The increasing health inequity and injustice of the COVID-19 pandemic rendered visible the inadequacy of global health governance, and exposed the self-interested decision-making of states and pharmaceutical companies. This research explores the advocacy activities of humanitarian and development international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) in responding to this inequality and investigates how they framed alternatives for global health justice. It reviews 47 organizational documents and 43 media articles of five INGOs (ActionAid, Médecins Sans Frontières, Oxfam, Save the Children, and World Vision) and points to the importance of understanding advocacy frames in analyzing how these organizations prioritize agendas and advocacy strategies. The dominance of the ‘human rights’ frame, sometimes in combination with ‘scientific evidence’ and ‘security’ frames, reflects the identities, mandates, and histories of campaigning and collaboration of these INGOs. This paper contends that the advocacy of humanitarian and development INGOs highlights both deontological and teleological ethics, promoting the voices of people in lower-income countries, clarifying duty bearers and their accountabilities, and addressing structural barriers from a human rights perspective in a global health agenda setting.

COVID-19大流行导致的健康不平等和不公正现象日益严重，凸显了全球健康治理的不足，并暴露了国家和制药公司的自利决策。本研究探讨了人道主义和发展国际非政府组织 (INGO) 为应对这种不平等而开展的宣传活动，并调查了他们如何制定全球卫生正义的替代方案。它回顾了五个国际非政府组织（行动援助组织、无国界医生组织、乐施会、救助儿童会和世界宣明会）的 47 份组织文件和 43 篇媒体文章，并指出了在分析这些组织如何确定议程和倡导策略的优先顺序时了解倡导框架的重要性。“人权”框架的主导地位，有时与“科学证据”和“安全”框架相结合，反映了这些国际非政府组织的身份、任务以及活动和合作的历史。本文认为，人道主义和发展国际非政府组织的倡导强调义务论和目的论道德，促进低收入国家人民的声音，明确责任承担者及其责任，并从人权角度解决全球卫生议程中的结构性障碍环境。