How Fragmented Are Global Policy Debates on Health Data Sharing? Studying Fragmentation Through Discourse Network Analysis

Abstract Global policy‐making is often described as taking place in a fragmented and complex institutional landscape. In this article, we revisit the verdict of fragmentation through the lens of discourse network analysis, seeking to understand the extent to which global policy debates can be characterised as fragmented. Examining the case of health data sharing (HDS), an area marked by competing norms and rules, we present results from a longitudinal analysis of the trajectories of HDS policy frames (1995 to 2019). We study discursive fragmentation empirically by analysing three indicators: (1) frame diversification; (2) the increase of conflicting frames (frame contestation); and (3) the emergence of at least three clusters (‘discourse coalitions’) in our networks. We observe that HDS is marked by both centralisation and fragmentation dynamics. We conclude that, despite its self‐portrayal as a global health actor, the European Union has played a marginal role in the debates under scrutiny.