The main objective is to transform these centres into ainterconnected network of capabilitiesrather than isolated centres of excellence. Three major axes are proposed: the adoption ofsustainable work programmesaligned with global priorities, a technical partnership with theWHO Academyto disseminate large-scale training, and the strengthening ofhealth literacy. This approach aims to restoretrust in scienceand to better prepare educational and health systems for future crises. In summary, the document advocates for a more structured international cooperation to ensure asustainable impacton global public health.
Global Forum of WHO Collaborating Centres, Lyon
From 7 to 9 April 2026, Lyon will host the first Global Forum of WHO Collaborating Centres, on the theme "collaborating for a healthier future", alongside the One Health Summit and with the participation of several hundred institutions from over 80 countries. This Forum aims to strengthen the scientific and technical contribution of these centres to the Fourteenth General Programme of Work of WHO and the "Health for All" agenda.
During a session dedicated to the role of collaborating centres, the WHO Regional Director for Europe, Hans Kluge, and Didier Jourdan, head of the FR135 collaborating centre and holder of the UNESCO Chair in Global Health & Education, spoke jointly. Hans Kluge set the strategic framework for the European Region, emphasising the need for strong networks of collaborating centres to support countries in a context of multiple crises.
Didier Jourdan illustrated this framework based on the experience of WHO collaborating centres, highlighting three key developments for the network: moving from scattered actions to genuine work programmes aligned with EPW2 and GPW14, strengthening the articulation with the WHO Academy to disseminate evidence-based training on a large scale, and using education and health literacy as a structural response to the crisis of trust in science and institutions. Together, they advocated for collaborating centres designed not only as "centres of excellence" but as interconnected "centres of capacity" serving educational systems, health professionals, and communities....
Presentation of Pr. Didier Jourdan
Speaking from the perspective of FR135 – the WHO Collaborating Centre and UNESCO Chair in Global Health & Education platform – I would like to illustrate what a future-ready network of collaborating centres means in practice through three very concrete shifts for the CCs and CCs network.
First, moving from projects to programmes of work, aligned with EPW2 and GPW14.
From where we stand, in the prevention of diseases, education and health promotion field, the real value of a collaborating centre is not a series of isolated projects, but a clear mandate on core public health functions directly connected to the WHO's core mandate.
For example, in our CC, we work as a mission-driven platform on the capacity of education systems to: prevent NCDs and promote mental health in children and young people, reduce health inequities early in life, and strengthen social and educational resilience in crises – all of which are central priorities in EPW2.
For the European CC network, this means that each centre should be explicitly positioned on a portfolio of functions – for example, lifelong learning for health in cities, school health and health-promoting schools, behavioural and cultural insights, One Health, digital public health, or primary care – rather than on a fragmented list of activities, with shared outcomes in terms of equity, essential public health functions and country impact.
In a context where the real test for public health is long-term impact and sustainability, collaborating centres must be designed not for short cycles of activity, but for building enduring capacities that outlast projects and mandates. We can see this in practice through our contribution to the Schools for Health in Europe network: by co-developing frameworks, tools and training for health-promoting schools policies in member states, we help countries embed health promotion into the long-term functioning of their public health and education systems, rather than as a temporary programme.
Second, systematically connecting CCs with the WHO Academy to deliver scale.
As Hans underlined, the WHO Academy is a major asset. From a technical point of view, this changes the equation.
Our CC positions itself as a producer of evidence-based training content and pedagogical models on health promotion, health literacy, and intersectoral training for health care professionals, educators, social workers… We also bring specific expertise in microlearning in low-income settings, using low-tech digital tools to support community health workers, nurses, homecare workers and other frontline professionals with short, practice-oriented learning modules that can be accessed even in constrained environments.
We are already working with the Academy to turn this expertise into modular, multilingual and adaptable training packages (we are currently working on a course of lifelong learning for health in cities). This allows us to support countries where public health and health education training capacities have been weakened by conflict, economic crisis or institutional reforms.
It is an illusion to think that a centralised academy alone can meet the learning needs of health professionals everywhere. The only effective model is a close partnership: national and regional collaborating centres, firmly rooted in Member States, working with the WHO Academy to translate global standards into relevant, actionable training. For the Academy, strong articulation with CCs is not optional, it is an operational imperative.
In other words, a strategically organised network of CCs, plugged into the Academy, can function as a permanent training infrastructure for the world – accessible even when national pipelines for technical expertise and workforce development are disrupted.
Third, using education and health literacy as a structural response to the crisis of trust.
The foresight work for this Forum has shown how misinformation, changing information ecosystems and new technologies are reshaping our relationship with science.
As a joint WHO–UNESCO centre, our starting point is that trust cannot be treated only through communication campaigns. It requires long-term investment in the capacity of children, adolescents, adults, settings and communities to make sense of information, to debate, and to participate in decisions that affect their health.
Operationally, our CC works with formal education systems (schools and universities), non-formal settings (associations, NGOs, community programmes, women’s literacy initiatives) and informal environments (communities, social networks, digital platforms) in several countries to integrate health promotion, health literacy and media and information literacy into curricula, in-service training, community-based learning spaces…
If we scale this up through a coordinated CC network, we can offer WHO and Member States regional public goods – shared frameworks, tools and training offers – that are transferable to other regions, including those where institutions are fragile and trust in multilateralism is under pressure.
This is a very concrete way to “protect multilateralism through science”: by investing in the educational capacities that make societies more able to understand evidence, to engage with norms and standards, and to use health as a bridge for peace.
In short: in an age of mistrust, our best answer is simple – credible norms and standards, strong networks, and collaborating centres that turn both into practice.
Let me end with one simple idea.
If we want a future-ready network of collaborating centres, we should stop thinking of CCs only as “centres of excellence” and start organising them as “centres of capacity” – connected to each other, connected to the WHO Academy, and connected to classrooms and communities where the next generation of public health resilience is actually being built.