General Framework of the Concept of GPG

GPGs can be defined as goods and services whose benefits or harms exceed national borders and affect countries in more than one geographical region and even the whole world, reaching out not only the present generation but also the next generations, in whose production or financing the countries’ own resources are inadequate and therefore require global cooperation (Rao 1999: 68).

GPGs must, by definition, have the characteristics of publicity and globalism. What is meant by the publicity feature is that nobody can be excluded from the consumption of goods and there is no competition in their consumption, just like the case for public goods. Its globality feature means that GPGs affect countries in more than one region, more than one population group and not only this generation, but also future generations in terms of their benefits or harms (Akdemir and §ahin 2006: 4). What can be inferred here is that GPGs must meet at least these two criteria. Other features of GPGs are that they cause free rider problems, are consumed collectively and require public financing.

Although GPGs appear to cause positive externalities in general, there are many cases where they also cause negative externalities. It can be said that these nega­tive externalities, emerging especially in parallel with globalization, increased. As a result, GPGs emitting positive externality are defined as GPG, and GPGs emit­ting negative externality are defined as global public bads by some authors in the literature. Problems that usually arise due to the unintended consequences of GPGs are called global public bads. In fact, it is used to express the spread of negative externalities across borders that arise due to a good and service (Guler 2012: 636).

For example, when combatting infectious diseases in a country, it is possible to prevent the spread of that disease to other countries.

Due to the global dimension of GPGs, even if countries alone can produce some GPGs, it will not be possible to provide these goods at an adequate level. For this reason, the actor involved in the production and presentation of GPGs is not just a single country; many organizations in different fields also take part in this process as an important actor (Mutlu 2006: 55).

The actors playing the most active role in the provision of GPGs are undoubt­edly nation states and international organizations. But apart from these actors, non-profit organizations such as academic institutions, independent foundations, non-governmental organizations and profit-making organizations such as private companies also carry out various activities within the scope of social responsibility projects and make significant contributions to the presentation of GPGs. Research, development and environmental protection activities are supported by foundations. Foundations have played a significant role in the protection of biological diversity and the development of vaccines against diseases. Non-governmental organizations such as Greenpeace and Amnesty International as well as university research centres are non-profit organizations that play a significant role in the presentation and financing of GPGs. Profit-making organizations, on the other hand, can allocate large resources to research and activities on that subject, especially in the sector they operate in (Turan 2010: 125-127).

International organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, as well as organizations such as multilateral development banks, can also be considered among these actors. The IMF basically contributes to preventing crises and ensuring financial balance; multilateral development banks contribute to capacity building and institutional development.

Multilateral international communities formed by international and regional orga­nizations are at the focal point of presenting GPGs. Communities such as the International Labour Organization (ILO), the World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the United Nations High Commis­sioner for Refugees (UNHCR) that operate under the United Nations (UN) and the United Nations effectively serve at global level. Apart from these, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) and the Interna­tional Organization for Communication via Satellites (INTELSAT) are among other communities considered within this group (Turan 2010: 134-137).

Since there are so many actors in the presentation of GPGs and all actors have different expectations, there are problems in decision-making and inadequate presen­tation problem arises for GPGs (Sagasti and Bezanson 2001: 10). In order to solve this problem, to find more comprehensive and effective solutions and to implement them, countries need to act together, establish common policies and act in accor­dance with them (Loschel and Rubbelke 2014: 195). For this reason, a supranational institution is needed for the effective delivery of GPGs.

12.2.1 Health and Refugee Protection as GPGs

Since its first use, the concept of GPG has been subjected to various classifications and divided into many sub-branches. Any public good can be considered as a GPG if it has certain characteristics. Health and refugee protection from these GPGs will be examined within the context of the study. The reason for including these two GPGs in the study is the fact that the COVID-19 outbreak is closely related to the health, a GPG, and the situation of the refugees during this pandemic requires examining refugee protection, another GPG, within the scope of the study.

12.2.1.1 Health as a GPG

Health has the characteristics of both public and private goods. Also, it is accepted as a GPG due to the potential of infectious diseases to cross national borders with glob­alization. The risk of spreading of infectious diseases to all countries, preventing the emergence of infectious diseases, controlling and eliminating the infectious diseases, inability to exclude anyone from health public goods and not being competitive in their consumption point out that they are GPGs (Yilmaz and Yarasir 2011: 9).

Health GPG constitutes two important externalities, both positive and negative. The negative externality constitutes the first externality in the form of spreading of infectious diseases to other countries and people due to its global feature, and the second type of externality is the positive externality that occurs by treating infectious diseases or by protecting people from diseases by reducing the risk of disease for other countries or people (Mutlu 2006: 198-199). In this context, measures should be taken to provide health globally and to prevent the spread of infectious diseases.

Infectious diseases have emerged as a problem faced by people in many stages of history. Diseases such as AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria have caused millions of people to become infected and die (World Bank Development Committee 2001: 3). The important point about infectious diseases is that, in addition to causing deaths, they may also result in disintegration of families, the emergence of some negative situations reflected in social and economic life and their transmission to generations (Yilmaz and Yarasir 2011: 11).

Issues such as trade, travel, immigration, asylum, communication and food secu­rity also have direct or indirect effects on health. With the increasing trade, easy access to unhealthy goods causes health problems. In addition, as a result of travels, millions of people every day can cause the spread of many diseases between coun­tries by means of transportation vehicles.

The expenditures required to prevent, control and eliminate infectious diseases can become an unbearable burden especially for developing countries, and failure to take the necessary measures due to the lack of sufficient resources in these countries may cause infectious diseases to spread to developed countries and thus, all countries of the world may face this threat. This will result in higher costs (Yilmaz and Yara§ir 2011: 12). If even one country is insufficient in combating epidemic diseases, it may cause the whole world to be exposed to the disease (Oral 2014: 84).

The COVID-19 outbreak, which started recently and was accepted and declared as a pandemic by the WHO, is also an issue that should be evaluated in this context. When evaluated in terms of health, which is accepted as a GPG, the COVID-19 pandemic started in China and affected all the countries of the world in a very short time after the necessary measures were not taken and spread rapidly. In other words, with its negative externality, it has the characteristics of global public bads.

However, with the practices and measures that are tried to be carried out in line with the decisions taken by countries within the scope of combating COVID-19, necessary efforts are taken to treat the disease and slow down its spread. With these steps taken, people will be protected and negative externality can turn into positive externality by reducing the risk.

12.2.1.2 Refugee Protection as a GPG

In the history, it is seen that wars or internal conflicts have occurred for many reasons and obligations.

Those who have to leave their country for compelling reasons settle in various countries. The needs that arise after the settlement are met by the country of asylum, except for the aid received from some countries and international organizations (Teyyare and Sayaner 2017: 449). However, the refugee problem, which emerges for compulsory reasons, affects not only that country but also other countries (Risse 2008: 26). Although the burden mostly remains in the country of residence, the refugee problem affects the whole world as we live in a global world. First of all, the cheap labour force that will emerge in the country where the refugees have settled affects the employment in that country, and then, this spills over to other countries. Although refugees first go to neighbouring countries with the concern of safety of life, they use these countries as step (crossroad) countries,^[XVIII] and at the first opportu­nity they go to developed countries for better living standards. The important point here is that while their country of departure is certain, the country where the refugees will seek asylum and settle in is not certain. This is why, in case of a possible refugee problem, all countries of the world become a potential asylum country. This makes the refugee problem a globalized one and requires providing refugee protection at a global level.

Due to its mentioned features, refugee protection is a GPG. It has the charac­teristics of non-rivalry in consumption and non-excludability from consumption, which are the two basic characteristics of public goods. Non-rivalry in consumption means that one person’s consumption of any good does not reduce another person’s consumption of the same (Samuelson 1954: 387). Non-excludability means once a public good is produced, nobody can be excluded from the consumption of that good and the consumption of that good cannot be prevented (Musgrave 1959: 9-11).

It can be said that refugee protection has these two features, albeit partially. Accordingly, the refugee problem or the solution of these problems, in other words, providing protection to refugees; has the feature of non-excludability, such that contribution by a country to refugee protection does not reduce the contribution required to be made by other countries or because many states benefit from the benefits arising from the solution of the problems independently of their contribu­tion (peace, order, stability, etc.), and it also has the characteristic of “non-rivalry in consumption” such that the benefit of a country does not reduce any benefit by another country. At the same time, the “free rider problem”, which is frequently encountered in public goods, also manifests itself in refugee protection (Bursaliogjlu 2016:28-29). Those who do not participate in the costs make use of the benefits such as international order, stability, peace and security created by the refugee protection, and on the other hand, they may suffer from the chaos, instability and conflicts that will occur if the problems are not solved and the refugees are not protected (Suhrke 1998: 398). For these reasons, refugee protection has these two basic features of public goods.

At the same time, refugee protection affects not only the countries in the region but also the countries outside the region both financially and in terms of hosting. Refugee protection has global effects that go beyond the responsibility of the host country. Resolving the refugee problem or providing refugee protection not only benefits the host country, but also benefits other countries nearby and countries further away (outside the region), in terms of stability, trust, human rights, peace, etc. (Mottaghi 2018: 1).

The fact that refugees are not a lost generation depends on how host country policy-makers and international and human development agencies respond to this issue. If problems of refugees such as access to health, education, employment and livelihoods are not resolved, this can lead to long-term crises such as infectious diseases, loss of human capital in education and long-term world stability, peace and restructuring processes, immigration to other countries with constant dissatisfaction in employment (Mottaghi 2018: 2). For this reason, the damages will be on a global scale.

Assistance and funding to host countries to bear the costs to avoid hosting refugees also show that refugee protection is a GPG. Because when the aid is sent, the invest­ments required by the donor country may not be made or the implementation plans of certain projects, programmes or processes related to the country may be postponed. Since the country cannot use the financing it provides to develop its own economy, it is obvious that this will affect future generations by causing the loss of welfare of future generations. This applies to all funding countries, neighbouring or not. On the contrary, there are global effects if the costs brought by refugees to the host country are not borne and no aid is received by the host country. Because the host country cannot meet this problem alone, this will fuel the refugee problem and cause refugees to seek asylum in more countries. It should be noted here that refugees can gradually create a global impact since they go not only to neighbouring countries but also to countries further away (Teyyare and Sayaner 2017: 439). In addition, if the costs are not borne, the country crushed under this burden may face economic stability problems, and, as a result of the stability being a GPG, the country’s deteriorating economy may disrupt the economies of other countries, lead to a domino effect and globally affect the whole world. The fact that countries develop specific policies regarding refugee problems also shows that refugee protection has GPGs character­istics. For example, a country in Europe in the mass refugee influx that arose due to a war in the Middle East should not develop a policy on not accepting refugees into its country. Since such policies are preferred by countries in today’s refugee flows, it would not be wrong to say that refugee protection shows the characteristics of GPGs.

Finally, even if a refugee who leaves his country and seeks asylum firstly in neighbouring countries, he can go to countries farther from neighbouring countries in the following years. Although the refugees are predominantly in neighbouring countries, a considerable number of them live in countries outside the region. The fact that more than one region is affected or the spreading of the externality to more than one region, which is a requirement for GPGs, becomes apparent in refugee protection. In this sense, refugee protection has global effects.

For the reasons explained, it is seen that the refugee problem affects not only the country of asylum, but also other countries. The main characteristics of the GPG, which are the non-excludability and non-rivalry in consumption and the fact that they cause cross-border positive and negative externalities, are also the case for refugee problem. For this reason, in a globalizing world, the refugee problem is actually a global public bad, and providing protection to refugees to solve this problem is a GPG. Considering that there is war in different geographies of the world and tens of thousands of people seek asylum every year, it is obvious that refugee protection is an issue that concerns the whole world. In this sense, within the scope of the COVID-19 outbreak, the living conditions of the refugees should also be considered and the measures should be evaluated in a wide framework.

12.2.2 Nature of COVID-19 Outbreak

The COVID-19 outbreak is estimated the most significant global health disaster of this century and the biggest challenge humanity has faced since World War II. The origin of the outbreak is linked to cases defined in Wuhan, the capital of Hubei Province in central China, and the disease has been named COVID-19 by the WHO (Chakraborty and Maity 2020: 1). Over time, this disease spread to other Chinese provinces and other countries internationally (Chen et al. 2020: 1).

As for the COVID-19 outbreak, global spread has been extremely rapid, and COVID-19 has now globally become a major health threat (Sirkeci and Yiicesahin 2020: 380). The World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) identified the COVID-19 outbreak as the biggest threat to the global economy since the 2008-2009 financial emergency (Chakraborty and Maity 2020:4). It is also thought that poor countries will be affected worse by the COVID-19 outbreak (Sirkeci and Yiicegahin 2020: 385).

The current COVID-19 outbreak has affected more than 20 million people in more than 200 countries worldwide and caused the deaths of approximately 800 thousand people. To date, no clinically approved drug or vaccine that is effective against COVID-19 has been reported. It quickly spread all over the world and created economic, health, social and environmental challenges for the whole human population (Chakraborty and Maity 2020: 1).

When it comes to human history, there are serious disease outbreaks caused by some viruses. Except for COVID-19, there have been at least five other epidemics in this century. These are: H1N1 in 2009, polio in 2014, Ebola in 2014, Zika in 2016 and recurrent Ebola in 2019 (Chakraborty and Maity 2020: 2). Later, the COVID- 19 pandemic was declared by WHO as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on 30 January 2020 and was described as an pandemic on 11 March 2020 (Dikmen et al. 2020: 329). Thus, it was the sixth epidemic in this century.

These worldwide outbreaks have caused billions of dollars in costs as well as many deaths. COVID-19 causes more people to suffer from infectious diseases compared to other diseases worldwide and their associated burdens. In addition, COVID-19 has the potential to significantly slow down the economy not only in China, the USA or India, but in the world as a whole, as well as its distressing effects on human life. Therefore, governments, the public and health personnel should show solidarity in general and fight shoulder to shoulder to prevent and control the epidemic (Chakraborty and Maity 2020: 2). Consequently, unlike past humanitarian disasters, this epidemic is global (Vince 2020).

As the GPGs literature was examined in the previous section, COVID-19 is a global public bad, and the interventions to be made, the decisions to be taken and the policies to be implemented in this context should be on a global scale.

It is necessary to accelerate the containment of the disease in order to control the COVID-19 crisis, to protect the economy, to alleviate the subsequent social, economic and financial impacts and to ensure the continuity of some activities. Refugees and the unprotected population are another issue that should not be ignored while working in this context (Alqutob et al. 2020).

12.2.3 Refugees’ Conditions During COVID-19 Outbreak

COVID-19 has proven that all people on the move are vulnerable to disease (Igoye 2020:1). The disease is transmitted by droplets. In addition, it is transmitted as a result of contact with the droplets that sick people scatter through sneezing and coughing. The best way to prevent disease is to avoid exposure to the virus. Since the virus is transmitted from person to person, close contact should be avoided, attention should be paid to keep social distance, hands should be washed with plenty of water and soap, and frequently touched surfaces should be constantly cleaned and disinfected (Dikmen et al. 2020: 329).

However, when the COVID-19 pandemic enters vulnerable places such as refugee camps, practices such as hand washing, social distancing and isolation become difficult.

In 2019, about 123,700 refugees and migrants reached Greece, Italy and Spain over three Mediterranean routes from Turkey and North Africa. While the COVID- 19 deaths and cases in Italy and Spain increased, the arrival of migrants and refugees to Mediterranean countries continued and increased to over 15,000 in the first two months of 2020. In addition, UNHCR has reported a much higher number of migrants entering the Western Balkan countries in recent months, contrary to the decreasing numbers since 2015 (Julia et al. 2020).

Considering that refugee and migrant mobility is still continuing, the situation of these people in the face of the COVID-19 outbreak is worth examining. This group, which is currently facing difficulties in many issues, has the potential to become even more vulnerable with COVID-19, because refugee camps and camps­like environment are socially built and generally accepted as temporary places. But some of them have existed for decades and accommodated several generations. The COVID-19 outbreak poses a huge danger to these places (Raju and Karlsson 2020). However, it can be said that no official measure has been announced for these camps for now (Clarke 2020: 16).

There are currently several challenges that refugees face. The first of these is access to language and knowledge. The second challenge relates to sociocultural differences between refugees and host countries and health practices that do not conform to their cultural or religious beliefs. The third challenge is overcrowding and close contact with people. The fourth challenge is that in host communities, health systems and local refugee volunteer organizations are overloaded, particularly in mental health care, due to the large number of refugees, because very few doctors in camp clinics have to deal with thousands of refugees (Junior, et al. 2020).

For such reasons, refugees are at high risk of contracting COVID-19 disease and developing psychiatric disorders that are worsened by the epidemic. Overcrowding, sewage problems, poor hygiene standards, malnutrition, lack of access to shelter, public services, healthcare and security-related problems are risk factors for COVID- 19 and can accelerate the spread of the disease (Kluge et al. 2020: 1238).

Around 68.5 million people around the world have had to flee their homes due to violence, war or repression. About 21.3 million of them are refugees. In addition, 40.8 million people were internally displaced. For internally and externally displaced people (refugees, forced migrants, asylum seekers, etc.), the mobility process and the post-settlement process involve a number of challenges. Especially in the host countries where refugees are seeking asylum, they face various problems including bureaucratic procedures, mixing with different cultures, poverty and even racism as well as problems such as overcrowding, sewage problems, poor hygiene standards, malnutrition, lack of access to health care, shelters and public services, and security. Especially, the lack of access to health services and clean water and living in crowded shelters make refugees more vulnerable to infection (Junior et al. 2020). For example, in slums in Dhaka and Mumbai, a household can have a population of 15 people. In addition, these houses do not have doors or windows, and many sleep in the same bed. Thousands of settlers share the same several public baths (Raju and Karlsson 2020). In addition, a UK-based aid organization that provides healthcare services to those living in Europe’s largest refugee camp warned that overcrowding could create a humanitarian disaster after the COVID-19 outbreak. It was also reported that strategies to reduce personal care and social distance were designed for 3,000 people in the Moria camp on the island of Lesvos in Greece, but more than 20,000 refugees had to live in these camps (Lacobucci 2020: 368). In this case, it is emphasized that in some parts of the camp, there is only one faucet for a large number of people and there is no soap; people live among the garbage without sewage systems (Hargreaves et al. 2020a).

It is also stated that migrants living in India are also subjected to reverse migra­tion and set out to return to their homes, and this reverse migration is described as the second largest mass migration in its history after the division of India in 1947 (Mukhra et al. 2020). Another example is seen in Lebanon. Lebanon, a country that hosts an estimated 1.5 million Syrian refugees, has faced a very serious economic crisis—though it is mitigated recently—civil unrest, as well as struggling with the COVID-19 outbreak (Kassem 2020). Similarly, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh’s second poorest region, is home to more than 855,000 Rohingya refugees from neighbouring Myanmar. Refugees living in this region live in places that can be described as slopes, sleep in a room made of plastic woven walls and covered with plastic sheets, and sewage problems are increasing in these places (Vince 2020). It can be said that immigrants living in Venezuela also live in the same conditions (Daniels 2020: 1023).

Since 17 March 2020, New York has been fighting against the COVID-19 crisis. This metropolis is also home to Latin immigrant communities. These immigrant communities have faced problems such as access to health care, difficulties arising from immigration status, financial and workforce instability for a long time. The COVID-19 pandemic has aggravated these current problems of vulnerable immi­grant communities. At the same time, it is very difficult for these groups to access COVID-19 treatment, testing and assistance programmes, as the public information is published in Portuguese and Spanish (Behbahani et al. 2020: 3). For all these reasons, the already fragile situation of refugees is evolving into more difficult conditions due to the COVID-19 outbreak.

While the struggle of refugees under difficult conditions is getting more difficult due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this may also be the case for migrants. With the correct expression used extensively, immigration defines people who change cities, countries or regions with their own will due to economic conditions. However, exam­ining the types of migration, it can be seen that the concept of forced migration is also included in this issue. In fact, forced migrations are population movements that take place in search of a safe place due to population exchanges, fear of punish­ment, limitation of individual freedoms such as repression and humiliation, border changes, terrorist incidents, wars and natural disasters (Ruiz and Silva 2013: 772). In this sense, it is seen that forced migration takes place in two ways. In the first group of forced migration, people tend to flee to other countries and seek asylum in order to escape from the aforementioned dangers, and those who migrate in this way are called refugees. The second group of forced migration, on the other hand, consists of migrations that take place under the supervision of the official authority and in this direction enable people to move from one place to another (Hajiagha 2007: 75). As can be seen, the concept of migrant may correspond to the concept of refugee in some cases. Therefore, within the scope of this study, it will be useful to examine the situation of forced migrants against COVID-19.

Even in the best of times, global societies face great difficulties in meeting the social care and health needs of migrants, racial, ethnic and other minority groups. Migrant workers are among the vulnerable populations most affected by national quarantines worldwide to mitigate the effects of the epidemic (Lodge and Kuchukhidze 2020: 249). The desperate situation of migrants and refugees is apparent, especially in camps and detention centres, where their seek for asylum await evaluation (Bhopal 2020a: 161). Immigration prisons face some challenges such as overcrowding, poor health conditions, inadequate health care and infectious diseases. It is not possible to keep distance and take other necessary measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in immigration prisons. These detention facilities pose a great risk of contamination. It has also been reported that many personnel in different immigration detention centres have tested positive for COVID-19 and the prisoners were exposed to infection. It is also stated that there may be a potentially dangerous epidemic spread at the US-Mexico border. The fact that asylum seekers live in these camps until their asylum applications are accepted and that these camps are overcrowded and unhealthy increases the risk of epidemics (Keller and Wagner 2020: 245).

The difficulties in refugee camps are identified by a wide variety of individuals. However, it is also stated that illegal (undocumented) immigrants face more difficul­ties. Undocumented persons do not have a legal right to reside in the country they currently live in; they are also in danger of coming down with COVID-19. Although the exact number of these persons is not known as they are not registered, authorities estimate that hundreds of thousands of people are in this situation in the UK. The fact that these people do not have a trust relationship with the authorities, lack of information communication, the inability to maintain social distance and the obsta­cles in front of getting minimum rights in health services are the case all over the world. At the same time, xenophobia and racism make the conditions even more difficult. Studies show that the epidemic adversely affects all immigrant and ethnic minority groups, but statistical information on illegal immigrants is not available (Bhopal 2020b).

COVID-19 affects homeless people as well as refugees and migrants. This will become a serious problem in North America, where there is a large population of homelessness in almost every metropolitan city in Canada and the USA. Homeless people live in favourable environments for epidemics, similar to refugees. These people have limited or, in some cases, no access to essential living supplies and cleaning products. This can facilitate the spread of the virus among these people (TsaiandWilson 2020: 186).

However, it is doubtful that nobody has ever had COVID-19 in refugee camps. This may be due to three reasons: refugees’ lack of information about symptoms and infection, lack of access to tests and fear of stigmatization (Kassem 2020). Because migrants and refugees may be stigmatized and unfairly discriminated against for spreading disease. These attitudes can prevent refugees and migrants from seeking treatment or cause them to hide their symptoms. This increases public health risk in a wider community, including host populations (Kluge et al. 2020: 1239).

As can be seen from all these mentioned above, efforts to prevent the COVID-19 outbreak should include a collective effort not only to contain the virus, but also on behalf of vulnerable populations (Junior et al. 2020). Refugees and migrants should not be ignored in efforts to combat COVID-19 (Lancet 2020: 1).

It is stated that very limited state financial assistance is given to refugees to assist with food, shelter, local language training, clothing, employment counselling, medical care and education in the USA to overcome these problems faced by refugees and immigrants. UNHCR is accepting funds to combat the COVID-19 outbreak around the world. Their purpose is to provide medical supplies and tests for the treatment of patients affected by COVID-19, conducting information campaigns, sending materials to regions in need and transporting medical work teams between regions (Junior et al. 2020). In addition, in April, the European Union promised 350 million euros to support refugees and asylum seekers, including those in Greece (Subbaraman 2020: 18).

At the same time, a provisional technical guide was prepared by the Inter Agency Standing Committee (IASC) to advise governments and institutions dealing with the large immigrant population. This guide recommends strategies to support outbreak preparedness and response among migrants in high-risk camps and slum environ­ments. The living conditions mentioned are extremely favourable for infectious diseases to turn into epidemics. Immigrants in these environments are sensitive to COVID-19 due to overcrowding, poor hygiene and malnutrition. The guide recom­mends the countries that the immigrants should not be scapegoated, stigmatized or targeted with discriminatory measures. In addition, the recommendations high­light the positive points, including practical interventions to maximize site plan­ning to maintain distance and promote infection prevention and control standards (Hargreaves et al. 2020b: 645).

The ongoing COVID-19 outbreak continues to progress every day. No individual, society, population group or nation is immune to this disease. Migrants and refugees constitute vulnerable population groups, which requires the urgent inclusion of migrants and refugees in the action plan to contain infection and no compromise on their right to the highest level of mental and physical health. In this context, even though certain efforts have been taken for refugees and migrants, they are not quite sufficient. However, special measures should be taken in vulnerable groups such as refugees and migrants in order to slow down and prevent the spread of the epidemic. In the global COVID-19 outbreak, host countries should not ignore ensuring the safety and health of immigrants. Immigrants remain an important part of many countries’ development paths. For this reason, they deserve equal treatment from their host countries, including economic livelihoods and mental issues (Mia and Griffiths 2020: 23).

In addition, refugees and migrants should be included in national public health systems without financial and legal risks. This approach is very important, as public health cannot be achieved without immigrant and refugee health (Kluge et al. 2020: 1239).

Good planning and management of health services for refugees and migrants and meeting the health needs of migrants are of great importance. In order to eliminate language barriers, materials should be provided in languages that migrant groups can understand, and it should be ensured that all information expected to reach the public about the epidemic reaches vulnerable groups. It should be ensured that all the proposed measures are applied to all people living in camps and similar environments. It is important that the legal fears of some immigrant groups should not prevent them from seeking for health care. Stigmatization and discrimination of refugees and immigrants should also be prevented (Dikmen et al. 2020: 329).

The success of measures to control the COVID-19 outbreak will only be possible by including all populations in international and national responses. Moreover, excluding refugees and immigrants would be unfair. The principles of equality, soli­darity and human rights should be at the centre of the COVID-19 response (Orcutt et al. 2020: 1482).

Concerns about the outbreak of COVID-19 in the camps will be justified if urgent action is not taken to improve conditions. Therefore, transparent and comprehensive research is required, along with preventive and inclusive control measures, to control and/or prevent the spread of COVID-19 to refugee camps (Kassem 2020).

As a result, if the intention is to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, an approach, which mainly includes migrants and refugees and where partnerships with various sectors and the whole society are considered within this scope, is necessary. The policy that is required now is to spread all prevention and control activities to vulnerable population groups and to minimize the risk of infection or transmission (Shrivastava and Shrivastava 2020: 163).

12.3