Difference between revisions of "International Aids Relief"
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
[http://proxy.foley.gonzaga.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=21806641&site=ehost-live | [http://proxy.foley.gonzaga.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=21806641&site=ehost-live | ||
| − | + | An international public health crisis: can global institutions respond effectively to HIV/AIDS?] | |
The United Nations Millennium Project (2005) describes the HIV/AIDS epidemic as a ‘global catastrophe, threatening social and economic stability in the most affected areas, while spreading relentlessly into new regions’. Multilateral institutions under the leadership of the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS and World Health Organization have been charged with coordinating the worldwide response. Yet with attention and funding diverted between bilateral, regional and multilateral aid providers, and little discernible success in containing the global epidemic to date, it remains an open question whether traditional global institutions are able to effectively combat HIV/AIDS. It is argued that bilateral relationships are still heavily relied upon at present as traditional multilateral arrangements struggle for resources and political attention. The critical questions discussed here are whether global institutions should, can and will respond effectively to the HIV/AIDS crisis. This analysis finds that the most readily organised and deployed global response will likely involve an alliance of public and private agencies that can escape some of the domestic, political and organisational constraints inherent in existing HIV/AIDS funding arrangements. Ultimately, newer hybrid arrangements that have emerged recently, like the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, may offer a more enduring global regime to control the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The corollary is that UN agencies alone in their traditional form, hampered by multilateral practicalities, will be less effective. | The United Nations Millennium Project (2005) describes the HIV/AIDS epidemic as a ‘global catastrophe, threatening social and economic stability in the most affected areas, while spreading relentlessly into new regions’. Multilateral institutions under the leadership of the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS and World Health Organization have been charged with coordinating the worldwide response. Yet with attention and funding diverted between bilateral, regional and multilateral aid providers, and little discernible success in containing the global epidemic to date, it remains an open question whether traditional global institutions are able to effectively combat HIV/AIDS. It is argued that bilateral relationships are still heavily relied upon at present as traditional multilateral arrangements struggle for resources and political attention. The critical questions discussed here are whether global institutions should, can and will respond effectively to the HIV/AIDS crisis. This analysis finds that the most readily organised and deployed global response will likely involve an alliance of public and private agencies that can escape some of the domestic, political and organisational constraints inherent in existing HIV/AIDS funding arrangements. Ultimately, newer hybrid arrangements that have emerged recently, like the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, may offer a more enduring global regime to control the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The corollary is that UN agencies alone in their traditional form, hampered by multilateral practicalities, will be less effective. | ||
Revision as of 04:48, 31 March 2008
Research Findings for International Aids Relief
Post research findings for this topic using the formatting template on the main research page. Please add your name to your posting. As research findings accumulate, you should organize and rearrange findings to represent viewpoints and other categories of information (background, primary research, news).
Findings
Aids Deaths in Africa http://www.kwanzaakeepers.com/africa-aids-death-count/africa-aids-death-count.htm
In order to examine the magnitude of this problem, it is important to have the most up to date facts on the AIDS epidemic. The website provides a constantly updating death toll of the number of people who have died from AIDS, and how many have been infected by HIV. As of Saturday, March 29th, the total number of deaths 34,542,000 and 51,037,000 infected. Matt Dufy
Fact Sheet: The President Plan for Aids Relief http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030129-1.html
This link provides information to President Bush's (and the American Government's) efforts to improve the quality of life of the millions facing AIDS in Africa. Over the next 5 years, $15 Billion dollars will be provided in order to prevent further spread of the disease, as well as care for and medicating people who have already been diagnosed. Matt Duffy
Aids in Africa
Anup Shah, <a href="http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/Africa/AIDS.asp">AIDS in Africa</a>, GlobalIssues.org, Last updated: Sunday, February 17, 2008
This website provides an overview of the AIDS crisis. There is information about the numbers of deaths and other affects AIDS has made in Africa. FoAlso the website provides information on the efforts (and lack thereof) of African leaders. Matt Duffy
[http://proxy.foley.gonzaga.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=21806641&site=ehost-live
An international public health crisis: can global institutions respond effectively to HIV/AIDS?]
The United Nations Millennium Project (2005) describes the HIV/AIDS epidemic as a ‘global catastrophe, threatening social and economic stability in the most affected areas, while spreading relentlessly into new regions’. Multilateral institutions under the leadership of the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS and World Health Organization have been charged with coordinating the worldwide response. Yet with attention and funding diverted between bilateral, regional and multilateral aid providers, and little discernible success in containing the global epidemic to date, it remains an open question whether traditional global institutions are able to effectively combat HIV/AIDS. It is argued that bilateral relationships are still heavily relied upon at present as traditional multilateral arrangements struggle for resources and political attention. The critical questions discussed here are whether global institutions should, can and will respond effectively to the HIV/AIDS crisis. This analysis finds that the most readily organised and deployed global response will likely involve an alliance of public and private agencies that can escape some of the domestic, political and organisational constraints inherent in existing HIV/AIDS funding arrangements. Ultimately, newer hybrid arrangements that have emerged recently, like the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, may offer a more enduring global regime to control the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The corollary is that UN agencies alone in their traditional form, hampered by multilateral practicalities, will be less effective.
