Page 34 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 34 of 160 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
26
political failures (such as not implementing a multisectoral HIV/AIDS program) in a
given country’s efforts to combat HIV/AIDS may clear the way for more effective
policies regarding the disease.
One of the few studies to examine the political determinants of the
HIV/AIDS rate is entitled “AIDS and the State: The Politics of Government
Responses to the Epidemics in Brazil and South Africa” by Gauri and Lieberman
(2004). The authors explore why some countries have responded to the HIV/AIDS
epidemic more aggressively than others and they focus on those specific strategies
and policies that governments have undertaken in the fight against HIV/AIDS.
Specifically, Gauri and Lieberman (2004) compare the response to the
HIV/AIDS epidemic in two middle-income countries: Brazil and South Africa. In
both countries the disease started among gay men and commercial sex workers and
soon thereafter both were warned that the consequences of ignoring the disease
would be disastrous. Yet, Brazil has now managed to control the epidemic while the
disease remains at a dangerously high level in South Africa. Gauri and Lieberman
(2004) argue that the principal factor is the difference in political institutions in each
country. For example, Brazil has an open and decentralized government with power-sharing
widely dispersed, while South Africa’s political system is more autocratic
and decision-making is more narrowly confined.
They thus conclude that:
National government action requires convincing decision-makers
that something needs to be done, that action is likely to be effective,
Object Description
| Title | Political determinants and economic effects of HIV/AIDS: a push for the multisectoral approach |
| Author | Davis, Dollie |
| Author email | dollieda@usc.edu; dolliesdavis@gmail.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Philosophy |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Political Economy & Public Policy |
| School | College of Letters, Arts and Sciences |
| Date defended/completed | 2008-07-15 |
| Date submitted | 2008 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2008-10-30 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Wise, Carol |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Nugent, Jeffrey B. Chi, Iris |
| Abstract | The proposed dissertation offers an explanation for the large differences in HIV/AIDS rates among 89 low and middle-income countries throughout the Sub Saharan African, Asian, and Latin American regions over a ten-year period (1995-2005). The HIV/AIDS rates in these countries vary widely and seemingly independently of economic wealth. One possible determinant of these differences is the presence and degree of development of strong multisectoral programs aimed at both prevention and cure of HIV/AIDS. The main hypothesis for this dissertation is: "A country's success in combating HIV/AIDS lies in the government's ability to implement an effective multisectoral program." This hypothesis is explored through quantitative models using data from the ten-year period (1995-2005). Results show that the presence of a multisectoral program over the ten-year period is associated with a significantly lower HIV/AIDS incidence rate by 2005. This effect is produced by controlling for various political, economic, societal, and institutional factors. Although there is some anecdotal evidence which suggests that multisectoral programs help to improve the HIV/AIDS problem in developing countries, there has been little if any empirical work done on this subject to date. |
| Keyword | multisectoral; HIV/AIDS; economic development |
| Geographic subject (region) | Carribbean |
| Geographic subject (continent) | Africa; Asia; South America |
| Coverage date | 1995/2005 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m1724 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Davis, Dollie |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Davis-2422 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume44/etd-Davis-2422.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 34 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 26 political failures (such as not implementing a multisectoral HIV/AIDS program) in a given country’s efforts to combat HIV/AIDS may clear the way for more effective policies regarding the disease. One of the few studies to examine the political determinants of the HIV/AIDS rate is entitled “AIDS and the State: The Politics of Government Responses to the Epidemics in Brazil and South Africa” by Gauri and Lieberman (2004). The authors explore why some countries have responded to the HIV/AIDS epidemic more aggressively than others and they focus on those specific strategies and policies that governments have undertaken in the fight against HIV/AIDS. Specifically, Gauri and Lieberman (2004) compare the response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic in two middle-income countries: Brazil and South Africa. In both countries the disease started among gay men and commercial sex workers and soon thereafter both were warned that the consequences of ignoring the disease would be disastrous. Yet, Brazil has now managed to control the epidemic while the disease remains at a dangerously high level in South Africa. Gauri and Lieberman (2004) argue that the principal factor is the difference in political institutions in each country. For example, Brazil has an open and decentralized government with power-sharing widely dispersed, while South Africa’s political system is more autocratic and decision-making is more narrowly confined. They thus conclude that: National government action requires convincing decision-makers that something needs to be done, that action is likely to be effective, |
