Page 37 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 37 of 160 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
29
dissertation that the multisectoral HIV/AIDS program itself is an effective policy
tool that adds to those political determinants of HIV/AIDS.
The above article by Gauri and Lieberman (2004) provides a strong
foundation for this dissertation. However, whereas these authors compare political
institutions in the two countries as the basis for explaining different HIV/AIDS rates,
my research differs in several ways. First, the epidemic is explored both qualitatively
and quantitatively with a key independent variable being the presence of a
multisectoral HIV/AIDS program in 89 low and middle-income countries over a ten-year
period. Similar political determinants of the disease are explored but societal
determinants are included as well. Economic effects from the disease are reviewed
and information from interviews and case studies is provided. It is the political
determinants (such as decentralization of political decision-making) formulated by
Gauri and Lieberman (2004) that most inform my argument.
In their comparison of Brazil and South Africa, Gauri and Lieberman (2006)
coin the term “boundary institutions” to further explain Brazil’s success in
combating HIV/AIDS. Boundary institutions are another political determinant of
HIV/AIDS and are defined as “the rules and procedures, especially those
implemented by the state, which involve monitoring or regulating citizens according
to particular group identities” (Gauri and Lieberman 2006:47). According to the
authors, these boundary institutions are useful when a government wants to regulate
diverse populations for a variety of reasons, such as denying privileges or setting
right past wrongs. Strong boundary institutions exist when group labels (black, gay,
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 37 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 29 dissertation that the multisectoral HIV/AIDS program itself is an effective policy tool that adds to those political determinants of HIV/AIDS. The above article by Gauri and Lieberman (2004) provides a strong foundation for this dissertation. However, whereas these authors compare political institutions in the two countries as the basis for explaining different HIV/AIDS rates, my research differs in several ways. First, the epidemic is explored both qualitatively and quantitatively with a key independent variable being the presence of a multisectoral HIV/AIDS program in 89 low and middle-income countries over a ten-year period. Similar political determinants of the disease are explored but societal determinants are included as well. Economic effects from the disease are reviewed and information from interviews and case studies is provided. It is the political determinants (such as decentralization of political decision-making) formulated by Gauri and Lieberman (2004) that most inform my argument. In their comparison of Brazil and South Africa, Gauri and Lieberman (2006) coin the term “boundary institutions” to further explain Brazil’s success in combating HIV/AIDS. Boundary institutions are another political determinant of HIV/AIDS and are defined as “the rules and procedures, especially those implemented by the state, which involve monitoring or regulating citizens according to particular group identities” (Gauri and Lieberman 2006:47). According to the authors, these boundary institutions are useful when a government wants to regulate diverse populations for a variety of reasons, such as denying privileges or setting right past wrongs. Strong boundary institutions exist when group labels (black, gay, |
