Increasing Civil Society Participation in the National HIV Response: The Role of UNGASS Reporting

Payson Center for International Development and Technology Transfer, Law School, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70118, USA.
JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes (Impact Factor: 4.56). 12/2009; 52 Suppl 2:S97-103. DOI: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181baee06
Source: PubMed


The 2001 Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS provided impetus for strengthening collaboration between government and civil society partners in the HIV response. The biennial UNGASS reporting process is an opportunity for civil society to engage in a review of the implementation of commitments.
Descriptive analyses of the National Composite Policy Index from 135 countries; a debriefing on UNGASS reporting with civil society in 40 countries; and 3 country case studies on the UNGASS process.
In the latest UNGASS reporting round, engagement of civil society occurred in the vast majority of countries. The utility of UNGASS reporting seemed to be better understood by both government and civil society, compared with previous reporting rounds. Civil society participation was strongest when civil society groupings took the initiative and organized themselves. An important barrier was their lack of experience with national level processes. Civil society involvement in national HIV planning and strategic processes was perceived to be good, but better access to funding and technical support is needed. Instances remain where there are fundamental differences between government and civil society perceptions of the HIV policy and program environment. How or whether differences were resolved is not always clear, but both government and civil society seemed to appreciate the opportunity for discussion.
Collaborative reporting by government and civil society on UNGASS indicators is a small but potentially valuable step in what should be an ongoing and fully institutionalized process of collaborative planning, implementation, monitoring, assessment and correction of HIV responses. The momentum achieved through the UNGASS process should be maintained with follow-up actions to address data gaps, formalize partnerships and enhance active and meaningful engagement.

Download full-text


Available from: Sofia Gruskin, Apr 23, 2015
1 Follower
20 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: At the 2001 United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS (UNGASS), Member States agreed to regularly review progress made in national responses to HIV. This article provides (1) a brief overview of how the resultant global UNGASS reporting system was developed; (2) the origins, background, limitations and potential of that system; (3) an overview of the articles in this supplement; and (4) crosscutting institutional and methodological issues. United Nations Member States biennially provide The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) with data on 25 core indicators of national responses to HIV, collected in Country Progress Reports. This article critically reviews and interprets these data in light of international political considerations and overall data needs. There has been a considerable improvement in response rates, accompanied by an increase in data quality and completeness. Both nationally and internationally, the UNGASS process is viewed as being more substantial and important than a reporting exercise to the United Nations General Assembly. The process has catalyzed the development of national monitoring systems and has created opportunities for civil society to monitor and challenge government commitments and deeds. Although the UNGASS global reporting system now comprises an unequaled wealth of data on HIV responses, collected from a broad range of countries, it cannot yet answer several critical questions about the progress and effectiveness of those responses. Evaluation studies that go beyond indicator monitoring are needed, but they will take time to design, fund, implement and interpret. In the meantime, this global monitoring system provides a good indication of the overall progress in the global response to HIV and whether Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 6 (to halt and reverse the HIV epidemic) is likely to be reached by 2015.
    JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 12/2009; 52 Suppl 2:S69-76. DOI:10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181baec7c · 4.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Any initiative to coordinate actions, plans, or initiatives to improve the interaction between global health stakeholders finds itself feeding into a vastly complex global system. By utilising complexity theory as part of a new scientific paradigm, complex adaptive behaviour can emerge to create coherence. A suggested global health convention facilitating incremental regime development could be a way to create good governance processes. Minimum specifications could provide wide space for innovation and encourage shared action. Such specifications would be both a product of, and a facilitator for, future generative relationships. The potential empowerment of individuals as a result of this has the potential to transform global health by creating an arena for continual cooperation, interaction and mutual dependence among global stakeholders.
    Global Public Health 01/2012; 7(5):452-64. DOI:10.1080/17441692.2011.649486 · 0.92 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: National political commitment is likely to become particularly crucial to sustaining antiretroviral treatment programmes in the coming decade, as donor contributions to HIV funding decreases. The objective of this study is to synthesise information on existing indicators of political commitment to respond to national HIV epidemics. The authors describe and critically evaluate the existing indicators and propose studies to validate them. Several indicators have been developed to measure governments' political commitment to respond to national HIV epidemics--the AIDS Program Effort Index, the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS Declaration of Commitment Indicators and the AIDS Policy Aggressiveness Indicators--but the validity of these measures has not been systematically assessed. The indicators differ in their intended use, collection methods, content categories, data coverage, and strengths and limitations. Several types of studies could be used to test indicator validity (based on indicator content, comparisons of the same indicator using different elicitation methods, relationship patterns between indicators, relations between indicators and other variables and the consequences of using the indicators). The existing indicators of political commitment to respond to national HIV epidemics are useful for many purposes, including research, policymaking and advocacy. A range of studies could improve the understanding of indicator validity. New data collection and measurement approaches offer opportunities to improve how actors in the HIV community capture the complicated, multidimensional concept of political commitment.
    Sexually transmitted infections 03/2012; 88(2):e1. DOI:10.1136/sextrans-2011-050221 · 3.40 Impact Factor
Show more