For the last decade, discussions about who governs policy on prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS have revolved around the controversial relationship between Western donors and the power they have over their recipient...For the last decade, discussions about who governs policy on prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS have revolved around the controversial relationship between Western donors and the power they have over their recipient governments. While these debates were once politically germane, recent trends show a decline of donor funding, as well as an increase of financial ownership of the epidemic within Southern Africa. Commensurate with this shifting financial influence, some well-governed, wealthy African states are beginning to deviate from global M＆E （monitoring and evaluation） indicators. These policy movements, away from global M＆E indicators, also correlate with increases in HIV prevalence, which signals the need for further investigation into policy efficacy.展开更多
文摘For the last decade, discussions about who governs policy on prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS have revolved around the controversial relationship between Western donors and the power they have over their recipient governments. While these debates were once politically germane, recent trends show a decline of donor funding, as well as an increase of financial ownership of the epidemic within Southern Africa. Commensurate with this shifting financial influence, some well-governed, wealthy African states are beginning to deviate from global M＆E （monitoring and evaluation） indicators. These policy movements, away from global M＆E indicators, also correlate with increases in HIV prevalence, which signals the need for further investigation into policy efficacy.
