The Experts below are selected from a list of 116394 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Sofia Gruskin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
human rights in the global response to hiv findings from the 2008 united nations General Assembly special session reports
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 2009Co-Authors: Sofia Gruskin, Laura Ferguson, Greet Peersman, Deborah RuggAbstract:Background: Every country in the world has made human rights-related commitments in relation to HIV, yet assessment of the extent to which HIV-related rights are indeed respected, protected and fulfilled remains relatively new. Civil society has, in some places, highlighted the strengths and shortcomings of government action, but attention to governments' own reports of their performance vis-a-vis their HIV-related human rights obligations offers an important and inadequately explored data source. Methods: We reviewed National Composite Policy Index data from 133 United Nations General Assembly Special Session Country Progress Reports and examined their narrative reports for text relating to human rights. Findings: 2008 National Composite Policy Index data show an increase in the number of countries reporting on human rights issues since 2006. These reports offer important information, even when they are internally inconsistent. Almost all reporting countries (94%) note that their national HIV policies explicitly mention the promotion and protection of human rights, yet only 22% of these countries report performance indicators to assess human rights compliance. In addition, 71% of countries report protective laws or regulations for vulnerable subpopulations, yet 63% of those same countries report the existence of laws or policies that hinder access to HIV services for vulnerable subpopulations. Interpretation: Because they include data that have been provided or approved by governments, the United Nations General Assembly Special Session Country Reports provide critical information to support national legal and policy reform and implementation of a human rights-based approach to HIV By identifying shortcomings in the fulfillment of human rights, a refocusing of efforts is possible, which can aid both governments and civil society in achieving an effective and appropriate response to HIV through advocacy for and implementation of laws, policies and programs that support human rights.
-
the un General Assembly special session on hiv aids were some lessons of the last 20 years ignored
American Journal of Public Health, 2002Co-Authors: Sofia GruskinAbstract:The outcome document from the UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) represents political commitments and serves as a framework to guide national and international work. In this editorial the author argued that to deal effectively with HIV/AIDS there is a need to recognize the limitations of the special session. UNGASS’s over time stems from the fact that it can form the justification for resource allocation and priority setting and that it sets out specific targets for achievement on which governments are expected to report publicly. Although it recognizes the rhetorical value of human rights it makes the issue a separate component of the response rather than fully integrated within it. It is noted that the policy and strategic documents of the UN system to address HIV/AIDS that predate the UNGASS are also far more inclusive of many of the issues that the declaration does not address. However the UNGASS declaration is far reaching in its recognition that access to medications in the context of HIV/AIDS is a fundamental element of the right of all people. Thus in the context of the Declaration countries are held more accountable in their actions in preventing and providing treatment to HIV infected people.
Alan J Balch - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
creating a 21st century global health agenda the General Assembly of the united nations high level meeting on non communicable diseases
CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2011Co-Authors: Edward E Partridge, Elizabeth J Mayerdavis, Ralph L Sacco, Alan J BalchAbstract:On May 13, 2010, the General Assembly of the United Nations (UN) voted unanimously for UN Resolution 64/265 to hold a High Level Meeting on Non-Communicable Diseases in September 2011. This UN High Level Meeting, to be held in New York, is an unparalleled opportunity to put noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), including cancer, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, stroke, and chronic respiratory disease, on the global health and development agenda. It also has the potential to secure political commitments from heads of government for a coordinated global response to NCDs, to promote multisectoral action to addressing NCDs within countries, and to ensure that resource allocations for addressing NCDs are more commensurate with their contribution to the global disease burden. Such actions will provide the urgent and necessary momentum to dramatically improve the prevention and management of NCDs for future generations. Our 3 organizations, as well as other partners, are working together to maximize the impact of this meeting. The world can no longer afford to ignore the ever-expanding global social and economic threat posed by chronic diseases. NCDs account for >60% of all deaths globally, and the overall burden of chronic diseases continues to grow.1 By 2030, it is estimated that NCDs will be responsible for 7 in 10 deaths worldwide.2 In addition to the human toll, the economic impact of chronic disease is staggering and will continue to rise. The World Health Organization estimates that the cumulative estimated national income losses attributable to chronic disease from 2005 to 2015 could exceed $1 trillion in just 3 countries: China ($558 billion), Russia ($303 billion), and India ($237 billion).1 Moreover, the chronic disease mortality burden is heaviest in less affluent nations. Of the world's roughly 35 million annual deaths attributable to NCDs, ≈80% occur in low- and middle-income countries.3 …
-
creating a 21st century global health agenda the General Assembly of the united nations high level meeting on non communicable diseases
Diabetes Care, 2011Co-Authors: Edward E Partridge, Elizabeth J Mayerdavis, Ralph L Sacco, Alan J BalchAbstract:On 13 May 2010, the General Assembly of the United Nations (UN) voted unanimously for UN Resolution 64/265 to hold a High Level Meeting on Non-Communicable Diseases in September 2011. This UN High Level Meeting, to be held in New York, is an unparalleled opportunity to put noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), including cancer, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, stroke, and chronic respiratory disease, on the global health and development agenda. It also has the potential to secure political commitments from heads of government for a coordinated global response to NCDs, to promote multisectoral action to addressing NCDs within countries, and to ensure that resource allocations for addressing NCDs are more commensurate with their contribution to the global disease burden. Such actions will provide the urgent and necessary momentum to dramatically improve the prevention and management of NCDs for future generations. Our three organizations, as well as other partners, are working together to maximize the impact of this meeting. The world can no longer afford to ignore the ever-expanding global social and economic threat posed by chronic diseases. NCDs account for >60% of all deaths globally, and the overall burden of chronic diseases continues to grow (1). By 2030, it is estimated that NCDs will be responsible for 7 in 10 deaths worldwide (2). In addition to the human toll, the economic impact of chronic disease is staggering and will continue to rise. The World Health Organization estimates that the cumulative estimated national income losses attributable to chronic disease from 2005 to 2015 could exceed $1 trillion in just three countries: China ($558 billion), Russia ($303 billion), and India ($237 billion) (1). Moreover, the chronic disease mortality burden is heaviest in less affluent nations. Of the world's roughly 35 million annual deaths attributable to NCDs, ∼80% occur in low- and middle-income countries …
Deborah Rugg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
human rights in the global response to hiv findings from the 2008 united nations General Assembly special session reports
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 2009Co-Authors: Sofia Gruskin, Laura Ferguson, Greet Peersman, Deborah RuggAbstract:Background: Every country in the world has made human rights-related commitments in relation to HIV, yet assessment of the extent to which HIV-related rights are indeed respected, protected and fulfilled remains relatively new. Civil society has, in some places, highlighted the strengths and shortcomings of government action, but attention to governments' own reports of their performance vis-a-vis their HIV-related human rights obligations offers an important and inadequately explored data source. Methods: We reviewed National Composite Policy Index data from 133 United Nations General Assembly Special Session Country Progress Reports and examined their narrative reports for text relating to human rights. Findings: 2008 National Composite Policy Index data show an increase in the number of countries reporting on human rights issues since 2006. These reports offer important information, even when they are internally inconsistent. Almost all reporting countries (94%) note that their national HIV policies explicitly mention the promotion and protection of human rights, yet only 22% of these countries report performance indicators to assess human rights compliance. In addition, 71% of countries report protective laws or regulations for vulnerable subpopulations, yet 63% of those same countries report the existence of laws or policies that hinder access to HIV services for vulnerable subpopulations. Interpretation: Because they include data that have been provided or approved by governments, the United Nations General Assembly Special Session Country Reports provide critical information to support national legal and policy reform and implementation of a human rights-based approach to HIV By identifying shortcomings in the fulfillment of human rights, a refocusing of efforts is possible, which can aid both governments and civil society in achieving an effective and appropriate response to HIV through advocacy for and implementation of laws, policies and programs that support human rights.
Aurorita Mendoza - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
is there a gender gap in the hiv response evaluating national hiv responses from the united nations General Assembly special session on hiv aids country reports
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 2009Co-Authors: Michel Carael, Hein Marais, Judith Polsky, Aurorita MendozaAbstract:Background:The Declaration of Commitment of the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS (UNGASS), in 2001, sets out several policy and programmatic commitments that pertain to women and the gender aspects of the HIV epidemic. Some of them are General, whereas others are more spec
Axel Dreher - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
country or leader political change and un General Assembly voting
European Journal of Political Economy, 2013Co-Authors: Axel Dreher, Nathan M JensenAbstract:In this project we explore the relationship between leader change and relations between states. Voting in the United Nation's General Assembly (UNGA) is often used as a measure of political proximity between countries. We use UN voting coincidence to examine how changes in leadership affect relations. Specifically, we examine how political change affects a country's voting with the United States. In this paper we explore how leadership change affects UNGA voting. Using differences between "key" and "non-key" UN votes to the United States, we explore if political change is driven by preference change or by a changing external position. While political change has little impact on voting on non-key issues (state preferences) we find that after leadership change, countries are more likely to vote in line with the United States on key UN votes.
-
Do the IMF and the World Bank influence voting in the UN General Assembly
Public Choice, 2010Co-Authors: Axel Dreher, Jan-egbert SturmAbstract:Using panel data for 188 countries over the 1970–2008 period, this paper analyzes empirically the influence of the IMF and the World Bank on voting patterns in the UN General Assembly. Countries receiving adjustment projects and larger non-concessional loans from the World Bank vote more frequently in line with the average G7 country. The same is true for countries obtaining non-concessional IMF programs. Regarding voting coincidence with the United States, World Bank non-concessional loans have a significant impact, while IMF loans do not. This overall pattern of results is robust to the choice of control variables and method of estimation.
-
Does US Aid Buy UN General Assembly Votes? A Disaggregated Analysis
Public Choice, 2008Co-Authors: Axel Dreher, Peter Nunnenkamp, Rainer ThieleAbstract:Using panel data for 143 countries over the period 1973–2002, this paper empirically analyzes the influence of US aid on voting patterns in the UN General Assembly. We use disaggregated aid data to account for the fact that various forms of aid may differ in their ability to induce political support by recipients. We obtain strong evidence that US aid buys voting compliance in the Assembly. More specifically, our results suggest that General budget support and grants are the major aid categories by which recipients have been induced to vote in line with the United States. When replicating the analysis for other G7 donors, no comparable patterns emerge.
-
Do IMF and World Bank Influence Voting in the Un General Assembly
Social Science Research Network, 2006Co-Authors: Axel Dreher, Jan-egbert SturmAbstract:Using panel data for 188 countries over the period 1970-2002 this paper empirically analyzes the influence of the IMF and the World Bank on voting patterns in the UN General Assembly. Countries receiving adjustment programs and larger non-concessional loans from the World Bank vote more frequently in line with the average G7 country. The same is true for countries obtaining non-concessional IMF programs. Regarding voting coincidence with the US, World Bank (concessional and non-concessional) loans have a significant impact, while the IMF has not. These results are robust to the inclusion of control variables and method of estimation.
-
Do IMF and World Bank Influence Voting in the UN General Assembly
Research Papers in Economics, 2006Co-Authors: Axel Dreher, Jan-egbert SturmAbstract:Using panel data for about 100 countries over the period 1970-2002 this paper analyzes empirically the influence of the IMF and the World Bank on voting patterns in the UN General Assembly. The main hypotheses tested relate to the impact of overall foreign aid, and IMF and World Bank loans in particular. The influence of trade and foreign direct investment, democracy, dependence, and cultural as well as political proximity on voting behavior is also analyzed. Our results, based on Extreme Bounds Analysis, show that countries receiving concessional IMF loans are significantly more likely to vote with the G7 countries, while (non-concessional) money from the IBRD significantly reduces voting coincidence. Bilateral aid from G7 countries is not robustly related to voting in the General Assembly.