No abstract

In response to Mexico’s burgeoning industrial epidemics of obesity and type-2 diabetes, triggered in part by sugar-sweetened carbonated beverages’ ability to readily market their products and influence consumption, the government has responded through a variety of non-communicable disease (NCD) policies. Nevertheless, major industries, such as Coca-Cola, have been able to continuously obstruct the prioritization of those policies targeting the consumption, marketing and sale of their products. To better understand why this has occurred, this article introduces a political science agenda-setting framework and applies it to the case of Coca-Cola in Mexico. Devised from political science theory and subsequently applied to the case of Coca-Cola in Mexico, my framework, titled Institutions, Interests, and Industry Civic Influence (IPIC), emphasizes Coca-Cola’s access to institutions, supportive presidents and industry efforts to hamper civic mobilization and pressures for greater regulation of the soda industry. Methodologically, I employ qualitative single case study analysis, combining an analysis of 26 case study documents and seven in-depth stake-holder interviews. My proposed analytical framework helps to underscore the fact that Coca-Cola’s influence is not solely shaped by the corporation’s increased economic importance, but more importantly, its access to politicians, institutions and strategies to divide civil society. Additionally, my proposed framework provides several real-world policy recommendations for how governments and civil society can restructure their relationship with the soda industry, such as the government’s creation of laws prohibiting the industry’s ability to influence NCD policy and fund scientific research.

Using a temporal approach dividing the reform process into two periods, this article explains how both Brazil and the United States were slow to respond to AIDS. However, Brazil eventually outpaced the United States in its response due to international rather than democratic pressures. Since the early 1990s, Brazil's success has been attributed to "strategic internationalization": the concomitant acceptance and rejection of global pressure for institutional change and antiretroviral treatment, respectively. The formation of tripartite partnerships among donors, AIDS officials, and nongovernmental organizations has allowed Brazil to avoid foreign aid dependency, while generating ongoing incentives for influential AIDS officials to incessantly pressure Congress for additional funding. Given the heightened international media attention, concern about Brazil's reputation has contributed to a high level of political commitment. By contrast, the United States' more isolationist relationship with the international community, its focus on leading the global financing of AIDS efforts, and the absence of tripartite partnerships have prevented political leaders from adequately responding to the ongoing urban AIDS crisis. Thus, Brazil shows that strategically working with the international health community for domestic rather than international influence is vital for a sustained and effective response to AIDS.

No abstract

BackgroundTo date, few studies have assessed how Brazil’s universal healthcare system’s (SUS, Sistema Único de Saúde) systemic, infrastructural, and geographical challenges affect individuals’ abilities to access organ transplantation services and receive quality treatment.DiscussionIn this article we evaluated the existing literature to examine the impact that SUS has had on an increasingly important healthcare sector: organ transplantation services. We assess how equity challenges within the transplantation system can be explained by wider problems within SUS. Findings suggest stark disparities in access to transplantation services both within and across Brazil’s regions. We found that these regional differences are partially due to logistical challenges, especially in loosely populated areas but are also a consequence of disparities in resource allocations within SUS and under-capacitated health care facilities affecting transplantation services.SummaryWe suggest that Brazil needs to improve its health outcome measurement system for organ transplantations and epidemiological surveillance, to gain more comprehensive and comparable data. Finally, we recommend policy strategies to reduce barriers to access to transplantation services by increasing transplantation service coverage in some areas and investing in emerging technologies.