Indicators of political commitment to respond to HIV

Abstract

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.

Building political will for HIV response: an operational model and strategy options

“…Also of potential utility are the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS (UNGASS) Declaration of Commitment indicators (UNAIDS, ), and Lieberman's () AIDS policy aggressiveness indicators. As Goldberg et al () note, each of these indicator sets was developed for different purposes, varies in their data categories and collection methods and has validity issues. Refining indicators for political will, building on these existing indicator sets, is beyond the scope of this article, but could be a useful next step in advancing understanding of political will and country ownership.…”

Long-term financing needs for HIV control in sub-Saharan Africa in 2015–2050: a modelling study

“…Many countries in the world are committed to ensuring access to HIV treatment for those individuals needing treatment. 19 Long-term ART has a cost, however, and creates financing obligations, which HIV-affected countries need to meet from domestic and external sources of financing. Earlier studies have considered long-term costs and expenditures, as well as health and economic benefits of HIV prevention and treatment.…”

Unravelling Commitment? An Empirical Assessment of Political Commitment to Reduce Hunger and Undernutrition in Five High Burden Countries

“…The most popular research instrument for commitment metrics drawing on primary data is the expert perception survey. It has, for instance, been applied to assess political commitment regarding health (Goldberg et al 2012), HIV/AIDS (USAID et al 2003) and hunger and nutrition (te Lintelo et al 2011(te Lintelo et al , 2013(te Lintelo et al , 2014aFox et al 2014). This paper reports on findings from perception surveys conducted from July to October 2013 with 213 experts in five high burden and Scaling Up Nutrition campaign countries: Bangladesh, Malawi, Nepal, Tanzania and Zambia (see Table 3.1).…”

“…Political scientists have an ambivalent take on the concept of political commitment. 'Standing at the crossroads of politics and policy' (Post, Raile and Raile 2010: 654), political commitment is variously described as complicated and multidimensional (Goldberg et al 2012), a 'classic black box' (McCourt 2003(McCourt : 1016, and the 'slipperiest concept in the policy lexicon' that is 'never defined except by its absence' (Hammergren 1998: 12). The concept is routinely used in a rhetorical, catch-all manner (Thomas andGrindle 1990: 1164), using post hoc circular logic (Brinkerhoff 2000) to explain both failure and success of public policy interventions.…”

“…While this plasticity ensures commitment to remain an important part of the vocabulary of political leaders, various authors have attempted to define 3 and unpack the concept to facilitate empirical analysis (e.g. Morrissey 1995;Brinkerhoff 2000;McCourt 2003;Shiffman 2007;Shiffman and Smith 2007;Post et al 2010;Goldberg et al 2012). These analyses have focused on two types of questions.…”