DSpace
DSpace

UC Home > Library > UC Research Repository > College of Science > Science: Chapters and Books >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10092/6143

Title: Co-opting the Global Health Agenda: The Problematic Role of Partnerships and Foundations in Defining Priorities
Authors: Faubion, C.T.
Paige, S.B.
Pearson, A.L.
O. Williams and S. Rushton
Issue Date: 2011
Citation: Faubion, C.T., Paige, S.B., Pearson, A.L. (2011) Co-opting the Global Health Agenda: The Problematic Role of Partnerships and Foundations in Defining Priorities. In O. Williams and S. Rushton (Ed.). Partnerships and Foundations in Global Health (pp. 1-25). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Abstract: There is little dispute that the global health agenda is increasingly being shaped by foundations and partnerships, as the introduction to and rationale for this book make plain. In the wake of structural adjustment in the Global South, and in the context of the worldwide dominance of neoliberalism, new actors are addressing global health crises such as HIV/AIDS, malnutrition, and water-borne diseases (Farmer, 2005; WHO, 2008). This book examines the impact of these new global health actors on the wider system of global health governance. In this chapter, we argue that the mainstream global health agenda is being driven by powerful, wealthy, and generally market-oriented (and often corporate-funded) foundations as well as by new Global Health Partnerships (GHPs). Given the resources and political support these actors enjoy, they have become de facto agenda-setters and increasingly shape the trajectory of global health governance. Whilst such actors are investing resources on an unprecedented scale -- especially in combating specific diseases such as HIV, tuberculosis and malaria -- we argue here that they also have a tendency to bolster the same corporate, capitalist, neoliberal agenda that has been so deleterious to health outcomes across the globe (Harvey, 2003; Kim, 2000). Certainly they are not alone in this –much publicly-funded global and national health policy and spending is similarly underpinned by neoliberal ideology (Saith, 2006). Nevertheless, there is a need to further explore the implications of this ‘private turn’ in global health governance as these new actors remake the health agenda in specific ways.
Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
University of Canterbury. Geography
Research Fields: Field of Research::11 - Medical and Health Sciences::1117 - Public Health and Health Services
Field of Research::16 - Studies in Human Society::1605 - Policy and Administration::160599 - Policy and Administration not elsewhere classified
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10092/6143
Rights: This extract is taken from the author's original manuscript and has not been edited. The definitive version of this piece may be found in Partnerships and Foundations in Global Health Governance edited by Simon Rushton and Owain David Williams which can be accessed from www.palgrave.com
Rights URI: http://library.canterbury.ac.nz/ir/rights.shtml
Appears in Collections:Science: Chapters and Books

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
12634786_Faubion_Paige_Pearson_Chapter_Public.pdf489.47 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

 

Items in UC Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

Valid XHTML 1.0! DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2010  Duraspace - Feedback