The goal of combating diseases such as HIV and Aids and malaria by giving universal access to treatment won’t be met. The number of people living with HIV has fallen by 17% since 2002 but 33m still do, 70% of them in Africa.
The target of reducing the mortality of children aged under five by two thirds also looks unlikely to be achieved. The mortality rate has dropped since 1990, but 10m children still die every year, almost half of them from pneumonia, diarrhoea, malaria and Aids.
“We’re still a long way off from ending extreme poverty,” said Judith Robertson, the head of Oxfam Scotland. “Meeting the goals is the first step to a life of dignity, free of poverty, for everyone. The world cannot afford a single broken promise. Failing one will fail all.”
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/world-news/the-world-s-broken-promises-1.1056068
Showing posts with label Millenium Development Goals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Millenium Development Goals. Show all posts
Wednesday, 22 September 2010
Saturday, 12 June 2010
MALARIA: Health metrics assessment
It is clear that most countries will not reach the Millennium Development Goal targets by 2015. Yet there can still be dramatic improvements over the next five years – and beyond – if we take the opportunity to learn from the successes and find ways to replicate them.
In an era where demonstrating the effectiveness of development assistance for health is becoming increasingly important, following up this study with careful country case studies will be vital. Bursts of rapid improvement are possible, with countries such as Egypt and Tunisia achieving remarkable declines in both maternal and child mortality rates.
Country-specific research that focuses on the steps taken to achieve these rapid reductions could reveal the necessary formula for countries that are falling behind. We also need to know more about how interventions targeted at child and maternal health are working. To better understand child mortality reductions, we must examine how policy initiatives such as vaccine programs, insecticide-treated bed net distribution, or the scale-up of antiretroviral treatment
are contributing to accelerated mortality declines.
Next steps could include exploring how levels and trends in child mortality are related to changes in the key drivers of child mortality, including income per capita, levels of maternal education, the HIV epidemic, and malaria. Studying these indicators will help us understand where country performance has been better than expected.
With hindsight, we can ask whether the targets set for MDG4 and MDG5 were realistic or overly ambitious. Looking past 2015, when a new round of health targets may be formulated, it will be important to ground the choice of targets in an informed discussion of the distribution of progress across nations.
http://www.healthmetricsandevaluation.org/print/reports/2010/building/building_momentum_conclusion_IHME_0610.pdf
In an era where demonstrating the effectiveness of development assistance for health is becoming increasingly important, following up this study with careful country case studies will be vital. Bursts of rapid improvement are possible, with countries such as Egypt and Tunisia achieving remarkable declines in both maternal and child mortality rates.
Country-specific research that focuses on the steps taken to achieve these rapid reductions could reveal the necessary formula for countries that are falling behind. We also need to know more about how interventions targeted at child and maternal health are working. To better understand child mortality reductions, we must examine how policy initiatives such as vaccine programs, insecticide-treated bed net distribution, or the scale-up of antiretroviral treatment
are contributing to accelerated mortality declines.
Next steps could include exploring how levels and trends in child mortality are related to changes in the key drivers of child mortality, including income per capita, levels of maternal education, the HIV epidemic, and malaria. Studying these indicators will help us understand where country performance has been better than expected.
With hindsight, we can ask whether the targets set for MDG4 and MDG5 were realistic or overly ambitious. Looking past 2015, when a new round of health targets may be formulated, it will be important to ground the choice of targets in an informed discussion of the distribution of progress across nations.
http://www.healthmetricsandevaluation.org/print/reports/2010/building/building_momentum_conclusion_IHME_0610.pdf
Sunday, 6 June 2010
POVERTY: Africa Progress Panel Report
Who is to blame for poverty in Africa?
In the forward to this year's Africa Progress Report, Kofi Annan puts the emphasis on African leaders to improve poverty levels and meet Millennium Development Goal commitments. But will his words have impact?
"Good governance and accountability will determine Africa's future."This is the standout statement in the Africa Progress Report 2010 (APR), published by the Africa Progress Panel (APP) last week.
Formed in 2005 in the wake of the Gleneagles G8 summit, the APP seeks to promote "Africa's development by tracking progress, drawing attention to opportunities and catalysing action".
In terms of Africa's progress, the report had much to boast about: the last decade ushered in economic growth across much of the continent. Kofi Annan, former UN secretary general and chairman of the APP, described Africa as "a new economic frontier", thanks to continued discoveries of natural resources, an ever-growing list of new partners, such as China and the steady rise in domestic revenues, foreign direct investment, remittances and official development assistance (ODA) – or aid.
But these achievements have not eradicated Africa's ills and the report set out to address why.
"Why does progress on achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) remain so low, so uneven? Why do the absolute and relative numbers of people living in poverty remain so high? Why do so many people face food and nutrition, joblessness and minimal access to basic services such as energy, clean water, healthcare and education? Why are so many women marginalised and disenfranchised? And why is inequality increasing?" Annan asked in the forward to the report.
He concluded that the root causes of Africa's problems were a lack of political will and the inability of the continent's leaders to use revenues to benefit the people.
"Responsibility for driving equitable growth and for investing in achievement of the MDG targets rests firmly with Africa's political leaders," Annan added.
It's not the first time this sentiment has been expressed, but will Annan's words and the central message of this report have more impact because of who they are being directly aimed at? This report is written with African leaders - in government, business and civil society – very much in mind.
Support for development and Africa's economic success have both been hit by the economic crisis. The crisis, says the report, "highlighted a number of worrisome trends... such as growing inequality, setbacks in achieving MDGs, vulnerability... concerns that economic contraction squeezes out commitment to human development". In the downturn, the need for good governance to mitigate the damage becomes essential and Africa leaders have been shown to be wanting.
While the report continues to call on donors to uphold their MDG commitments and the Gleneagles declarations (speaking of which, the point about aid commitments appears to have been left off the draft communiqué for this month's G8 summit) and emphasises the numerous agreements signed by the continent's leaders to improve transparency, accountability and pro-poor growth in Africa, the key message is that there needs to be greater political will to achieve long-term success.
But if development is a question of political will, then Africa needs political transformation fast. But this won't be easy.
No easy task
Of the 33 founder member countries of the Organisation of African Unity, now the African Union, who Annan credits with "the vision... to promote a poverty-busting development agenda", 16 are among the least developed countries on the United Nations Development Programme's (UNDP) Human Development Index. Many of these countries have been governed by the same person for more than 20 years.
The report suggests that mutual accountability and monitoring are part of the solution, but implementing schemes to do just that hasn't been straight forward.
The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) is supposed to promote good governance through self-monitoring. Some 29 countries have joined the APRM, but the voluntary nature of the mechanism has raised questions about its effectiveness for bringing about any real, lasting change.
Even the report seems unable to forcefully convey the need for African leaders to change their priorities for the good of their citizens, evidenced in the wording it uses to chastise. While the report tells Africa's partners in no uncertain terms that their "bloated subsidy regimes and unfair trade rules" leave African countries "heavily disadvantaged," it goes on to assert, in something of an understatement, that "Africans beyond elite circles are not benefiting sufficiently". It would seem that even the language of the report shows precisely who its authors feel prepared or perhaps able to reprimand.
For Africa's development partners, the report makes clear their incentive to support change: climate change and the impact of rising temperatures are straining resources, meaning "necessity rather than altruism will compel politicians to persuade their publics... of the imperative to invest in sustainable global development".
What remains unclear is what the incentive is for Africa's autocrats, many of whom lead some of Africa's most resource-rich and populous countries. These are places where the death of a leader perhaps provides the only chance there is to change lives for the better.
In the forward to this year's Africa Progress Report, Kofi Annan puts the emphasis on African leaders to improve poverty levels and meet Millennium Development Goal commitments. But will his words have impact?
"Good governance and accountability will determine Africa's future."This is the standout statement in the Africa Progress Report 2010 (APR), published by the Africa Progress Panel (APP) last week.
Formed in 2005 in the wake of the Gleneagles G8 summit, the APP seeks to promote "Africa's development by tracking progress, drawing attention to opportunities and catalysing action".
In terms of Africa's progress, the report had much to boast about: the last decade ushered in economic growth across much of the continent. Kofi Annan, former UN secretary general and chairman of the APP, described Africa as "a new economic frontier", thanks to continued discoveries of natural resources, an ever-growing list of new partners, such as China and the steady rise in domestic revenues, foreign direct investment, remittances and official development assistance (ODA) – or aid.
But these achievements have not eradicated Africa's ills and the report set out to address why.
"Why does progress on achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) remain so low, so uneven? Why do the absolute and relative numbers of people living in poverty remain so high? Why do so many people face food and nutrition, joblessness and minimal access to basic services such as energy, clean water, healthcare and education? Why are so many women marginalised and disenfranchised? And why is inequality increasing?" Annan asked in the forward to the report.
He concluded that the root causes of Africa's problems were a lack of political will and the inability of the continent's leaders to use revenues to benefit the people.
"Responsibility for driving equitable growth and for investing in achievement of the MDG targets rests firmly with Africa's political leaders," Annan added.
It's not the first time this sentiment has been expressed, but will Annan's words and the central message of this report have more impact because of who they are being directly aimed at? This report is written with African leaders - in government, business and civil society – very much in mind.
Support for development and Africa's economic success have both been hit by the economic crisis. The crisis, says the report, "highlighted a number of worrisome trends... such as growing inequality, setbacks in achieving MDGs, vulnerability... concerns that economic contraction squeezes out commitment to human development". In the downturn, the need for good governance to mitigate the damage becomes essential and Africa leaders have been shown to be wanting.
While the report continues to call on donors to uphold their MDG commitments and the Gleneagles declarations (speaking of which, the point about aid commitments appears to have been left off the draft communiqué for this month's G8 summit) and emphasises the numerous agreements signed by the continent's leaders to improve transparency, accountability and pro-poor growth in Africa, the key message is that there needs to be greater political will to achieve long-term success.
But if development is a question of political will, then Africa needs political transformation fast. But this won't be easy.
No easy task
Of the 33 founder member countries of the Organisation of African Unity, now the African Union, who Annan credits with "the vision... to promote a poverty-busting development agenda", 16 are among the least developed countries on the United Nations Development Programme's (UNDP) Human Development Index. Many of these countries have been governed by the same person for more than 20 years.
The report suggests that mutual accountability and monitoring are part of the solution, but implementing schemes to do just that hasn't been straight forward.
The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) is supposed to promote good governance through self-monitoring. Some 29 countries have joined the APRM, but the voluntary nature of the mechanism has raised questions about its effectiveness for bringing about any real, lasting change.
Even the report seems unable to forcefully convey the need for African leaders to change their priorities for the good of their citizens, evidenced in the wording it uses to chastise. While the report tells Africa's partners in no uncertain terms that their "bloated subsidy regimes and unfair trade rules" leave African countries "heavily disadvantaged," it goes on to assert, in something of an understatement, that "Africans beyond elite circles are not benefiting sufficiently". It would seem that even the language of the report shows precisely who its authors feel prepared or perhaps able to reprimand.
For Africa's development partners, the report makes clear their incentive to support change: climate change and the impact of rising temperatures are straining resources, meaning "necessity rather than altruism will compel politicians to persuade their publics... of the imperative to invest in sustainable global development".
What remains unclear is what the incentive is for Africa's autocrats, many of whom lead some of Africa's most resource-rich and populous countries. These are places where the death of a leader perhaps provides the only chance there is to change lives for the better.
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
POVERTY: MDG target will be met
The World Bank says that at least one of the Millennium Development Goals will be met. The Bank's latest Global Monitoring Report was released today. In the annual report, the Bank says the MGD to halve poverty by 2015 will be met. Meanwhile, the goals of halting the spread of AIDS, improving access to education and water, improving child and mother survival and gender equality goals will not be met by 2015 and the progress was slowed by the global recession.
"Poverty rates were falling in all regions, even in Africa the rate was falling about one percent a year," he noted.Portugal said progress made in the 1990s had reduced inflation, strengthened government finances and gave them better access to private capital markets."All those efforts prior to the crisis paid off," he told the press briefing. "It meant that countries were in a stronger position to respond to the crisis."As a result, the estimated 920 million people who will likely be extremely poor in 2015 should represent a cut nearly of nearly 50 percent from the 1.8 billion in such conditions in 1990, the World Bank noted."Based on these estimates, the developing world as a whole is still on track to achieve the first MDG of halving extreme income poverty from its 1990 level of 42 percent by 2015," it said.Asia has done a particularly good job of reducing extreme poverty, and has already seen the rate of extreme poverty plunge from nearly 55 percent of its population in 1990 to just under 17 percent in 2005.That level is expected to fall to 5.9 percent in 2015.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5itmCVryYHBmaI-kbuULQd7gWeSBw
"Poverty rates were falling in all regions, even in Africa the rate was falling about one percent a year," he noted.Portugal said progress made in the 1990s had reduced inflation, strengthened government finances and gave them better access to private capital markets."All those efforts prior to the crisis paid off," he told the press briefing. "It meant that countries were in a stronger position to respond to the crisis."As a result, the estimated 920 million people who will likely be extremely poor in 2015 should represent a cut nearly of nearly 50 percent from the 1.8 billion in such conditions in 1990, the World Bank noted."Based on these estimates, the developing world as a whole is still on track to achieve the first MDG of halving extreme income poverty from its 1990 level of 42 percent by 2015," it said.Asia has done a particularly good job of reducing extreme poverty, and has already seen the rate of extreme poverty plunge from nearly 55 percent of its population in 1990 to just under 17 percent in 2005.That level is expected to fall to 5.9 percent in 2015.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5itmCVryYHBmaI-kbuULQd7gWeSBw
Sunday, 25 April 2010
South East Asia malaria
Malaria, which poses a risk to 77 percent of the South-East Asian population and claims thousands of lives each year, needs more commitment and greater funds for successful interventions from donors and states, the World Health Organisation (WHO) said Friday.
Calling it a disease without borders, Samlee Plianbangchang, WHO regional director for South-East Asia said in a statement: “Increasing funding for effective interventions could significantly reduce malaria deaths in many countries”.
“In WHO’s South-East Asia Region, several countries have made good progress and demonstrated that support for malaria control is working,” he said ahead of World Malaria Day April 25.
For instance, Sri Lanka and South Korea have both reached the elimination stage in malaria. Bhutan has also made good progress and is now aiming towards malaria elimination. Reported malaria deaths have decreased significantly in Bangladesh, Thailand and Myanmar with improved case management, the statement said.
“Nevertheless, malaria is endemic in all the countries in the South-East Asian region, except the Republic of Maldives, and the situation is becoming increasingly difficult to control due to several technical and managerial problems,” Plianbangchang added.
Said Jai P. Narain, director, communicable diseases, WHO: “Repeated focal epidemics are common due to socio-environmental changes. Many cases are due to population migration. There is no doubt that malaria adversely affects economic development, particularly the livelihood of the poor.”
“It is well understood that to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) we have to reduce the impact of malaria significantly. But to do so, we need to address the social, economic, environmental and behavioural factors that contribute to the disease’s occurrence and its impact,” he added.
http://blog.taragana.com/health/2010/04/23/more-funds-needed-to-tackle-malaria-who-april-25-is-world-malaria-day-22038/
Calling it a disease without borders, Samlee Plianbangchang, WHO regional director for South-East Asia said in a statement: “Increasing funding for effective interventions could significantly reduce malaria deaths in many countries”.
“In WHO’s South-East Asia Region, several countries have made good progress and demonstrated that support for malaria control is working,” he said ahead of World Malaria Day April 25.
For instance, Sri Lanka and South Korea have both reached the elimination stage in malaria. Bhutan has also made good progress and is now aiming towards malaria elimination. Reported malaria deaths have decreased significantly in Bangladesh, Thailand and Myanmar with improved case management, the statement said.
“Nevertheless, malaria is endemic in all the countries in the South-East Asian region, except the Republic of Maldives, and the situation is becoming increasingly difficult to control due to several technical and managerial problems,” Plianbangchang added.
Said Jai P. Narain, director, communicable diseases, WHO: “Repeated focal epidemics are common due to socio-environmental changes. Many cases are due to population migration. There is no doubt that malaria adversely affects economic development, particularly the livelihood of the poor.”
“It is well understood that to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) we have to reduce the impact of malaria significantly. But to do so, we need to address the social, economic, environmental and behavioural factors that contribute to the disease’s occurrence and its impact,” he added.
http://blog.taragana.com/health/2010/04/23/more-funds-needed-to-tackle-malaria-who-april-25-is-world-malaria-day-22038/
Saturday, 17 April 2010
Millenium Development Goals
The world is unlikely to reach the international goals set to reduce malnutrition or maternal and child mortality by 2015, authorities on global health and nutrition say. They believe that improving child nutrition is a key way to lessen all three.
Experts gathered at the Harvard School of Public Health Wednesday (April 14) for a symposium presented by the Harvard Nutrition and Global Health Program at the Harvard Initiative for Global Health.
Nutrition Department chair Walter Willett introduced the session by outlining the eight Millennium Development Goals, adopted at a United Nations summit in 2000. The symposium focused on three of the eight goals: halving extreme malnutrition and poverty, and reducing child and maternal mortality. The other goals include guaranteeing universal primary education; gender equality; fighting AIDS, malaria, and other diseases; protecting the environment; and developing a global partnership for development.
Willett said each goal tackles an area of enormous challenge, but nutrition plays a role in achieving all of them. Though some nations, particularly those in East Asia and Latin America, have made progress toward achieving the goals, nations in Africa and South Asia have made little progress.
http://serkadis.com/index/528859
Experts gathered at the Harvard School of Public Health Wednesday (April 14) for a symposium presented by the Harvard Nutrition and Global Health Program at the Harvard Initiative for Global Health.
Nutrition Department chair Walter Willett introduced the session by outlining the eight Millennium Development Goals, adopted at a United Nations summit in 2000. The symposium focused on three of the eight goals: halving extreme malnutrition and poverty, and reducing child and maternal mortality. The other goals include guaranteeing universal primary education; gender equality; fighting AIDS, malaria, and other diseases; protecting the environment; and developing a global partnership for development.
Willett said each goal tackles an area of enormous challenge, but nutrition plays a role in achieving all of them. Though some nations, particularly those in East Asia and Latin America, have made progress toward achieving the goals, nations in Africa and South Asia have made little progress.
http://serkadis.com/index/528859
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
