GOVERNANCE - QUESTION 2
You are encouraged to include your name, age, gender, and location when you participate, for statistical analysis purposes. Anonymous inputs are also welcome.
You are encouraged to include your name, age, gender, and location when you participate, for statistical analysis purposes. Anonymous inputs are also welcome.
To post your comments, you can:
- Choose the option ‘Google Account’ or ‘Unknown (Google)’ and sign in using your personal Google + Account.
- Choose the option ‘Name/URL’ and post using your name. You may leave the URL section blank or include the URL of your institutional website; only your name will appear with your comment.
- Choose the option ‘Anonymous’ and post without providing any personal information. The comment will appear as ‘Anonymous’.
By posting here, you agree to the legal disclaimer
18 comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Simply by allowing them to work with UNAIDS! There have been less then 10 vacancies in 2016! However, there is a lot of work to do
ReplyDeleteFind a way to work more effectively within the existing AIDS response platforms at the national level (on-line tools, mobile apps etc), initiate meetings, discussions with constituencies represented in NCC (not only when GF proposal is on the way, but in a broader sense).
ReplyDeleteMainstream AIDS response into existing civil society platform (for example like the platform of the Civil Society Forum of the Eastern Partnership), etc.
The secretariat and cosponsors are already engaging many stakeholders in their mandated areas. They need to review their scope of engagement and increase it based on the expansion of players in a particular sector. Then the concerns would be brought to the board by the cosponsors and other members. Expanding the board would be premature at this stage. Another way is a case by case basis at country level for a start to start discussions between a key stakeholder and the joint team. This bottom-up approach will justify expansion if needed. If a particular stakeholder is a major contributor to the response is not part of the team yet that is where issues are, it makes sense to widen representation at the board. Stakeholders such as the private sector, foundations,Funds, civil society have to be engaged but not always as board members.
ReplyDeleteInvite more (independent) stakeholders or communities to the Board discussions and make sure it their participation is being financed. Provide communities with the right to raise the voice. Highlight (good practice) countries, meaning countries that are doing well to include Civil Society and blame those who don’t. UNAIDS should address violations in that respect and be a bit more political if these core principles are not respected. Another good idea might be to publish brief summaries of the board meeting discussions and to request country delegates to distribute the reports among communities at country level.
ReplyDeleteA strong but more streamlined governance for UNAIDS will be useful. The CCO (composed of the Heads of Agency, Global Coordinators and Focal Points) should remain the primary coordination mechanism and continue as a standing committee of the PCB. Global Coordinators should continue to provide day-to-day coordination.
ReplyDeleteThe 11 cosponsors cover the key UN agencies and necessary contributions to the Joint Programme, further expansion risks resulting in an unwieldy group. Engaging other stakeholders could be explored, for example through an associate member status. Linkages and coherence between the PCB and boards of cosponsoring agencies needs to be strengthened.
Over the past few years UNAIDS and the international AIDS community have benefited from the unique leadership of the Executive Director. The role of the Executive Director may have nevertheless been constrained by the extent to which HIV has been seen as primarily a health problem. While this is understandable and justifiable, the reality is that the impact of HIV on social development and reconstruction has been even more important and evident. Highlighting this even more in the future will be important and the Executive Director's mandate should be expanded within the UN to address this. The Board should be encouraged to take this up and approve such a strategy.
ReplyDeleteThe current composition of the board works well and would not be improved by an expansion to include more members. This would make coordination and achieving consensus even more difficult than currently. Nevertheless, it is important for the joint programme to hear the perspectives of a broad range of stakeholders, including a broader range of community and civil society groups, industry, and other stakeholders. This could be accomplished in part by inviting representatives of stakeholder groups to participate, on an ad hoc basis, in discussions of particular relevance to their constituencies.
ReplyDeleteMembers of the board could also improve their engagement with a broader range stakeholders. Cosponsors could do more to bring the perspectives of country level partners into the board. Member states could include a more diverse set of representatives on their delegations, which include the perspectives of currently unrepresented stakeholders. The NGO delegation could also expand its scope to include a broader range of stakeholders, including community groups currently on the margins of the HIV response.
At a more practical level, the joint programme could do more to increase its operational outreach and engagement with a broader range of stakeholders. Cosponsors, in particular, could improve the way they engage with potential stakeholders and make an effort to integrate such engagement into their day-to-day operations.
In order not to make change configuration Program Coordinating Board through ECOSOC, as it is difficult and complicated process, we suggest - for example, to add the possibility of including associate members - non-members of the board. But those, who can propose topics, take part in preparation of PCB meetings and discussions - for example to be connected to the working groups conducted for preparation of PCB Meetings.
ReplyDeleteWe also suggest the opportunity to submit reports not only NGO delegation, but to include other stakeholders – Member States, scientist, private foundations, etc
Time allocated for UNAIDS Board discussions is very limited and the current practice which consists in inviting important stakeholders to join the discussions where their expertise is required should continue. The existing streamlined and coordinated governance system should remain, to ensure that the UN’s wide-ranging AIDS response remains focused and manageable. The engagement of other partners should be strengthened along specific projects, globally and above all at country level, given the context and the priorities.
ReplyDeleteEn los debates de la Junta Coordinadora del Programa ONUSIDA se permite el aporte de información por representantes de los países que forman parte de esta junta, por ejemplo, en la última reunión de la Junta Coordinadora del Programa ONUSIDA el representante de Ecuador tuvo la palabra ante la audiencia en 2 oportunidades, dentro de estas intervenciones resalto la siguiente información mencionada: “Desde el año 2014, el Ministerio de Salud financia en parte la contratación de promotores pares de diferentes organizaciones civiles para vincularlos como Técnicos de Atención Primaria en Salud (TAPS) para intervenir a través de acciones comunitarias en poblaciones clave”. La finalidad de esta intervención fue instar a los diferentes organismos gubernamentales de otras naciones a implementar un programa similar, para así fortalecer el poder ciudadano, sus formas de expresión y el afianzamiento de sus bases para lograr una respuesta efectiva al VIH/Sida; lo relevante de estas intervenciones no es solo el comentario en la Junta sino también hacer el seguimiento respectivo de estos planteamientos para que se ejecuten en los distintos países.
ReplyDeleteCurrently, the NGO delegation to the PCB have 5 members and 5 alternates. Increasing the number of NGO delegates to participate at the PCB can help ensure greater representation and voice of PLHIVs, KPs and CS
ReplyDeleteThe Board already feels very crowded. I dont think that broadening the membership wider at this time would be the correct response
ReplyDeleteThe current composition of the board well represents the different constituencies, however, expansion of country level delegations and the broader range of community and civil society partners representing especially the key populations would ensure that voices of all stakeholders are heard in the PCB.
ReplyDeleteRepresentatives have to have strong roots to country or global responses and should be chosen by the constituencies they represent. Particular support need to be given to constituencies that are weak such as networks of people living with HIV who are not key populations and young adolescents. In this way the voices of different population groups will be consistently heard.
ReplyDeleteПредлагаю сделать максимально прозрачной процедуру выбора делегатов от НГО в PCB от стран с широким информированием и публичной процедурой выбора - предварительный отбор по номинации от нескольких организаций (3-5) с описанием достижений кандидата и затем уже голосование через Интернет по предварительно отобранным кандидатурам. Важно чтобы максимальное количество НГО было информировано о процессе.
ReplyDeleteEnsure dedicated board seats for people living with HIV, women, young people, and key population groups; with each constituency the opportunity to report to UNAIDS Board
ReplyDeleteSunt necesare crearea căilor de acces (mai frecvent bariere financiare) pentru mai multe ONG sau alte entități, decit Ministerul Sănătății, la sedințele PCB. Prezentarea rapoartelor alternative si modelelor de bune practici reprezintă o practică bună și trebuie extinsă.
ReplyDeleteThe question is a leading one. It presumes important stakeholders do not have a consistent voice in UNAIDS board discussions. Yet, a broad range of civil society organizations participate in the NGO Delegation and as observers. To speak just of young peoples' organizations, for example, the young peoples' organization, The Pact, has had consistently strong participation in PCB meetings (and should be supported to continue) and the IAS brought a number of young people who participated in the 39th PCB meeting. Further, in the NGO Delegation, two of the ten delegates are young people and come from organizations of young people. I hope that this question is not coming from those who now want the private sector (f.ex. pharma) to hold seats on the UNAIDS board. Expertise from the private sector, researchers and scientists, and others should be invited in as appropriate to offer information for specific agenda items. This is currently the process and past meeting reports will show researchers, community members, key population organizations, legal experts, and pharma representatives throughout the 3-day meetings.
ReplyDeleteTo strengthen civil society participation would be very helpful, however. It is challenging for communities to build the expertise needed to meaningfully participate in PCB meetings and to understand the past precedents, political dynamics, and negotiations that create the current environments. The all-volunteer members of the NGO Delegation need a sustainably and adequately funded communication and consultation facility to support them (the facility had been cut to bare bones even before the recent 30% cut) and they need funded opportunities for capacity and skills building - and to be able to help develop the capacity of the next generation of potential delegates from different key population groups.