Person:
Kaufman, Joan

Profile Picture

Email Address

AA Acceptance Date

Birth Date

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Job Title

Last Name

Kaufman

First Name

Joan

Name

Kaufman, Joan
Author's Publications: search.filters.isAuthorOfPublication.7a117634-9925-4051-99f7-8ce07f829d2e

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    China’s health assistance to Africa: opportunism or altruism?
    (BioMed Central, 2016) Lin, Shuang; Gao, Liangmin; Reyes, Melissa; Cheng, Feng; Kaufman, Joan; El-Sadr, Wafaa M.
    China has made substantial health commitments to Africa in the past several decades. However, while much has been written regarding China-Africa aid overall, relatively little attention has been given to China’s health aid. To better understand these investments, we provide an overview of the current framework and characteristics of China’s health aid to Africa. China’s health assistance has been perceived by some as opportunistic, largely as a demonstration of China’s engagement in “soft power” and an attempt to enhance its access to natural resources and political favors by African countries. Others have attributed altruistic intent, aiming to support the advancement of the health of populations in the African continent with a “no strings attached” approach. Our overview demonstrated that despite the magnitude of China’s health assistance, many questions remain regarding the scope of this aid, its effectiveness and the governance mechanisms that guide the conceptualization and implementation of such efforts. We also identified the need for a systematic and rigorous evaluation of the various elements of China’s health assistance to African countries in order to gain a deeper understanding of how priorities and allocations for health aid are determined, how such aid fits within the specific African country’s health strategies and to assess the effectiveness of such aid. Insights garnered through such an assessment could help determine future priorities for investment as well as inform efforts to optimize the value of China's aid for the populations of the recipient countries.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Developing Community Advisory Board Guidelines for AIDS Vaccine Trials in China
    (BioMed Central, 2012) Kaufman, Joan; Liu, C; Menezes, A
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Investment in HIV/AIDS programs: Does it help strengthen health systems in developing countries?
    (BioMed Central, 2008) Yu, Dongbao; Souteyrand, Yves; Banda, Mazuwa A; Kaufman, Joan; Perriëns, Joseph H
    Background: There is increasing debate about whether the scaled-up investment in HIV/AIDS programs is strengthening or weakening the fragile health systems of many developing countries. This article examines and assesses the evidence and proposes ways forward. Discussion: Considerably increased resources have been brought into countries for HIV/AIDS programs by major Global Health Initiatives. Among the positive impacts are the increased awareness of and priority given to public health by governments. In addition, services to people living with HIV/AIDS have rapidly expanded. In many countries infrastructure and laboratories have been strengthened, and in some, primary health care services have been improved. The effect of AIDS on the health work force has been lessened by the provision of antiretroviral treatment to HIV-infected health care workers, by training, and, to an extent, by task-shifting. However, there are reports of concerns, too – among them, a temporal association between increasing AIDS funding and stagnant reproductive health funding, and accusations that scarce personnel are siphoned off from other health care services by offers of better-paying jobs in HIV/AIDS programs. Unfortunately, there is limited hard evidence of these health system impacts. Because service delivery for AIDS has not yet reached a level that could conceivably be considered "as close to Universal Access as possible," countries and development partners must maintain the momentum of investment in HIV/AIDS programs. At the same time, it should be recognized that global action for health is even more underfunded than is the response to the HIV epidemic. The real issue is therefore not whether to fund AIDS or health systems, but how to increase funding for both. Summary: The evidence is mixed – mostly positive but some negative – as to the impact on health systems of the scaled-up responses to HIV/AIDS driven primarily by global health partnerships. Current scaled-up responses to HIV/AIDS must be maintained and strengthened. Instead of endless debate about the comparative advantages of vertical and horizontal approaches, partners should focus on the best ways for investments in response to HIV to also broadly strengthen the primary health care systems.