GIGA Working Papers Edited by the GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies
GIGA Working Papers Edited by the GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies
复制标题
GIGA 德国全球与区域研究所编辑的 GIGA 工作论文
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
A. Catrina
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
V. Joshua;G. Reynisdottir;J. Ytterberg;M. Engström;A. Eklund;M. Skold;P. Jakobsson;J. Rönnelid;V. Malmström;L. Klareskog;J. Grunewald;A. Catrina
本文阐述了全球卫生治理（GHG）中的主要参与者--政府、非政府组织（NGO）、政府间组织（IOs）和跨国制药公司（TNPC）--如何相互作用，从而改变了全球卫生架构，特别是艾滋病治疗。作者使用“权力类型”（Keohane/Martin）和“接口”（Norman Long）的概念，研究了主要温室气体行为者之间的冲突，这些冲突主要是由于自1995年以来生效的《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》（TRIPS）而引起的，这些冲突是围绕着获得防治艾滋病毒/艾滋病的药物的机会有限而产生的。然后，他们分析了巴西和南非为获得快速和低成本的抗逆转录病毒药物治疗艾滋病所做的努力。他们的结论是，虽然两国的决策者采用了不同的方法来解决艾滋病问题，但他们在非政府组织的支持下，能够在全球一级沿着法律的界面修改《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》和改变世贸组织的一些规则。在国家一级，巴西防治艾滋病的成果令人鼓舞，但南非却不然，南非当局长期否认这一挑战。作者认为，不同的结果是巴西的能力，结合联合收割机话语，法律的，行政和资源为基础的接口。
The present article illustrates how the main actors in global health governance (GHG)— governments, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), intergovernmental organizations (IOs), and transnational pharmaceutical companies (TNPCs)—have been interacting and, as a result, modifying the global health architecture in general and AIDS treatment in particular. Using the concept of “power types” (Keohane/Martin) and “interfaces” (Norman Long), the authors examine the conflicts among major GHG actors that have arisen surrounding the limited access to medicines for fighting HIV/AIDS basically as a result of the Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), in force since 1995. They then analyze the efforts of Brazil and South Africa to obtain fast and low-cost access to antiretroviral medication against AIDS. They conclude that while policy makers in the two countries have used different approaches to tackle the AIDS problem, they have been able, with the support of NGOs, to modify TRIPS and change some WTO rules at the global level along legal interfaces. At the national level the results of the fight against AIDS have been encouraging for Brazil, but not for South Africa, where authorities denied the challenge for a prolonged period of time. The authors see the different outcomes as a consequence of Brazil’s ability to combine discoursive, legal, administrative, and resource-based interfaces.