Civil society organizations (CSOs) are recognized as playing an exceptional role in the global AIDS response. However, there is little detailed research to date on how they contribute to specific governance functions. This article uses Haas' framework on global governance functions to map CSO's participation in the monitoring of global commitments to the AIDS response by institutions and states. Drawing on key informant interviews and primary documents, it focuses specifically on CSO participation in Global AIDS Response Progress Reporting and in Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria processes. It argues that the AIDS response is unique within global health governance, in that CSOs fulfill both formal and informal monitoring functions, and considers the strengths and weaknesses of these contributions. It concludes that future global health governance arrangements should include provisions and resources for monitoring by CSOs because their participation creates more inclusive global health governance and contributes to strengthening commitments to human rights.
IntroductionIn 2010, two global networks of people living with HIV, the International Community of Women Living with HIV (ICW Global) and the Global Network of People living with HIV (GNP +) were invited to review a draft strategic framework for the global scale up of prevention of vertical transmission (PVT) through the primary prevention of HIV and the prevention of unintended pregnancies among women living with HIV. In order to ensure recommendations were based on expressed needs of people living with HIV, GNP+ and ICW Global undertook a consultation amongst people living with HIV which highlighted both facilitators and barriers to prevention services. This commentary summarizes the results of that consultation.DiscussionThe consultation was comprised of an online consultation (moderated chat‐forum with 36 participants from 16 countries), an anonymous online e‐survey (601 respondents from 58 countries), and focus‐group discussions with people living with HIV in Jamaica (27 participants). The consultation highlighted the discrepancies across regions with respect to access to essential packages of PVT services. However, the consultation participants also identified common barriers to access, including a lack of trustworthy sources of information, service providers' attitudes, and gender‐based violence. In addition, participant responses revealed common facilitators of access, including quality counselling on reproductive choices, male involvement, and decentralized services.ConclusionsThe consultation provided some understanding and insight into the participants' experiences with and recommendations for PVT strategies. Participants agreed that successful, comprehensive PVT programming require greater efforts to both prevent primary HIV infection among young women and girls and, in particular, targeted efforts to ensure that women living with HIV and their partners are supported to avoid unintended pregnancies and to have safe, healthy pregnancies instead. In addition to providing the insights into prevention services discussed above, the consultation served as a valuable example of the meaningful involvement of people living with HIV in programming and implementation to ensure that programs are tailored to individuals' needs and to circumvent rights abuses within those settings.
