A recent posting on this blog remarked on the need forgreater civil society involvement and for them to use their voice to makedemands. So it’s promising to seethat the message has been heard. For the first time ever, the activist voice ofcivil society was present and pressing for action in ways never before seen atthe GAVI Board’s most recent meetingin VietNam. During the Board’smeeting, representatives of civil society openly applauded the members thatsupported their position with public comments and withheld applause from thosewho didn’t.
In the interests of making demands, the civil societymembers who attended the GAVI partners meeting went even further by demandingthe Board increase their involvement by dedicating an additional seat to a civilsociety representative. Note, thatthis might not be an unreasonable expectation. The Global Fund forAIDS, TB, and malaria has 3 seats for civil society, while the GAVIAlliance board has only one.
It seems reasonable to expect that this is a trend that willlast into 2010. What makes methink so? First, the GAVIleadership appears more receptive than ever. The new deputy CEO of GAVI, HelenEvans, comes from the Global Fund, with its greater involvement of civilsociety. Add to that the Boardchair, Mary Robinson,former President of Ireland, is a well-known advocate for a rights-basedapproach to health and a vocal supporter of cervical cancer vaccines, perhapsthe vaccine with the best-organized civil society backing today.
Faced with a major financing challenge, a difficultfundraising environment and competing priorities for donor attention, thefuture of the GAVI Alliance and child survival may rest on the way in whichcivil society plays its role. Civilsociety can contribute in several important ways. With an effective and active role of civil society, it ispossible to elevate global vaccinations and child survival from a technicalissue of interest to specialists to a cause or a movement with interest fromthe general public. This is whathappened with AIDS and a large part of why that disease eclipses all others inits attention, funding, and political will.
Civil society can demand more from all parties – donors,countries, industry, and the Alliance itself. It’s easy pickings to shout at industry as the sole partyneeding to do more. While there isindeed more that industry can do, it would be naïve to think that there isn’tmore that we can demand from the other parties as well. Donors can give more and countries cando more to implement their vaccinations equitably and the Alliance can be heldaccountable for doing its part.
Success will also mean using the voice wisely and using theright voices. Because civilsociety stands to benefit directly from some of the decisions that itinfluences, it needs to be wise in its approach. For example, the Global Fund currently gives ~25% of itsfunding to civil society organizations while GAVI gives nearly all of its moneyto governments so a move to greater funding from GAVI to civil society might bea good one but it is also in their self-interest. When civil society finds the voices of the affectedcommunities themselves, it will also have its most significant impact. If it brings in only its Geneva and DC-basedadvocacy champions, it will have less of the authenticity that makes it acompelling force in so many discussions. If all this happens, we may lookforward to 2010 as the year that civil society emerged as a major force inglobal vaccinations.