|
|
Post by tylerjmurphy on Oct 22, 2021 21:52:51 GMT
It is interesting to reflect on where funding sources come from and how that impacts which initiatives are undertaken in a country. These external actors are often closely tied to funders and have to shape initiatives in order to be financially sustainable. I think the challenge is involving communities in shaping initiatives on a local and country wide level that is not overly taxing and sustainable. I think this is a great transition into this months forum on capacity strengthening where the financial sustainability is integral to many communities and initiatives. Especially the need for this financial support to be from within rather than creating financial dependence on external actors. |
|
|
|
Post by shobanaram on Oct 31, 2021 16:17:44 GMT
In looking at data for a research project, I have been looking more specifically at the topic of tobacco use in India, which interestingly has taken quite a dive since 2010 through initiatives put forth by a number of internal and external factors. Current survey data has shown that the numbers have dropped by 17% since 2010, which equates to around 8 million fewer tobacco users in India despite a booming population. Internal factors like taxation, limiting public places that allow tobacco use, and placement of graphic images on tobacco packs from the central/federal government, in addition to the foundational external factor of WHO creating the Framework Convention on Tobacco control which India ratified in 2004 had the most significant effects. Additional internal factors included: state governments who regulated nicotine containing e-cigarettes, tobacco cessation centers which included a number of clinicians and counselors focused on recurrent counseling/pharmacotherapy. The primary negative player in this intervention was, as expected, tobacco companies, of which there are both Indian based and European based companies. What is interesting to me about this national intervention is that there was a focus on the creation of these separate entities (tobacco cessation centers) rather than an integration and utilization of healthcare professionals as a major internal factor which appears to be a potential focus area for the upcoming years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eadjei on Nov 11, 2021 8:11:05 GMT
I went on a week-long medical mission trip to Peru with an NGO in college. Once I got to medical school, I reflected on the true impact of this trip and actually felt guilt at going, especially since my individual participation was not sustainable. The organization itself was arguably sustainable, they had feet on the ground year-round. During that trip, we built a staircase up a mountainside that would undoubtedly help in some ways but I wondered how much say the community had in location, etc (the leadership team had mentioned nothing was done without the permission). In an ideal world, community members are engaged every step of the way and are the forefront of these organizations and their leadership. However, most times, external organizations are housed outside of the country and have occasional meetings with community leaders. Funding is an entirely different issue. I do believe that the large funding organizations (WHO, Unicef) have the best intent when designing large projects and goals. They usually utilize employees that live in the country where these projects are implemented. However, at the core of external funding is a conflict of interest. You will have discrepancies between what community leaders and what these organizations want to do; and when those discrepancies exist, the funder usually has the last word. I think what is very interesting about this is the fact that there is discrepancies between what the projects community leaders and outside organizations want to do with regards to designing large projects, especially when the overall goal should be collaborating together to develop sustainable projects in the community. I feel like most external organizations, since they may have won received funding through specific grants, feel limited or restrained in their ability to truly listen and appreciate the opinions of the locals. |
|
