| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
154074
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The concept of post-neoliberalism has emerged in response to the electoral victories of new left governments across Latin America starting in the late 1990s. Since then, it has been widely employed to understand the policy response of new left governments to the neoliberal Washington Consensus. However, there is no clear consensus on the utility of the concept and little effort has been made to systematically analyse policy and institutional trends amongst countries pursuing post-neoliberal strategies, including attention to variation in approaches to policy and underlying tensions and contradictions of post-neoliberal policy development. We performed a critical literature review of post-neoliberalism and, based on this review, argue that the concept remains useful, but only if we understand it as a tendency to break with neoliberal policy prescriptions leading to a variety of distinct post-neoliberalisms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
136463
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Global Health Partnerships (ghps) have become ubiquitous within global health governance (ghg). Even before the onset of the global financial crisis public–private partnerships (ppps) were an omnipresent policy tool in global health and in the current austerity climate ppps have been heralded as an effective way to address a growing resource gap in ghg. Despite their omnipresence, ghps have not received adequate attention from critical scholars; few efforts have been made conceptually and theoretically to grasp how ppps are transforming the logic of ghg. We argue that ghps have contributed to the emergence of a complex global health governance architecture in which private solutions (market mechanism) are generally privileged over public approaches. Drawing on Gramscian conceptualisations of public/private, we suggest that the reshaping of the private and public realm inherent to ppps represents a further deepening of the neoliberal management of individuals and populations, allowing private interest to become more embedded within the public sphere and to influence global and national health policy making. This undermines the attempt to improve global health results as the inequitable distribution of social determinants of health, especially poverty and social exclusion, remain the main barriers to achieving health for all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|