The diffusion of information and communication technology (ICTs) throughout the world is changing the face international development and global health in fundamental ways. Development practitioners and technologists have an array of new tools with the potential to solve age-old problems, but the road to realize success is full of failures – as it should be.
At Forum One, we take monitoring and evaluation (M&E) seriously, especially when it comes to measuring the success of digital communication campaigns. While we love data and establishing relevant indicators for initiatives that are sometimes hard to measure, we also love talking about these strategies.
Much of the current conversation among the international health community is focused on noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). NCDs are medical conditions or diseases that are not spread by infection (e.g., lung disease or diabetes). The impact from these disease could be greatly reduced by healthier decision making.
Long gone are the days of print outs, folders, pamphlets and even books. E-readers are becoming a popular method for distributing information for not only popular books and magazines, but large data heavy organizations.
This summer, I had the pleasure of attending the InterAction Forum (#IAForum) here in Washington, D.C. One of my most pleasant surprises was the acknowledgement and engagement at a very senior level around data sharing and transparency within the global development sector.
This post was written by Alanna Shaikh. Alanna is a global health professional who blogs at UN Dispatch and Blood and Milk.
Yesterday, Hillary Clinton announced a new $60 million initiative to help 100 million households adopt clean and efficient cookstoves and fuels by 2020. The Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves is a public-private partnership that includes the US State Department, the UN Foundation, the World Food Program, Royal Dutch Shell, the World Health Organization, and the US Environmental Protection Agency, among others.
In a blog post for The New Republic, author David Rieff calls Hillary Clinton’s approach to development naïve, contradictory, and muddled. His post is a response to Clinton’s speech, delivered last week at SAIS, about the administration’s six-year, $63 billion Global Health Initiative.
Rieff’s critique rests on three main arguments, all of which will be familiar to Aid Watch readers.