Future directions project

The Conference not only became the world’s largest medical event, it also changed its character – from a purely scientific congress to a multidisciplinary conference including medical, industry, community, donors, media and political stakeholders. In the last years, the community participants have often criticized the Conference and its organizers.

Last year, the International AIDS Society gave itself a new structure and moved its offices to Geneva. The IAS launched the Future Directions Project to explore how the Conferences can have the largest possible impact on the global response to AIDS. The project will be looking for ideas, via key informant interviews, group consultations, and web-based discourses. In this context, a two-day consultation meeting was held in Geneva last March, which included international NGOs the first day and community activists the second day. Both groups suggested structural changes (to be implemented for the 2008 IAC) and program changes (to be already considered for Toronto 2006). This reporter participated in the activists’ consultation meeting.

The introduction to the meeting by the IAS Managing Director, Craig McClure, was rather unfortunate. Craig said that at future Conferences, the damage to property by activists would no longer be tolerated. Activists attacking pharma booths or speakers would be carried away and have their registration removed. Most people objected that such a rigid policy would be counterproductive. We also found it insensitive from IAS to open the meeting with such a statement.

We asked how this consultation meeting would change the way the IAS is doing its business, to which they answered there would be more dialogue and debate. However, we believe that this is not enough. We need to see concrete action, follow-up and more transparency. They asked: ”How can the Conference best contribute to the global response to AIDS? What needs to be different for it to do that?“ We replied that this question was not really helpful and the question should rather be: ”What do conference goers want?“ Some answers to that could be: Not a bigger conference, but a smaller one; more dialogue and debate, and Q&A sessions. Politicians should be exposed to hard talk sessions to avoid them using the Conference for their own agenda. We need networking opportunities and affordable places to meet. There was a debate about the Bangkok Community Village. Some liked it, others said that it was a circus. Most agreed that it was not a good place to meet because it was too noisy. Other points we also raised were access to onsite methadone and to free meeting sites, and a space for upcoming hot issues (the conference newspaper was mentioned as a possible channel).

Finances
In the past, the Conference finances often were subject to criticism. In Bangkok, the surplus was 1,800,000 USD. This amount was split as follows:

• 40% went to the local host to fund Thai AIDS projects;
• 30% went to the ”revolving fund“ to secure the future of the Conference;
• 30% went to IAS; and
• Community co-organizers received 50,000 USD upfront and had their expenses covered.

Another hot topic for community participants was the registration fees. The IAS decided to lower the fees for Toronto. Whereas first-world registrations will be reduced by 50 USD, developing country registrations will be reduced by 250 USD in comparation with Bangkok.

Venues for 2008
Russia, Ukraine, India, China and Turkey are being considered. China and Russia would pose a problem (entry restrictions for PLWHAs). There have been discussions recently on Canada’s entry policy. Canadian authorities ask people who need a visa to disclose their HIV status. The IAS is working with the government to have the travel ban repealed. This should happen by June 2005. Venues have been tentatively booked in Geneva for the worst case scenario.

Role of the co-organizers
There was some discussion concerning this issue. Many activists feel that the current community co-organizers are not representative of the community, that they have no clear role, no clear mandate and no support from anyone. Their role is reduced to tokenism, they provide session chairs, reviewers, committee members etc., and deal with problems as they occur. Some suggested the co-organizer system should be replaced by a broader coalition of stakeholders. The role of the industry should also be redefined. Currently, it is the pharmaceutical industry that is renting exhibition space and satellites, as well as sponsoring delegates. Yet, the generic industry and suppliers could also be more represented. We want to see more decision makers and less marketing people to connect them back to the real world.

Communication
This was identified as a weak point. Not enough time was left to discuss this through or to come up with concrete recommendations. Some thought that there should be a communication advisory group. We agreed that this issue needed follow up.

Next steps
The stakeholder meeting minutes are now available online on the IAS website, through which additional comments are also collected. We recommended a joint follow-up meeting discussing the collated input with all stakeholder groups. We also recommended the IAS to follow up on communications. Some of us supported the idea of a community oriented caucus for the IAS.

Comment
In calling these consultation meetings, the IAS has sent out a positive sign. It should, however, be seen as the starting point for a process. How the recommendations will be translated into concrete action remains to be seen. Other, maybe more substantial questions should be asked. Why do people participate in this Conference? How is knowledge transferred to the local level? What are the priorities for Toronto 2006, and how are they set? How does the Conference reach beyond the session halls? How can the Conference be more than a circus-style meeting for 20,000 people every two years? These questions will have to be answered if the IAS is seeking qualitative, instead of quantitative growth.

You can visit the web page of the IAS at www.iasociety.org and find out more about the Future Directions Project at www.iasociety.org/futuredirections/ where the minutes of this meeting are also available.

David Haerry

EATN - European AIDS Treatment News, Volume 13, I – Spring 2005

More...