current
issue > summer
2010
contents
Adorned
with a striking necklace
from one of her favorite
artists in Beijing,
Joan Kaufman settles
in with a cup of
coffee to reflect
on her career in international
health policy. A
self-acclaimed China
wonk, Kaufman’s
home is filled with
Chinese art and antiques:
carved cabinets,
rosewood wall hangings,
and porcelain bowls.
Having returned stateside
from China over a
decade ago to raise
her family in Wellesley,
Kaufman continues
to circle the globe
with a suitcase,
identifying and addressing
emerging issues and
opportunities, and
educating current
and future world leaders
about international
health issues.
Kaufman
moves seamlessly between
academics and the
public and non-profit
sectors. She’s
taught at the Heller
School for Social
Policy and Management
at Brandeis, at the
Kennedy School of
Government, and at
Harvard School of
Public Health. She’s
worked for the Ford
Foundation, the United
Nations Population
Fund, and served on
advisory committees
for the World Health
Organization and the
National Institutes
of Health. An expert
in health and social
policy, reproductive
health, gender equity,
and HIV/AIDS, Kaufman
has published extensively
and has the ear of
the Chinese government.
WWM:
What first ignited
your interest in public
health and in health
policy in China specifically?
Kaufman: My interest in China
came first. I became
completely hooked
on everything Chinese
after taking a summer
course at Columbia
on Chinese art, taught
by a curator at the
Metropolitan Museum.
I ended up focusing
my undergraduate
degree, and a subsequent
Masters, in Chinese
Studies. My thesis
examined the Chinese
family planning program,
which led me to a
second Masters degree
in public health. From
there I spent four
years on the ground
in China, working
with the United Nations’ Population
Fund (UNFPA).
WWM:
You were one of the
first western public
health specialists
to be invited into
China as part of the
reforms introduced
by Deng Xiaoping.
What were you brought
in to do?
Kaufman: This was a very interesting
time in Chinese history.
Deng Xiaoping has
just returned to power
following the Cultural
Revolution. He was
convinced that population
control was key to
China’s
bid for modernization
and invited the UNFPA
into China to develop
a core of expertise
in the reproductive
health field. We had
probably 20 projects
going on at the time
including undertaking
China’s
first scientific census
and building technical
expertise in terms
of demography, clinical
trial know-how, and
manufacturing of modern
contraceptives.
WWM:
What was the public’s
reaction to the One-Child
Population Policy?
Kaufman: The One-Child policy
really built upon
an earlier program—the
Later, Longer, Fewer
campaign—which
encouraged couples
in urban areas to
limit themselves to
two children and those
in rural areas to
limit themselves to
three. The One-Child
policy called upon
party members to further
limit themselves to
having one child.
The policy wasn’t
very popular anywhere,
nor well implemented
in the rural areas
where most people
followed a policy
of having two children
with adequate spacing,
especially if the
first child was a
girl.
WWM:
Is it time for the
policy to be overturned?
Kaufman: Yes, the policy is
not necessary and
is, in fact, the cause
of considerable other
problems. I have been
active in a project
that I initiated when
I was with the Ford
Foundation in China
that has been looking
at fertility rates
across China for some
time and the negative
consequences of the
one child policy.
The country has changed
so much in terms of
fertility intentions
and desires, and an
awareness of the economic
tradeoffs of additional
children, that we
don’t
think there would
be a massive resurgence
in births if the policy
were revoked. Maybe
a short term up-tick.
 |
There
are, however, long-term,
unintended consequences
of the One-Child policy
that will be very
difficult to manage.
The country’s
sex ratio and age
ratios are quite distorted.
The skewed ratio of
more boys to girls
will play out for
decades in terms of
the marriage market
and a dearth of girls
in society in general.
There are not going
to be enough young
working people to
support an elderly
population given that
life expectancy is
so high. China is
already entering into
below replacement
fertility in urban
areas, so even though
the overall population
will continue to grow
for a while, once
it starts to decrease,
it will decrease dramatically
and with huge distortion.
WWM:
You were actively
engaged in health
issues in the early
days of the AIDS epidemic.
What was China’s
response?
Kaufman: The first AIDS case
was diagnosed in 1985.
It was considered
a so-called “foreigner’s
epidemic”—imported
from the vices of
the west. I was living
in the US at the time,
getting a doctorate
at Harvard’s
School of Public Health,
and was part of the
AIDS and Reproductive
Health Network, which
was working on AIDS
projects in Africa,
Latin America, and
Asia. The dynamics
of the emerging epidemic
in China were clear
to me and I advocated
for an aggressive
prevention program
by the Chinese government.
When I moved back
to China to work with
the Ford Foundation
in 1996, I devoted
a large portion of
my grant portfolio
to mobilizing the
government’s
AIDS response. I was
able to fund some
important behavioral
research studies,
build up a non-governmental
advocacy community,
work with government
health officials,
and bring the researchers,
advocates, and government
officials together
to coordinate our
efforts.
WWM:
Was there much of
a non-governmental
health community in
China at the time?
Kaufman: The whole idea of
an NGO [non-governmental
organization] is not
well received in China,
especially at the
local level, where
such organizations
are often viewed as
anti-government, not
non-governmental.
But on the AIDS issue,
and on some other
issues like the environment,
there is a growing
appreciation for the
important role that
these organizations
play both in service
delivery and in advocacy.
I am seeing more cooperation
between the local
Centers for Disease
Control in China and
NGOs, especially when
the centers are trying
to reach some of the
most affected and
highly stigmatized
populations—like
drug users or gay
men. The presence
of NGOs is growing,
but it is still thin.
WWM:
Among which subpopulations
did HIV first surface
in China?
Kaufman: Seventy percent of
the early cases involved
injecting drug users
who shared needles.
China was a major
transshipment route
in the heroin trade
in the Golden Triangle
in Southeast Asia.
Very early on we made
a case for harm reduction
programs, which include
clean needle programs
and drug replacement
programs—like
methadone—to
try to decrease the
HIV infection rate
among the injecting
drug user population.
Of
course at that point
in China there was
the feeling that these
people were social
garbage and that they
deserved to die because
of their own behaviors.
Further, the government
had the mistaken belief
that the epidemic
would stay contained
within the injecting
drug user population.
One of the first things
we did was to bring
in the “Asian
evidence,” people
from Thailand and
Vietnam, to show the
efficacy of harm reduction
programs and the evidence
that epidemics never
stay contained within
any one population.
I am happy to say
that, today, China
has a very aggressive
harm reduction program
for injecting drug
users as part of their
AIDS prevention program.
WWM:
What was the turning
point, when AIDS prevention
became more accepted?
Kaufman: By 2002, the epidemic
became more widespread—over
one million Chinese
were reportedly infected
at the time with estimates
of ten million by
2010 (the estimates
were subsequently
reduced to 650,000
and now is 750,000)—and
the infection had
spread to include
female commercial
sex workers, homosexual
men, and paid blood
donors and their families.
Many
people were quite
critical of the Chinese
government’s
handling of a widespread
outbreak in Central
China that involved
blood donation. There
is a long history
of paid blood donation
in China. Traditional
cultural reservations
about giving blood
have impeded the development
of a voluntary blood
donation system. In
this instance, blood
collection centers
in central China were
following unhygienic
procedures and many,
many people became
infected. In Henan
province alone, over
60 percent of the
adult population in
some villages became
infected; vertical
transmission spread
the disease to spouses
and offspring and,
over time, a major
orphan problem emerged.
The Chinese government
suppressed news of
this epidemic and
to this day no one
has really taken responsibility
for it.
 |
But
it was a turning point
for China with respect
to HIV/AIDS. It changed
the face of AIDS in
China—these
were innocent victims—and
the public became
more sympathetic.
It also forced the
government to develop
a best-practices response,
including launching
a free AIDS treatment
program.
WWM:
What is a best-practices
response?
Kaufman: Best practices are
interventions that
have been proven over
and over to reduce
HIV transmission.
But to be successful,
you also have to create
an “enabling
environment,” a
multi-sectoral approach.
In order to convince
people to come forward
for AIDS testing,
you have to have enforceable
laws and policies
that protect them
from losing their
jobs. You need collaboration
between the Public
Security Bureau (police),
the health department,
and NGOs that may
be working with drug
users so that they
are not arrested when
they come to a syringe
and needle exchange
site. In the larger
scheme, you have to
work on gender equity
so that women have
more power in their
marriages. Most of
the global AIDS dollars
go to health ministries
not to multi-sector
initiatives, however.
WWM:
You have lived in
China and speak Mandarin,
but what is your secret,
how have you been
able to be so effective
in the inner circles
within China?
Kaufman: I am a collaborator
and have been interested
and involved in China
for a very, very long
time. I enjoy a trusted
status in China, having
built many relationships
in the government
working with the UN
as a funder through
the Ford Foundation,
and conducting academic
research with Chinese
colleagues. Even on
controversial topics
like the AIDS epidemic,
my goal is to help
China, not to further
any personal agenda.
WWM:
You are the China
Team Leader for The
International AIDS
Vaccine Initiative.
Are we even close
to developing an effective
vaccine?
Kaufman: No, but it takes decades
to develop vaccines.
From an evolutionary
biology perspective,
this is a very challenging
virus. The investment
we have made in developing
the vaccine to date
has already led to
an enormous amount
of scientific knowledge
and has demonstrated
that a vaccine is
possible. Will we
have a vaccine commercially
available within the
next decade? I am
not sure. I personally
believe that given
the complex human
behavior that needs
to be changed for
really effective prevention,
having a vaccine is
going to be the easiest
way to avoid future
infections. A vaccine
that protects women
or young girls, without
them having to demand
condom use, is important.
WWM:
While HIV/AIDS remains
at the cornerstone
of the Obama Administration’s
2010 budget, it also
represents a broader
definition of global
health, including
preventable and tropical
diseases, malnutrition,
and the health needs
of mothers and children.
What do you think
of this policy shift?
Kaufman: When I teach my global
health policy course,
I agree with the Obama
Administration.
The lion’s
share of funding has
gone to HIV/AIDS,
and there are other
unattended problems,
like maternal mortality
or malaria, that need
to be addressed. When
I teach my AIDS policy
class, however, I
argue that, although
we have made very
real progress, we
must not get complacent.
Four hundred people
continue to become
HIV-infected every
day. For every two
people put on treatment,
five new HIV infections
occur. There are just
not enough health
care dollars out there. |