This document summarizes Cambodia's response to the global threat of avian influenza and pandemic preparedness. It provides a timeline of key events and discusses three main policy narratives around culling practices, public health priorities, and protecting livelihoods. Interviews and surveys with government, private, and NGO actors in Cambodia revealed differences in perceptions of how effectively the government and donors responded, with donors seen as intervening more effectively. The conclusion emphasizes that policies need to better protect livelihoods and compensation practices while building technical capacity within the agriculture ministry.
Cambodia’s Victim Zero: Global and National Response to Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza by Sophal Ear
1. Cambodia’s Victim Zero: Global and National
Responses to Highly Pathogenic Avian
Influenza Sophal Ear, PhD
2. Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Timeline—
Moments
III. Policy Narratives
IV. Understanding the
Political Economy
of the Policy
Process
V. Conclusion
7. A Few Words on Methodology
• Qualitative research methodology
• 40+ one-on-one semi-structured interviews
across gov’t, private sector, & NGOs
• Web survey launched on 27 May 2008
– 44 visits
– 17 responses
8. II. Timeline—Context
• Political Structure and Modern History
• Aid Dependence and Tourism
• The Livestock Sector and Poultry in
Particular
Human Pandemic Flu Timeline
Asian flu H2N2 Russian H1N1 H9N2 H5N1
Spanish (H1N1) HK flu H3N2 HPAI H5N1 H7N2 H7N3 H10N7
9.
10.
11. Timeline—Moments
• Start: SARS (2002), A Wake-up Call;
Enter HPAI (2004)
• Middle: HPAI Control Activities; From
Animal to Human Health
20. Actors, Networks, and Interests
6
5
4
3
2
1
Adapted from data originating from Avian Influenza and Pandemic Preparedness Funding Matrix Cambodia 2008-2009, see Table 1.5 in Annex 1.
22. ―With respect to Avian Influenza, the Royal Government
of Cambodia has intervened effectively and
appropriately, given resource allocations.‖
Strongly Strongly
Agree Neutral Disagree N/A
Agree Disagree
(a) Among humans: 6% 50% 25% 6% 0% 13%
1 8 4 1 0 2
(b) Among animals: 7% 47% 40% 0% 0% 7%
1 7 6 0 0 1
(c) Protecting livelihoods: 8% 25% 25% 17% 0% 25%
1 3 3 2 0 3
(d) Pandemic preparation: 13% 47% 13% 13% 0% 13%
2 7 2 2 0 2
(e) Other 17% 0% 0% 0% 0% 83%
1 0 0 0 0 5
23. ―With respect to Avian Influenza, Donors (including all
non-Royal Government of Cambodia entities whether
local or international) have intervened effectively and
appropriately, given resource allocations.‖
Strongly Strongly
Agree Neutral Disagree N/A
Agree Disagree
(a) Among humans: 18% 59% 12% 0% 0% 12%
3 10 2 0 0 2
(b) Among animals: 7% 60% 33% 0% 0% 0%
1 9 5 0 0 0
(c) Protecting livelihoods: 0% 38% 31% 15% 0% 15%
0 5 4 2 0 2
(d) Pandemic preparation: 7% 36% 29% 7% 0% 21%
1 5 4 1 0 3
(e) Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
0 0 0 0 0 0
24. IV. Understanding the Political
Economy of the Policy Process
• Donors and NGOs
• Beyond Aid: Other Sources of Revenue
and the Importance of Tourism
– Bureaucratic Politics and Patronage
• Media Spin
25. Cambodia’s AI & Pandemic
Preparedness Pie (2008-2009)
Animal health
$2,077,861 , (9%)
Human health
$8,944,457 , (40%)
$5,031,076 , (23%)
Information,
education,
communication
(IEC)
Pandemic
preparedness
$6,198,512 , (28%)
Source: Avian Influenza and Pandemic Preparedness Funding Matrix Cambodia 2008-2009, see Table 1.5 in Annex 1.
27. V. Conclusion: Key challenges,
obstacles and opportunities
• Don’t Forget Livelihoods!
– Government and Donors motivated by other
concerns
• Revisiting Compensation
– Tremendous confusion about its use and
effectiveness elsewhere
28. Conclusion (cont’d)
• Increase credibility of MAFF as partner by
building its technical capacity & financial
management
• Ultimate responsibility for success or
failure of policies must rest with those in
charge—authorities themselves