This thesis focuses on the development of a malaria vaccine as an avenue to explore global health partnerships. In the last twenty years, public-private partnerships have become a prominent organizational form in global health. Hundreds of large transnational collaborations and countless smaller collaborations between the public, private and non-profit sectors have been established. Partnerships have been supported by the large increase of donor funding for research and control of infectious diseases in impoverished countries and many aim to develop or provide vaccines, medicines or interventions. Analysts generally agree that partnerships are saving many lives and revolutionizing drug and vaccine development for infectious diseases. However, while partnership is a notion that connotes equity and mutuality, often global health partnerships operate in contexts that involve vast disparities in power and resources and there is little known about the impacts of partnerships on the places where they operate. This raises the questions: How do global health partnerships operate in practice? What are their impacts in the places where they operate? Addressing these questions, this thesis examines a partnership established to develop the most advanced malaria vaccine, named RTS,S. Based on 17 months of ethnographic research in Tanzania and interviews with representatives of partnering organizations in Belgium and the United States, I trace the development of the RTS,S vaccine from laboratories to its clinical trials across Africa. I explore the social relationships formed between private companies, philanthropic institutions and non-profit organizations in the North, and research institutions and communities in north-eastern Tanzania, where a malaria vaccine clinical trial was conducted. Analyzing the impacts of the malaria vaccine partnership, I focus on community development, construction of infrastructure, the building of human capacity, provision of health care and extraction of data. The focus on partnerships is intended to improve understanding about this ever-increasing social, political and economic formation in global health, and contributes to discussions and debates about how partnerships operate and their role in international development, global health governance and transnational medical research.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2007. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 95-115).

Thesis (M.I.S. (Information Science) -- University of Pretoria, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Harvard University, 1994. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 156-160).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, Berkeley, 1988. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 216-225).

Development aid discourses have been criticised for perpetuating othering and coloniality. The discourses have been argued to produce and reproduce conceptual creations of a distinguishable 'us' and 'them' through binaries of 'developed' and 'underdeveloped', and they have been stated to uphold lingering colonial and racial hierarchies where the former colonial powers remain preeminent and subjugate the 'Global South'. This decolonial critique of development aid discourses and their perpetuation of asymmetrical relationships between donor and recipient has led to the emergence of development partnerships. This discourse emphasises the levelling of the playing field, and mutual cooperation to achieve common development goals. The development partnership discourse thus appears to challenge the othering and coloniality inherent in former development aid discourses. In 2015, the United Kingdom's Department for International Development (DFID) ended their 'traditional' bilateral aid programme to South Africa and implemented a 'development partnership' in its place. DFID's development partnership discourse has previously been criticised for denying mutuality, however, and for perpetuating racialised hierarchies. The question is therefore whether the discourse surrounding DFID's development partnership with South Africa is perpetuating othering and coloniality, or whether it is establishing a relationship built on mutual interests and cooperation. This research paper analyses two DFID policy papers setting out the planning of the partnership approach, and four transcripts of interviews with representatives involved in the implementation of the development partnership. By applying Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) the thesis analyses linguistic aspects of the discourse that serves to uphold certain power structures by defining decision-­‐making. The CDA particularly focuses on the science, narrative and perceived 'truths' about development, the recontextualisation of its particular language and the interconnectedness with other discourses that continue to sustain and reproduce the discourse. The research finds a more nuanced approach to development, as conceptualised by the representatives involved in the implementation of the partnership, and that it is challenging the 'imperial gaze' inherent in development aid discourses. However, the analysis also reveals clear examples of othering and coloniality. This is evident through linguistic distancing through notions of time, relying on particular binaries, and referring to a naturalised development trajectory which denies lived experiences and subjugate South Africa as a country. The suggestion of mutuality therefore appears to be just a façade, and the development partnership discourse is rather emphasising difference and justifying colonial hierarchies.

This study explores perceptions regarding the existence and influence of occupational subcultures on commercialisation outcomes in four Australian hybrid industry-research organisations. The thesis proposition is that occupational subcultures exist within Australian Cooperative Research Centres (CRCs) and impact commercialisation outcomes; the distinctly different knowledge and skills that provide reason for research and commercial groups to collaborate, may simultaneously create obstacles to communication and cooperation. Understanding and considering the impact of occupational cultures that underpin the actions and decisions taken by member organisations and individuals, may be important in hybrid industry-research organisations. The findings of this study extend and challenge some of the management practices recommended by extant innovation research. In particular, the finding that process management techniques functioned to ease the transition from exploration to exploitation activities during commercialisation in one CRC contradicts advice to isolate exploration activities from process management. Directions for future research include the investigation of temporal orientations in research and commercial occupational subcultures in the context of commercialisation in hybrid-industry research organisations. Temporal attributes encompass planning horizons, mono and polychronicity, and attributes towards pace and punctuality. Additionally, the findings regarding the impact of argumentation styles upon commercialisation justify further research to examine different national settings, industry sectors and occupational communities. / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 1996. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 146-154).

Externalization agreements have become more common in Europe after 2015, and one of the mostrecent ones is the Migration and Economic Development Partnership agreement between the UnitedKingdom (UK) and Rwanda. According to that agreement people who are seeking safety from theUK are going to be transferred to Rwanda where their asylum claim is assessed and if they are grantedrefugee status they are going to be settled in Rwanda. This study conducted a critical discourse analysis on documents about the partnership agreement thatwere published on the GOV.UK website. The study used postcolonialism and the concept ofexternalization as theoretical framework. Through critical discourse analysissix discourses were uncovered. These were: partnership discourse,safe third country discourse, the UK as a safe haven discourse, we versus they discourse,securitization discourse and innovation discourse. These discourses revealed that colonial timesstereotypes are still affecting the way that refugees are presented in the documents. And that whilethe documents aim to create a picture of collaboration and equality, the agreement itself is part of aworld that is affected by colonial times power relations, which affects Rwanda’s abilities to bargainthe agreement and how the roles of the agreement have been created. Therefore, the agreementfollows and recreates colonial discourses and power structures. The study also found that thepartnership agreement can be seen as externalization agreement as it externalizes refugee protectionto Rwanda and is justified by similar arguments that are common in externalization practices.

Thesis (M.B.A.)--University of North Carolina Wilmington, 2009. / Title from PDF title page (February 23, 2010) Includes bibliographical references (p. 54-57)