Aspen Institute Publications
Aspen Institute publications are listed below. Many are available for purchase through Google Checkout, a secure system for handling credit card transaction online. For assistance with ordering publications, please contact our Publications office by email or by phone at (410) 820.5433. Please note: Orders are shipped two times a week from our warehouse in Queenstown, MD, on the Eastern Shore.
Championing a Regional Approach to Health Workforce Planning and Management: Profile of Professor Kayode Odusote
Human Resources for Health, Health Worker Migration, and the Role of the UK and the International Community in Zambia
High-level support and smart program design are crucial to launching health financing strategies, but success hinges on developing effective implementation and monitoring, according to a MLI issue brief on reducing financial barriers to reproductive health released this month.
This paper presents three possible scenarios for the forthcoming 2013 legislative elections - the "status quo", the Boutros Commission Draft, and the Charbel Proportional Proposal - and argues for an effective and democratic electoral system that addresses the inequalities and traps for corruption present in Lebanon today. Taking into account Lebanon's tenuous multi-confessional identity, standardization of voting practices, electoral zoning and expatriate voter inclusion, Ekmekji presents a thorough and recommendation-based analysis of the options available and the best road forward to reform in Lebanon.
Nature as Foundation of Economy: Investing in Natural Infrastructure for Conservation Supporting Human Development
The Aspen Institute’s Energy and Environment Program is pleased to announce the completion of a new publication based on the Dialogue Series on Conservation in the 21st Century entitled “Nature as Foundation of Economy: Investing in Natural Infrastructure for Conservation Supporting Human Development.” The Dialogue Series on Conservation in the 21st Century is an ongoing nonpartisan dialogue on the future of conservation, society and the environment. This report chronicles ideas and information from our discussions about the need for a new narrative for conservation that accounts for human economy, engages local ownership, values ecosystem services and motivates private and public partnership for investment in the natural infrastructure. Participants in the dialogue contributed their time and ideas as experts in their field; their participation does not constitute individual or organizational endorsement. To learn more about the Dialogue Series on Conservation in the 21st Century, contact Nicole Alexiev at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Reallocation Imperative: A New Vision for Spectrum Policy, the report of the 2011 Aspen Institute Roundtable on Spectrum Policy (AIRS), addresses new ways of allocating, clearing, using and/or sharing spectrum controlled by private parties and government agencies. Written by rapporteur Preston Marshall, the report attempts to step back and establish a broad vision for reallocating spectrum in the United States in the public interest, discussing new approaches that will facilitate more effective and efficient spectrum use. A number of recommendations are laid forth to guide future spectrum policy development, Congressional actions, and technology explorations.
Institutional Innovation: Oxymoron or Imperative?, the Report of the 2011 Roundtable on Institutional Development, explores the consequences of the growing disconnect between the fundamental design of most firms and the capabilities of the business infrastructure in which they operate. The Report captures the insights of the participants with a focus on identifying conditions that are favorable to institutional innovation and maximizing the effectiveness of institutional leadership.
ANDE’s 2011 report on small and growing businesses (SGB) reveals progress and strides in building a new kind of investment community that is committed to both social and financial returns. The 2011 Impact Report is a one-of-a-kind publication offering data on the current state of the SGB sector, the impact of ANDE’s members, and a comprehensive review of its work this past year.
A special supplement to the summer 2012 edition of the Stanford Social Innovation Review. The special supplement features an introduction by Jane Wales and articles by five Aspen Philanthropy Group authors describing the monitoring and evaluation philosophies of the foundations they lead.
Advancements in biomedical science and technology have led to the development of many new diagnostic tests, drugs and devices—greatly expanding the treatment options available to patients. Less has been done to directly compare the effectiveness of such treatments, making it increasingly difficult for physicians and other providers to determine which therapeutic approaches will work best for which patients. Comparative effectiveness research, an endeavor that is supported by substantial funding from the federal government, aims to do just that. Applied appropriately, it could improve quality of care and health outcomes. However, pharmaceutical and medical device companies, as well as some physician and patient groups, have expressed concerns that such research might focus on the best clinical approach for populations and thus not benefit individual patients with unique health needs, and that it might restrict the treatment options available to patients. Further, there are fears that it could stifle medical innovation. But both international experience with comparative effectiveness research and the more limited experience with it here in the United States suggest that the benefits of more information about the relative clinical benefits of various drugs, devices and treatments outweighs its potential for harm, especially if such evaluations of medical processes and procedures are fair, accurate and transparent.