Why Nicaraguan children survive. Moving beyond scenario thinking.

PIP: The authors respond to Tony Dajer's critique of their study concerning the trend in Nicaraguan infant mortality and its possible explanations. It is pointed out that the sharp decline in Nicaragua's infant mortality in the mid-1970s is an intriguing phenomenon, since it began to occur at a time of economic slump, civil disturbance, and under a government that gave low priority to the social sector. It is contended that a number of factors (among them the Managua earthquake) prompted the government to shift its allocation of resources from hospital-based health care in the capital city to ambulatory health care throughout the country. After the revolution, the Sandinista government continued this process. Dajer's characterization of USAID-funded clinics as "notoriously ineffective" is rejected; arguing that although operating under overt political guidelines, these projects are well-advised by experts. Dajer's question as to the importance of health care within the Sandinista government is considered. It is maintained that the revolution was not fought in order to reduce infant mortality, and that health was not the primary concern of the Government of National Reconstruction. It was the international solidarity movement, not the Sandinista government, which focused so intently on infant mortality, hoping to find good news to report. The issue of health care had the added advantage of being politically noncontroversial. It is also maintained that since the mid-70s, the country's health policy has remained stable, despite the radical changes in government because the international arena helps determine national health policy.^ieng