IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v141y2024ics016885102400006x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vaccine nationalism is not unethical from a political ethics perspective: Learning from the global COVID-19 vaccine distribution failure

Author

Listed:
  • Shao, Qi

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an apparent conflict between medical and political ethics regarding the ethical evaluation of vaccine nationalism ― the “My Country First” vaccine allocation policy. Medical ethics sees this policy as selfish, leading to an unequal global vaccine allocation. Political ethics, however, argues that this policy is in the national interest and should not be labeled unethical. This conflict is one of the fundamental reasons why various medical ethics-based global vaccine allocation schemes, including the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility, have been difficult to implement. As long as the international community remains composed of different countries, vaccine nationalism will be difficult to eradicate. Therefore, international organizations, including World Health Organization, should focus on universal vaccine access rather than allocation based solely on medical ethics. Countries, especially low-income countries, must strengthen vaccine-related capacity-building to immunize their citizens as early as possible. Otherwise, they may still be at the bottom of the global vaccine allocation queue when the next globally challenging outbreak occurs. High-income countries should work to expand the distribution of vaccines, including donating vaccines to countries that lack them, helping other countries set up vaccine factories, and sharing vaccine production technology and intellectual property, which is the right choice from medical and political ethics perspectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Shao, Qi, 2024. "Vaccine nationalism is not unethical from a political ethics perspective: Learning from the global COVID-19 vaccine distribution failure," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:141:y:2024:i:c:s016885102400006x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.104996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016885102400006X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.104996?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:141:y:2024:i:c:s016885102400006x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.