IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/nzecpp/v57y2023i1p31-40.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public misunderstanding of pivotal COVID-19 vaccine trials may contribute to New Zealand’s adoption of a costly and economically inefficient vaccine mandate

Author

Listed:
  • John Gibson

Abstract

New Zealand adopted a policy of mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for workers in many sectors. Existing analysis suggests expected costs of this mandate policy far outweigh benefits. This paper discusses an issue potentially contributing to adoption of this costly vaccine mandate policy. There is a widespread public misunderstanding about the testing the vaccines underwent in the pivotal trials underpinning their approval, with over 95% of New Zealand’s voting-age public believing that the vaccines were tested against more demanding criteria than was actually the case. Consequently, public expectations about performance of these vaccines were likely inflated, and expected benefits of vaccine mandates may have been overstated. The ambiguous evidence on effects of COVID-19 vaccination on mortality risk also highlights the importance of these informational problems. If the public misunderstanding described here persists, a continuation of inefficient vaccine mandates whose costs exceed benefits is likely.

Suggested Citation

  • John Gibson, 2023. "Public misunderstanding of pivotal COVID-19 vaccine trials may contribute to New Zealand’s adoption of a costly and economically inefficient vaccine mandate," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(1), pages 31-40, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:nzecpp:v:57:y:2023:i:1:p:31-40
    DOI: 10.1080/00779954.2022.2077812
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00779954.2022.2077812
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00779954.2022.2077812?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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:nzecpp:v:57:y:2023:i:1:p:31-40. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RNZP20 .

    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.