Article Text
Abstract
This paper questions an exclusively state-centred framing of global health justice and proposes a multilateral alternative. Using the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines to illustrate, we bring to light a broad range of global actors up and down the chain of vaccine development who contribute to global vaccine inequities. Section 1 (Background) presents an overview of moments in which diverse global actors, each with their own priorities and aims, shaped subsequent vaccine distribution. Section 2 (Collective action failures) characterises collective action failures at each phase of vaccine development that contributed to global vaccine disparities. It identifies as critical the task of establishing upstream strategies to coordinate collective action at multiple stages across a range of actors. Section 3 (A Multilateral model of global health governance) takes up this task, identifying a convergence of interests among a range of stakeholders and proposing ways to realise them. Appealing to a responsibility to protect (R2P), a doctrine developed in response to human rights atrocities during the 1990s, we show how to operationalise R2P through a principle of subsidiarity and present ethical arguments in support of this approach.
- COVID-19
- Ethics
- Internationality
- Resource Allocation
- Right to Health
Data availability statement
No data are available.
This article is made freely available for personal use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.
https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usageStatistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
No data are available.
Footnotes
Twitter @atuire, @Susan_Bull_
Contributors Each author contributed substantially to the conception and analysis of the work; drafting the work or revising it critically; final approval of the version to be published; and is accountable for all aspects of the work. NSJ is the guarantor, responsible for the paper's overall content, and fully responsibility for the finished work and decision to publish.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Global access to COVID-19 vaccines: a scoping review of factors that may influence equitable access for low and middle-income countries
- Vaccine equity in COVID-19: a meta-narrative review
- Global health justice: epistemic theory and pandemic practice
- Analysis of the institutional landscape and proliferation of proposals for global vaccine equity for COVID-19: too many cooks or too many recipes?
- Reserving coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines for global access: cross sectional analysis
- A critical analysis of COVAX alliance and corresponding global health governance and policy issues: a scoping review
- We need people’s WHO to solve vaccine inequity, and we need it now
- Why are vaccination rates lower in low and middle income countries, and what can we do about it?
- Are asylum seekers, refugees and foreign migrants considered in the COVID-19 vaccine discourse?
- Global, regional, and national estimates of target population sizes for covid-19 vaccination: descriptive study