Article Text

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Towards A new model of global health justice: the case of COVID-19 vaccines
  1. Nancy S Jecker1,2,
  2. Caesar A Atuire3,
  3. Susan D Bull4,5
  1. 1School of Medicine, Department of Bioethics & Humanities, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
  2. 2Department of Philosophy, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, Gauteng, South Africa
  3. 3Department of Philosophy and Classics, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana
  4. 4The Ethox Centre & Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, University of Oxford Medical Sciences Division, Oxford, UK
  5. 5Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
  1. Correspondence to Dr Nancy S Jecker, School of Medicine, Department of Bioethics & Humanities, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA; nsjecker{at}uw.edu

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/usage

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

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.