Cargando…

Public opinion on global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys in Germany and the United States

Despite ongoing calls for a more even global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, there remains a great disparity between high- and low-income countries. We conducted representative surveys among the adult populations in the United States (N = 1,000) and Germany (N = 1,003) in June 2021 to assess publ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Klumpp, Matthias, Monfared, Ida G., Vollmer, Sebastian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Ltd. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8890975/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35305827
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.02.084
_version_ 1784661769690546176
author Klumpp, Matthias
Monfared, Ida G.
Vollmer, Sebastian
author_facet Klumpp, Matthias
Monfared, Ida G.
Vollmer, Sebastian
author_sort Klumpp, Matthias
collection PubMed
description Despite ongoing calls for a more even global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, there remains a great disparity between high- and low-income countries. We conducted representative surveys among the adult populations in the United States (N = 1,000) and Germany (N = 1,003) in June 2021 to assess public opinion in these countries on the distributive justice of COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted two instances of analytic hierarchy processes (AHP) to elicit how the public weighs different principles and criteria for vaccine allocation. In further discrete choice experiments, respondents were asked to split a limited supply of vaccine doses between a hypothetical high-income and a hypothetical low-income country. AHP weights in the United States and Germany were 37.4% (37.2–37.5) and 49.4% (49.2–49.5) for “medical urgency”, 32.7% (32.6–32.8) and 25.4% (25.2–25.5) for “equal access for all”, 13.7% (13.6–13.8) and 13.3% (13.2–13.4) for “production contribution”, and 16.3% (16.2–16.4) and 12.0% (11.9–12.1) for “free market rules”, respectively, with 95% CI shown in parentheses. In the discrete choice experiment, respondents in the United States and Germany split available vaccine doses such that the low-income country, which was three times more populous than the high-income country, on average received 53.9% (95% CI: 52.6–55.1) and 57.5% (95% CI: 56.3–58.7) of available doses, respectively. When faced with a dilemma where a vulnerable family member was waiting for a vaccine, 20.7% (95% CI: 18.2–23.3) of respondents in the United States and 18.2% (95% CI: 15.8–20.6) in Germany reduced the amount they allocated to the low-income country sufficiently to secure a vaccine for their family member. Our results indicate that the public in the United States and Germany favours utilitarian and egalitarian distribution principles of vaccines for COVID-19 over libertarian or meritocratic principles. This implies that political decisions favouring higher levels of redistribution would be supported by public opinion in these two countries.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8890975
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88909752022-03-04 Public opinion on global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys in Germany and the United States Klumpp, Matthias Monfared, Ida G. Vollmer, Sebastian Vaccine Article Despite ongoing calls for a more even global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, there remains a great disparity between high- and low-income countries. We conducted representative surveys among the adult populations in the United States (N = 1,000) and Germany (N = 1,003) in June 2021 to assess public opinion in these countries on the distributive justice of COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted two instances of analytic hierarchy processes (AHP) to elicit how the public weighs different principles and criteria for vaccine allocation. In further discrete choice experiments, respondents were asked to split a limited supply of vaccine doses between a hypothetical high-income and a hypothetical low-income country. AHP weights in the United States and Germany were 37.4% (37.2–37.5) and 49.4% (49.2–49.5) for “medical urgency”, 32.7% (32.6–32.8) and 25.4% (25.2–25.5) for “equal access for all”, 13.7% (13.6–13.8) and 13.3% (13.2–13.4) for “production contribution”, and 16.3% (16.2–16.4) and 12.0% (11.9–12.1) for “free market rules”, respectively, with 95% CI shown in parentheses. In the discrete choice experiment, respondents in the United States and Germany split available vaccine doses such that the low-income country, which was three times more populous than the high-income country, on average received 53.9% (95% CI: 52.6–55.1) and 57.5% (95% CI: 56.3–58.7) of available doses, respectively. When faced with a dilemma where a vulnerable family member was waiting for a vaccine, 20.7% (95% CI: 18.2–23.3) of respondents in the United States and 18.2% (95% CI: 15.8–20.6) in Germany reduced the amount they allocated to the low-income country sufficiently to secure a vaccine for their family member. Our results indicate that the public in the United States and Germany favours utilitarian and egalitarian distribution principles of vaccines for COVID-19 over libertarian or meritocratic principles. This implies that political decisions favouring higher levels of redistribution would be supported by public opinion in these two countries. Elsevier Ltd. 2022-04-06 2022-03-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8890975/ /pubmed/35305827 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.02.084 Text en © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
Klumpp, Matthias
Monfared, Ida G.
Vollmer, Sebastian
Public opinion on global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys in Germany and the United States
title Public opinion on global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys in Germany and the United States
title_full Public opinion on global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys in Germany and the United States
title_fullStr Public opinion on global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys in Germany and the United States
title_full_unstemmed Public opinion on global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys in Germany and the United States
title_short Public opinion on global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys in Germany and the United States
title_sort public opinion on global distribution of covid-19 vaccines: evidence from two nationally representative surveys in germany and the united states
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8890975/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35305827
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.02.084
work_keys_str_mv AT klumppmatthias publicopiniononglobaldistributionofcovid19vaccinesevidencefromtwonationallyrepresentativesurveysingermanyandtheunitedstates
AT monfaredidag publicopiniononglobaldistributionofcovid19vaccinesevidencefromtwonationallyrepresentativesurveysingermanyandtheunitedstates
AT vollmersebastian publicopiniononglobaldistributionofcovid19vaccinesevidencefromtwonationallyrepresentativesurveysingermanyandtheunitedstates