Cargando…
Mitigating donor interests in the case of COVID-19 vaccine: the implication of COVAX and DAC membership
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 vaccine donation process allegedly prioritised national interests over humanitarian needs. We thus examined how donors allocated vaccines by recipient country needs versus donor national interests and how such decisions varied across donation channels (bilateral vs COVAX w...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9842600/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36642442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010188 |
_version_ | 1784870170968195072 |
---|---|
author | Fang, Yian Ma, Tianyue Wu, Ming Tsuei, Sian Hsiang-Te |
author_facet | Fang, Yian Ma, Tianyue Wu, Ming Tsuei, Sian Hsiang-Te |
author_sort | Fang, Yian |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 vaccine donation process allegedly prioritised national interests over humanitarian needs. We thus examined how donors allocated vaccines by recipient country needs versus donor national interests and how such decisions varied across donation channels (bilateral vs COVAX with country earmarking) or exposure to foreign aid norms (membership status in the Development Assistance Committee—DAC). METHODS: We used the two-part regression model to examine how the probability of becoming a recipient country and the volume of vaccines received were associated with recipient countries’ needs (disease burden and GDP per capita), donor countries’ interests (bilateral trade volume and voting distance in the United Nations General Assembly) and recipient countries’ population size. The analysis further interacted the determinants with channel and DAC status. RESULTS: Donors preferentially selected countries with higher disease burden, lower GDP per capita, closer trade relations, more different voting preferences, and smaller populations. Compared with bilateral arrangements, COVAX encouraged more needs-based considerations (lower GDP per capita), less interest-based calculus (more distant economic relations and voting preferences) and larger population size. Compared with the DAC counterparts, the non-DAC donors focused more on politically and economically aligned countries but also on less economically developed countries. As for the volume of vaccines donated, countries received more vaccines if they had tighter trade relations with donors, more different voting patterns than donors, and larger populations. COVAX was associated with raising the volumes of vaccines to politically distant countries, and non-DAC donors donated more to countries with stronger trade relations and political alignment. CONCLUSION: Donors consider both recipient needs and national interests when allocating COVID-19 vaccines. COVAX and DAC partially mitigated donors’ focus on domestic interests. Future global health aid can similarly draw on multilateral and normative arrangements. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9842600 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98426002023-01-17 Mitigating donor interests in the case of COVID-19 vaccine: the implication of COVAX and DAC membership Fang, Yian Ma, Tianyue Wu, Ming Tsuei, Sian Hsiang-Te BMJ Glob Health Original Research INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 vaccine donation process allegedly prioritised national interests over humanitarian needs. We thus examined how donors allocated vaccines by recipient country needs versus donor national interests and how such decisions varied across donation channels (bilateral vs COVAX with country earmarking) or exposure to foreign aid norms (membership status in the Development Assistance Committee—DAC). METHODS: We used the two-part regression model to examine how the probability of becoming a recipient country and the volume of vaccines received were associated with recipient countries’ needs (disease burden and GDP per capita), donor countries’ interests (bilateral trade volume and voting distance in the United Nations General Assembly) and recipient countries’ population size. The analysis further interacted the determinants with channel and DAC status. RESULTS: Donors preferentially selected countries with higher disease burden, lower GDP per capita, closer trade relations, more different voting preferences, and smaller populations. Compared with bilateral arrangements, COVAX encouraged more needs-based considerations (lower GDP per capita), less interest-based calculus (more distant economic relations and voting preferences) and larger population size. Compared with the DAC counterparts, the non-DAC donors focused more on politically and economically aligned countries but also on less economically developed countries. As for the volume of vaccines donated, countries received more vaccines if they had tighter trade relations with donors, more different voting patterns than donors, and larger populations. COVAX was associated with raising the volumes of vaccines to politically distant countries, and non-DAC donors donated more to countries with stronger trade relations and political alignment. CONCLUSION: Donors consider both recipient needs and national interests when allocating COVID-19 vaccines. COVAX and DAC partially mitigated donors’ focus on domestic interests. Future global health aid can similarly draw on multilateral and normative arrangements. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-01-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9842600/ /pubmed/36642442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010188 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Fang, Yian Ma, Tianyue Wu, Ming Tsuei, Sian Hsiang-Te Mitigating donor interests in the case of COVID-19 vaccine: the implication of COVAX and DAC membership |
title | Mitigating donor interests in the case of COVID-19 vaccine: the implication of COVAX and DAC membership |
title_full | Mitigating donor interests in the case of COVID-19 vaccine: the implication of COVAX and DAC membership |
title_fullStr | Mitigating donor interests in the case of COVID-19 vaccine: the implication of COVAX and DAC membership |
title_full_unstemmed | Mitigating donor interests in the case of COVID-19 vaccine: the implication of COVAX and DAC membership |
title_short | Mitigating donor interests in the case of COVID-19 vaccine: the implication of COVAX and DAC membership |
title_sort | mitigating donor interests in the case of covid-19 vaccine: the implication of covax and dac membership |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9842600/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36642442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010188 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fangyian mitigatingdonorinterestsinthecaseofcovid19vaccinetheimplicationofcovaxanddacmembership AT matianyue mitigatingdonorinterestsinthecaseofcovid19vaccinetheimplicationofcovaxanddacmembership AT wuming mitigatingdonorinterestsinthecaseofcovid19vaccinetheimplicationofcovaxanddacmembership AT tsueisianhsiangte mitigatingdonorinterestsinthecaseofcovid19vaccinetheimplicationofcovaxanddacmembership |