Equality in the allocation of scarce vaccines
Equality in the allocation of scarce vaccines
In the event of a pandemic, demand for vaccines may exceed supply. One proposal for allocating vaccines is to use a lottery, to give all citizens an equal chance, either of getting the vaccine (McLachlan) or of survival (Peterson). However, insistence on strict equality can result in seriously suboptimal outcomes. I argue that the requirement to treat all citizens impartially need not be interpreted to require equal chances, particularly where citizens are differently situated. Assuming that we want to save lives, we should also seek to use vaccine efficiently, so far as this is compatible with equality. Thus, in allocating vaccine, we may want to be sensitive to i) different levels of need and/or ii) effects on vaccine production. While such policies may result in unequal chances, they may even improve everyone’s chances. In such cases, the resultant inequality is not a violation of impartiality, but a consequence of considering each person’s claim seriously.
65-84
Saunders, Ben
aed7ba9f-f519-4bbf-a554-db25b684037d
Saunders, Ben
aed7ba9f-f519-4bbf-a554-db25b684037d
Saunders, Ben
(2019)
Equality in the allocation of scarce vaccines.
Les Ateliers de l'éthique, 13 (3), .
(doi:10.7202/1061219ar).
Abstract
In the event of a pandemic, demand for vaccines may exceed supply. One proposal for allocating vaccines is to use a lottery, to give all citizens an equal chance, either of getting the vaccine (McLachlan) or of survival (Peterson). However, insistence on strict equality can result in seriously suboptimal outcomes. I argue that the requirement to treat all citizens impartially need not be interpreted to require equal chances, particularly where citizens are differently situated. Assuming that we want to save lives, we should also seek to use vaccine efficiently, so far as this is compatible with equality. Thus, in allocating vaccine, we may want to be sensitive to i) different levels of need and/or ii) effects on vaccine production. While such policies may result in unequal chances, they may even improve everyone’s chances. In such cases, the resultant inequality is not a violation of impartiality, but a consequence of considering each person’s claim seriously.
Text
TEF Vaccines R&R clean
- Accepted Manuscript
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 12 November 2018
e-pub ahead of print date: 20 June 2019
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 427352
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/427352
PURE UUID: d74121ef-4d41-49e3-aa30-4b1d327a0146
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 14 Jan 2019 17:30
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 07:28
Export record
Altmetrics
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics
