Role of Capitalism and International Organisations in Access to Vaccines

Although the evaluation of the COVAX initiative’s effectiveness is important, the broader perspective on the causes of the problem and potential solutions may be needed to minimise the risks of biased conclusions and implications. Adams (2020) explains the close connections between capitalism and neoliberal policies on the one hand and the current inefficiencies in addressing such pandemics and disasters on the other hand. By neglecting those needs that are not associated with profit-generation opportunities and misrepresenting the interests of some vulnerable groups, capitalism both increases the likelihood of such disasters and prevents the delivery of timely assistance to affected populations. Global health diplomacy is also not always free and independent of such external influences (Fidler, 2010). The emergence of vaccine nationalism and subjective interpretation of the dominant needs and concerns of citizens from different countries can also be attributed to capitalism and the active utilisation of their status by many developed countries (Whyte 2009). Such countries tend to utilise their higher research potential, financial opportunities, and political influence for prioritising their citizens and restricting the access to people from developing countries, illustrating the long-term negative influences of neoliberal policies and capitalist approaches. The exposure of such incentives and specific methods used will cause inevitable modifications at the national level.

As the existing profit-generation and nationalistic incentives may continue to exist in the future, the maximum functions should be assigned to international organisations such as the World Health Organisation that may utilise their power to ensure the more equitable and responsible distribution of vaccines (Eccleston-Turner & Burci, 2021). Most of the current health regulations should be revised to prevent the emergence of conflicting and antagonistic interests among different countries and international agents (Gostin et al., 2020). According to Maldonado et al. (2019), new metrics in global health may be helpful for objectively evaluating the current scope and structure of global health needs. On this basis, many international decisions can be made, thus, contributing to the higher equity and recognition of all parties’ needs. According to Davies and Wenham (2020), the improved system of international relations is critical to developing more effective responses to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this context, the role of the World Health Organisation may continue to increase with the possibility of formulating better-supported and objectively correct conclusions from the earlier responses to the pandemic in various countries (Montel et al., 2020). The latest technologies may successfully integrate a variety of relevant factors that should be considered in policy-making.

By reorienting the public and policy-makers’ attention to Africa and other developing countries, the World Health Organisation may assist in strengthening local community health systems (Nepomnyashchiy et al., 2020). Such a strategy may be important for properly reflecting the major local differences and conditions as well as neutralising the existing gendered impacts of the outbreak (Wenham et al., 2020). In this manner, the higher equity may be achieved both in relation to addressing the needs of different countries and vaccine distribution within a country or region. The previous history of epidemics may contribute to the formulation of more realistic policy solutions such as advance purchase agreements that may guarantee the higher predictability of long-term healthcare services’ delivery planning (Eccleston-Turner, 2015). By measuring the global burden of disease, the need for further adjustments can also be identified (Murray & Lopez 2013). The most important aspect is objectively applying global health metrics and harmonising the interests of all countries and international agents in their pandemic-related efforts (Mahajan 2019). Thus, the reliance on the broader approach with the recognition of complex influences of capitalism and international organisations may contribute to addressing the existing challenges more effectively as suggested by Eccleston-Turner and Upton (2020) and the COVAX initiative.

Conclusion

The provided analysis indicates that numerous obstacles to achieving equitable access to vaccines still exist at various levels. Eccleston-Turner and Upton (2020) correctly admit the presence of vaccine nationalism in many developed countries and the contradiction between the formal declarations and actual policies implemented by governments. The lack of effective policy instruments integrated in the COVAX initiative and high inequality of socioeconomic and political power may prevent the international community from adequate