scholarly journals Two decades of vaccine innovations for global public good: Report of the Developing Countries’ Vaccine Manufacturers Network 20th meeting, 21–23 october 2019, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Vaccine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (36) ◽  
pp. 5851-5860
Author(s):  
Sonia Pagliusi ◽  
Maureen Dennehy ◽  
Akira Homma
2021 ◽  
pp. 209660832110096
Author(s):  
Daya Reddy

This work addresses the issue of scientific literacy and its connection to the responsibility of scientists in relation to public engagement. The points of departure are, first, the notion of science as a global public good, and, second, developments in the past few decades driven largely by the digital revolution. The latter lend a particular urgency to initiatives aimed at promoting scientific literacy. Arguments are presented for reassessing approaches to public communication. The particular example of genome editing is provided as a vehicle for highlighting the challenges in engagement involving the scientific community, policymakers and broader society.


Author(s):  
Stephen M. Gardiner

Ethics is highly relevant to grand technological interventions into basic planetary systems on a global scale (roughly, “geoengineering”). Focusing on climate engineering, this chapter identifies a large number of salient concerns (e.g., welfare, rights, justice, political legitimacy) but argues that early policy framings (e.g., emergency, global public good) often marginalize these and so avoid important questions of justification. It also suggests that, since it is widely held that geoengineering has become a serious option mainly because of political inertia, there are important contextual issues, especially around the paradoxical question, “What should we do, ethically speaking, given that we have not done, and will continue not to do, what we should be doing?” Taking such issues seriously helps to explain why some regard geoengineering as ethically troubling and highlights the largely neglected threat of interventions that discriminate against future generations (“parochial geoengineering”). We should take seriously the risk that, far from being simply a welcome new tool for climate action, geoengineering may become yet another manifestation of the underlying problem.


Author(s):  
Patricia Illingworth ◽  
Wendy E. Parmet

Contrary to the standard view that health is a private good, health should be viewed as a public good: its benefits are nonexcludable and nonrivalrous. Health should, in fact, be understood as a global public good, in light of globalization. Chapter 6 illustrates this analysis with reference to the global eradication of smallpox. Understanding health as a global public good, rather than as a private good, has implications for a nation’s moral obligations to newcomers and the health policy that its government crafts: one person’s health can adversely affect another’s health, and good health can benefit many. Given the public good dimensions of health, failure to help newcomers in need of care may not only be counterproductive because it puts the health of all at risk, it may also violate basic principles of fairness, reciprocity and justice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document