| 来源类型 | Working Paper |
| 规范类型 | 报告 |
| DOI | 10.3386/w28601 |
| 来源ID | Working Paper 28601 |
| Addressing the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparing Alternative Value Frameworks | |
| Maddalena Ferranna; JP Sevilla; David E. Bloom | |
| 发表日期 | 2021-03-29 |
| 出版年 | 2021 |
| 语种 | 英语 |
| 摘要 | The COVID-19 pandemic has forced countries to make difficult ethical choices, e.g., how to balance public health and socioeconomic activity and whom to prioritize in allocating vaccines or other scarce medical resources. We discuss the implications of benefit-cost analysis, utilitarianism, and prioritarianism in evaluating COVID-19-related policies. The relative regressivity of COVID-19 burdens and control policy costs determines whether increased sensitivity to distribution supports more or less aggressive control policies. Utilitarianism and prioritarianism, in that order, increasingly favor income redistribution mechanisms compared with benefit-cost analysis. The concern for the worse-off implies that prioritarianism is more likely than utilitarianism or benefit-cost analysis to target young and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals in the allocation of scarce vaccine doses. |
| 主题 | Microeconomics ; Welfare and Collective Choice ; Health, Education, and Welfare ; Health ; Poverty and Wellbeing ; COVID-19 |
| URL | https://www.nber.org/papers/w28601 |
| 来源智库 | National Bureau of Economic Research (United States) |
| 引用统计 | |
| 资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
| 条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/586274 |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Maddalena Ferranna,JP Sevilla,David E. Bloom. Addressing the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparing Alternative Value Frameworks. 2021. |
| 条目包含的文件 | ||||||
| 文件名称/大小 | 资源类型 | 版本类型 | 开放类型 | 使用许可 | ||
| w28601.pdf（652KB） | 智库出版物 | 限制开放 | CC BY-NC-SA | 浏览 | ||
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
