Public support for European cooperation in the procurement, stockpiling and distribution of medicines

Abstract

Background The COVID-19 outbreak has heightened ongoing political debate about the international joint procurement of medicines and medical countermeasures. The European Union (EU) has developed what remains largely contractual and decentralized international procurement cooperation. The corona crisis has broadened and deepened public debate on such cooperation, in particular on the scope of cooperation, solidarity in the allocation of such cooperation, and delegation of cooperative decision-making. Crucial to political debate about these issues are public attitudes that constrain and undergird international cooperation. Methods Our survey includes a randomized survey experiment (conjoint analysis) on a representative sample in five European countries in March 2020, informed by legal and policy debate on medical cooperation. Respondents choose and rate policy packages containing randomized mixes of policy attributes with respect to the scope of medicines covered, the solidarity in conferring priority access and the level of delegation. Results In all country populations surveyed, the experiment reveals considerable popular support for European cooperation. Significant majorities preferred cooperation packages with greater rather than less scope of medicines regulated; with priority given to most in-need countries; and with delegation to EU-level rather than national expertise. Conclusion Joint procurement raises delicate questions with regard to its scope, the inclusion of cross-border solidarity and the delegation of decision-making, that explain reluctance toward joint procurement among political decision-makers. This research shows that there is considerable public support across different countries in favor of centralization, i.e. a large scope and solidarity in the allocation and delegation of decision-making.

In trust we trust: The impact of trust in government on excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…Hence, policy outcomes in turn affect key aspects of politics and policymaking. As recent survey research shows, government’s success in early fight against Covid-19 increases societal trust (e.g., Beetsma et al, 2020 ; Edelman 2020 ). In turn, societal trust can help partially substitute for containment measures, allowing the achievement of similar results with less severe consequences for freedoms and economic sustainability.…”

The new model for medicine distribution by combining of supply chain and expert system using rule-based reasoning method

“…1, March 2023: 295-304 296 applicable laws and regulations, including the distribution of hard medicines that must be handled by mean of special distribution [7], [8]. Restrictions on the level of mobility during the COVID-19 pandemic have an effect on medicine activity and distribution although it is partial, medicine distribution has so far been carried out using a special and exclusive distribution system because it must be closely monitored by the Medicine Circulation Supervisory Agency, there are medicines that are distributed freely, there are medicines that are distributed with a lim ited free system and there are even some medicines that are distributed in a limited distribution [9], [10]. However, there are obstacles that must be overcome when a public health center that lacks certain types of medicines cannot request medicines directly to other public health centers, coupled with the unavailability of a framework system to accommodate regulations in regulating the problem of distributing medicines directly from the center.…”

EU health solidarity in times of crisis: explaining public preferences towards EU risk pooling for medicines

“…To contribute to this debate, the current article investigates potential dividing lines in public support for EU joint procurement of medicines. Since joint procurement can be organized in different ways (Azzopardi-Muscat et al, 2017;Beetsma et al, 2021), a multi-dimensional research approach is warranted in order to capture the character and intensity of EU health solidarity. Hence, we theoretically and empirically distinguish three key policy dimensions in public support: (1) Scopewhat type of medicines should be subject to EU risk pooling?…”