Pharmaceutical companies developed COVID-19 vaccines in record time. However, it soon became apparent that global access to
the vaccines was inequitable. Through a qualitative inquiry as the pandemic unfolded (to mid-2021), we provide an in-depth
analysis of why companies engaged with the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility (COVAX), identifying the internal (to
the company) and external factors that facilitated or impeded engagement. While all producers of the World Health Organization
(WHO)-approved vaccines engaged with COVAX, our analysis highlights the differential levels of COVAX engagement and identifies
contractual obligations, opportunities and company strategy, and reputational pressures as key explanatory factors. We discuss
our empirical findings relative to the literature on political corporate social responsibility (PCSR). Accordingly, we question
whether pharmaceutical companies lived up to their responsibilities as corporate citizens and conclude that they failed to
fulfil the implied responsibility of combating inequitable vaccine distribution. We conclude with implications of our research
for practice, in relation to the challenges of global access to COVID-19 vaccines and for access to medicines more generally.
Eurostat's official Healthy Life Years (HLY) estimates are based on European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions
(EU-SILC) cross-sectional data. As EU-SILC has a rotational sample design, the largest part of the samples are longitudinal,
health-related attrition constituting a potential source of bias of these estimates. Bland-Altman plots assessing the agreement
between pairs of HLY based on total and new rotational, representative samples demonstrated no significant, systematic attrition-related
bias. However, the wide limits of agreement indicate considerable uncertainty, larger than accounted for in the confidence
intervals of HLY estimates.
Im Rahmen der Ökologisierung von Abgabensystemen spielen föderale Aspekte in der Regel keine Rolle. Die finanzwissenschaftliche
Literatur bietet jedoch Kriterien zur Festlegung der staatlichen Ebene, die für die Bepreisung unterschiedlicher negativer
Externalitäten am besten geeignet wäre. Im österreichischen Kontext wären sowohl die stärkere Ökologisierung des Abgabensystems
als auch in bestimmten Bereichen eine stärkere Dezentralisierung umweltbezogener Steuern und Abgaben überlegenswert.
Maria Riegler, Anna Burton, Markus Scholz, Katharina de Melo
This article refines and expands the debate on antecedents of company engagement in business partnerships for sustainability.
It builds upon the Awareness–Motivation–Capability (AMC) framework and extends it by means of an in-depth qualitative study.
The article thereby expands the understanding of antecedents of company engagement in business partnerships for sustainability.
In particular, it advances on the elements related to company- and industry-level motivators and on microlevel aspects. Based
on our research findings, we are able to extend the AMC framework's main categories and provide a more nuanced account of
the underlying elements constituting them. To reach a more complete understanding of the antecedents of company engagement
in business partnerships for sustainability, our analysis provides a general conceptual advancement while also investigating
potential differences based on business size and industry.