Social and solidarity economy and social inclusion of cooperatives in the Assin Fosu Municipality, Ghana

The social and solidarity economy (SSE) model is an alternative strategy to the neoliberal hegemonic paradigm amid global economic and political uncertainties and its associated decline in living conditions, inequalities and social exclusion. In response to these inadequacies, the study explored how cooperatives in the Assin Fosu Municipality of Ghana promote social inclusion, focusing on farm-based cooperatives. Using a mixed-method approach, quantitative data were collected from 175 randomly sampled members of six farm-based cooperatives and triangulated with qualitative data from the executives of the cooperatives who were constituted into a focus group. Data were described using descriptive statistics and the associations and effects were tested with the chi-square and binary logistic regression tools. We found that cooperatives promote social inclusion by facilitating access to productive and financial resources with members of credit-based cooperatives experiencing high social inclusion. Members with smaller households had more social status because they could engage in more social and economic activities within their communities and groupings. We recommended access to credit and productive resources and long-term birth control measures as these factors are sine qua non for high social inclusion.

Swiss residents' information behavior perceptions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal qualitative study

People's information behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic was challenged through vast amounts of information, misinformation, and disinformation. This study sets out to address the research gap of longitudinal, qualitative inquiries about how people's information behavior changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. It aims to assess how residents of German-speaking Switzerland perceived and evaluated information gathering during a global health crisis. As part of the "Solidarity in Times of a Pandemic" (SolPan) Research Commons, 83 semi-structured interviews with residents of German-speaking Switzerland were conducted in April 2020 (T1), October 2020 (T2), and October 2021 (T3). People were asked about their lived experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative data analysis followed a reflexive thematic analysis approach, using Wilson's model of information behavior as a theoretical framework. Participants perceived high-quality journalistic news media, the Swiss national government, scientific experts, and their direct social environment as trustworthy information sources. They were motivated to gather information through the wish of gaining agency and certainty in the context of a major, global health crisis. Intervening variables that hindered information seeking included a perceived lack of agency, habituation effects in the later stages of the pandemic, information overload, inconsistent information, and conspiracy theories. While information needs were generally high in T1, participants expressed a growing extent of information fatigue in T2. In T3, the most prominent themes were conflicting information and differing interpretations, which led to an increased perception of societal polarization, which was perceived as a direct consequence of participants' information behavior. This finding is contextualized through established models of attitude formation: The study indicates how participants formed rather stable attitudes over time and how this led to a growing polarization and societal segmentation as the pandemic progressed. Practical implications regarding how to meet such societal polarization during crises are discussed.

Solidarity and reciprocity during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal qualitative interview study from Germany

BACKGROUND

While solidarity practices were important in mitigating the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, their limits became evident as the pandemic progressed. Taking a longitudinal approach, this study analyses German residents' changing perceptions of solidarity practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and examines potential reasons for these changes.

METHODS

Adults living in Germany were interviewed in April 2020 (n = 46), October 2020 (n = 43) and October 2021 (n = 40) as part of the SolPan Research Commons, a large-scale, international, qualitative, longitudinal study uniquely situated in a major global public health crisis. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

While solidarity practices were prominently discussed and positively evaluated in April 2020, this initial enthusiasm waned in October 2020 and October 2021. Yet, participants still perceived solidarity as important for managing the pandemic and called for institutionalized forms of solidarity in October 2020 and October 2021. Reasons for these changing perceptions of solidarity included (i) increasing personal and societal costs to act in solidarity, (ii) COVID-19 policies hindering solidarity practices, and (iii) a perceived lack of reciprocity as participants felt that solidarity practices from the state were not matching their individual efforts.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining solidarity contributes to maximizing public health during a pandemic. Institutionalized forms of solidarity to support those most in need contribute to perceived reciprocity among individuals, which might increase their motivation to act in solidarity. Thus, rather than calling for individual solidarity during times of crisis, authorities should consider implementing sustaining solidarity-based social support systems that go beyond immediate crisis management.

How did organ donation in Israel become a club membership model? From civic to communal solidarity in organ sharing

Figuring out what pushes individuals to become organ donors has become the holy grail of social scientists interested in transplantations. In this paper I concentrate on solidarity as a determinant of organ donation and examine it through the history of organ donation in Israel. By following the history of transplantation policies since 1968 and examining them in relation to different types of solidarities, this paper leads to a nuanced understanding of the ties between solidarity and health policy. Attempts to foster an all-encompassing consensus on the definition of brain death yielded the Transplantation and the Brain-Respiratory Death Laws of 2008. It was hoped that a wide "civic solidarity" would render Israel self-sufficient in its organ economy. However, the failure of the law led to the breakdown of civic solidarity in organ donation. As a result, initiatives such as the priority policy and non-directed living organ donations, developed out of a narrower conception of solidarity. Juxtaposing these initiatives sheds light on macro level processes for policy makers and suggests solidarity as a key bioethical concept to understand organ donation policies.

Data Sharing During Pandemics: Reciprocity, Solidarity, and Limits to Obligations

South Africa shared with the world the warning of a new strain of SARS-CoV2, Omicron, in November 2021. As a result, many high-income countries (HICs) instituted complete travel bans on persons leaving South Africa and other neighbouring countries. These bans were unnecessary from a scientific standpoint, and they ran counter to the International Health Regulations. In short, South Africa was penalized for sharing data. Data sharing during pandemics is commonly justified by appeals to solidarity. In this paper, we argue that solidarity is, at best, an aspirational ideal to work toward but that it cannot ground an obligation to share data. Instead, low-and-middle income countries (LIMCs) should be guided by the principle of reciprocity, which states that we ought to return good for good received. Reciprocity is necessarily a conditional principle. LMICs, we argue, should only share data during future pandemics on the condition that HICs provide enforceable assurances that the benefits of data sharing will be equitably distributed and that LMICs won't be penalized for sharing information.

COVID, Vulnerability, and the Death of Solidarity: "Who Do We Not Save?"

Solidarity between more and less vulnerable groups is fundamental to an effective public health response to a global pandemic. Yet in the case of COVID-19, a focus on deciding who can and who cannot be protected from harm has shaped the pandemic experience and continues to determine the post-pandemic trajectory of life with SARS-CoV-2. In this paper I discuss how this has affected our understanding and acceptance of solidarity.

Solidarity for the Anthropocene

Social solidarity is essential to large-scale collective action, but the need for solidarity has received little attention from scholars of Earth Systems, sustainability and public health. Now, the need for solidarity requires recognition. We have entered a new planetary epoch - the Anthropocene - in which human-induced global changes are occurring at an unprecedented scale. There are multiple health crises facing humanity - widening inequity, climate change, biodiversity loss, diminishing resources, persistent poverty, armed conflict, large-scale migration, and others. These global challenges are so far-reaching, and call for such extensive, large-scale action, that solidarity is a sine qua non for tackling these challenges. However, the heightened need for solidarity has received little attention in the context of the Anthropocene and, in particular, how it can be created and nurtured has been overlooked. In this commentary, we explore the concept of solidarity from inter-species, intra-generational and inter-generational perspectives. We also propose strategies to enhance solidarity in the Anthropocene.

Social integration, solidarity, and psychological health of internally displaced persons in Cameroon: Exploring the role of community satisfaction

Background/Introduction

Conflict-induced displacement continue to be a pressing public policy concern due to the adverse effects on the well-being of internally displaced persons (IDPs). Understanding the integration process of these individuals, particularly the role of solidarity and social integration in fostering a sense of belonging and improving their community experiences and psychological well-being, remains unclear. This study investigates the role of community satisfaction in the relationship among social integration, solidarity, and psychological health of IDPs in Cameroon.

Methods

Cross-sectional data from 428 displaced individuals in the Ntui subdivision, Cameroon, were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM). This technique tested four latent variables: social integration, solidarity, community satisfaction, and psychological health.

Results

The results show a direct association between solidarity and both community satisfaction (β = 0.282; p < 0.001) and psychological health (β = 0.137; p < 0.01). Community satisfaction also has a direct relationship with the psychological health of the IDPs (β = 0.292; p < 0.001). An indirect effect of solidarity on psychological health through community satisfaction was observed (β = 0.084 (SE = 0.025, CI = [0.047, 0.129], p < 0.001)). However, no mediational effect of community satisfaction was found on the association between social integration and psychological health. The model accounted for 7% of the variance in community satisfaction (R2 = 0.07) and 20% of the variance in psychological health (R2 = 0.20). Conclusion: The findings indicate a strong sense of solidarity among the displaced persons in the studied communities in Cameroon, which promotes their psychological health via community satisfaction. As such, interventions should aim to foster solidarity among displaced persons to enhance their community experiences and psychological health.

Learning Language, Un/Learning Empathy in Medical School

This article considers the ways in which empathy for patients and related solidarity with communities may be trained out of medical students during medical school. The article focuses especially on the pre-clinical years of medical school, those that begin with orientation and initiation events such as the White Coat Ceremony. The ethnographic data for the article come from field notes and recordings from my own medical training as well as hundreds of hours of observant participation and interviews with medical students over the past several years. Exploring the framework of language socialization, I argue that learning the verbal, textual and bodily language of medical practice contributes to the increasing experience of separation between physicians and patients. Further considering the ethnographic data, I argue that we also learn a form of empathy limited to performance that short circuits clinical care and the possibility for solidarity for health equity. The article concludes with implications for medical education and the medical social sciences and humanities.

Stimulating solidarity to improve knowledge on medications used during pregnancy : A contribution from the ConcePTION project

BACKGROUND

Pregnant people have been overlooked or excluded from clinical research, resulting in a lack of scientific knowledge on medication safety and efficacy during pregnancy. Thus far, both the opportunities to generate evidence-based knowledge beyond clinical trials and the role of pregnant people in changing their status quo have not been discussed. Some scholars have argued that for rare disease patients, for whom, just like pregnant people, a poor evidence base exists regarding treatments, solidarity has played an important role in addressing the evidence gap. This paper explores whether and how the enactment of solidarity among pregnant people can be stimulated to help address the poor evidence base on medications used during pregnancy.

METHOD

We use the concept of solidarity formulated by Prainsack and Buyx and enrich their concept by providing an account for stimulating the enactment of solidarity. Then we apply this account to the case of pregnant people who use medication.

RESULTS

Solidarity means enacted commitment on the part of an individual to assisting others with whom the person recognizes a similarity in a relevant respect. Although solidarity cannot be imposed, we argue that the empowerment of people is a crucial concept in understanding how solidarity can be stimulated. Empowerment in the context of pregnant people means creating awareness about their status quo, explaining how scientific research can help close the knowledge gap, and how pregnant people can themselves contribute. In particular, how pregnant people can contribute to the collection of health data to strengthen the evidence base for medications used during pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that acting in solidarity can help change the status quo for pregnant people. Furthermore, we argue that the empowerment of pregnant people and other relevant stakeholders is a way to stimulate the enactment of solidarity. The process of empowerment starts by raising awareness about the lack of evidence on medications used during prengnacy and by explaining to pregnant people how they can contribute to changing the way knowledge is being generated by, for example, sharing data on the health effects of medications.

Towards trust-based governance of health data research

Developments in medical big data analytics may bring societal benefits but are also challenging privacy and other ethical values. At the same time, an overly restrictive data protection regime can form a serious threat to valuable observational studies. Discussions about whether data privacy or data solidarity should be the foundational value of research policies, have remained unresolved. We add to this debate with an empirically informed ethical analysis. First, experiences with the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) within a European research consortium demonstrate a gap between the aims of the regulation and its effects in practice. Namely, strictly formalised data protection requirements may cause routinisation among researchers instead of substantive ethical reflection, and may crowd out trust between actors in the health data research ecosystem; while harmonisation across Europe and data sharing between countries is hampered by different interpretations of the law, which partly stem from different views about ethical values. Then, building on these observations, we use theory to argue that the concept of trust provides an escape from the privacy-solidarity debate. Lastly, the paper details three aspects of trust that can help to create a responsible research environment and to mitigate the encountered challenges: trust as multi-agent concept; trust as a rational and democratic value; and trust as method for priority setting. Mutual cooperation in research-among researchers and with data subjects-is grounded in trust, which should be more explicitly recognised in the governance of health data research.

Rethinking solidarity towards equity in global health: African views

When the COVID-19 pandemic first took the world by storm, the World Health Organization (WHO) issued a Solidarity Call to Action to realize equitable global access to COVID-19 health technologies through pooling of knowledge, intellectual property and data. At the dawn of 2022, 70% of rich countries' populations were vaccinated but only 4.6% of poor countries (Our World In Data, Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccinations, 2022). Vaccine nationalism and rampant self-interest grew and our ineffective global response led to new variants of concern - like Omicron - emerging. Rather than abandon the idea of solidarity in global health, we believe that the international community must embrace it. Solidarity, with its emphasis on relationality and recognition of similarities, could offer fertile ground for building an ethical framework for an interconnected and interdependent world. Such a framework would be better than a framework that focuses principally on individual entitlements. To defend this view, we draw on African relational views of personhood and morality. When humans are conceived of as essentially relational beings, solidarity occupies a central role in moral behaviour. We argue that part of the reason appeals to solidarity have failed may be traced to an inadequate conceptualization of solidarity. For as long as solidarity remains a beautiful notion, practiced voluntarily by generous and kindhearted persons, in a transient manner to respond to specific challenges, it will never be able to offer an adequate framework for addressing inequities in global health in a systematic and permanent way. Drawing on this understanding of solidarity, we propose pathways to respond creatively to the risks we face to ensure equitable access to essential health for all.

Sociopolitical solidarity in STEM education: youth-centered relationships that resist learning as just achievement data

In this paper, we-a participatory action group-use the tenants of critical pedagogy to articulate how youths developed relationships for and with STEM disciplinary practices through participation in spaces outside of the official scripts of their high school STEM classrooms in the United States. Spaces included their robotics team, a hybrid digital collaborative space, and in an extra project with a teacher. Each of these cases surfaces youth's ongoing orientation to the fact that STEM learning is relational, and political, exemplifying pockets of resistance against the structures of schooling that foreground learning as an act of individuals. These pockets of resistance take a certain sociopolitical solidarity between learners and educators that centers STEM education which has the possibility to remake power structures to center relations with worlds, human and non-human, and the futures they help learners imagine.

Has public support for solidarity in healthcare financing in the Netherlands changed over time? A repeated cross-sectional study

It is argued that solidarity-based healthcare systems are under pressure and that public support is decreasing. It can, therefore, be expected that support for solidarity in healthcare financing has diminished over time. However, little research has been conducted into this. To fill this gap, we used survey data from 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019, and 2021 to examine changes in public support for solidarity in healthcare financing in the Netherlands over time. This was operationalised as the own willingness and the expected willingness of others to contribute to other people's healthcare costs. Using logistic regression analysis, we found that the own willingness to contribute has slightly increased among the general population over time, although this was not observed in all subgroups. No change in the expected willingness of others to contribute was observed. Our results suggest that the willingness to contribute to other people's healthcare costs has, at least, not decreased over time. A majority of the Dutch population remains willing to share the burden of healthcare costs, indicating support for the principles of the solidarity-based healthcare system. However, not all people are willing to contribute to the healthcare costs of others. In addition, we do not know how much people want to pay. Further research into these topics is necessary.

Forging gender and racial solidarities at trans-inclusive women's festivals

This article explores the interweaving of successes and failures at trans-inclusive women's festivals. I analyze conflicts that occurred at the Mystical Womxn's Magic Festival and the Ohio Lesbian Festival. In the process, I demonstrate that working across racial and gender divides in these spaces is possible but only if we understand that solidarity is processual and relational but also, quite simply, hard work. This labor requires acknowledging that failures are an integral part of the praxis of forging alliances. By failures, I am primarily referring to moments of insensitivity, casual macroaggressions, lack of deep listening, and other common occurrences of harm. Ultimately, I argue that solidarity is a journey not an end point and that a crucial aspect of the journey is grappling with collective and personal failures along the way.

[Public mental health and patient autonomy-an area of conflict?]

Public mental health (PMH) interventions aim to promote and improve the well-being of members of a society. PMH is based on a normative understanding of what well-being is and what factors contribute to it. Without necessarily disclosing it, measures of a PMH program may affect the autonomy of individuals if their personal perceptions regarding their own individual well-being differ from PMH's prescriptions for well-being oriented toward societal goals. In this paper, we discuss this potential tension between the possible goals of PMH and those of the addressees.

["Sending a signal of solidarity via bluetooth?"-A medical ethical analysis of the public debate on the Corona-Warn-App]

Definition of the problem

In the public debate in Germany on the Corona-Warn-App, the concept of solidarity is a prominent, but contested normative reference point. Thus, different uses of the concept with heterogeneous assumptions, normative implications and practical consequences stand next to each other and require medical ethical investigation. Against this backdrop, this contribution aims firstly to illustrate the spectrum of understandings of the concept of solidarity in the public debate on the Corona-Warn-App. Secondly, it elaborates the preconditions and normative implications of these uses and evaluates them from an ethical perspective.

Arguments

Starting with an introduction of the Corona-Warn-App and a general definition of the concept of solidarity, I present four examples for different uses of the concept of solidarity from the public discourse on the Corona-Warn-App that vary regarding the underlying identification, the group of solidarity, the solidarity contribution and the normative goal. They highlight the need for further ethical standards in order to assess their legitimacy. Hence, I use four normative criteria of a context-sensitive, morally substantial conception of solidarity (openness, malleable inclusivity, adequacy of the contribution, normative dependence) to ethically evaluate the solidarity recourses presented.

Conclusion

Critical remarks can be formulated for all presented notions of solidarity. On the one hand, the potentials and limitations of solidarity recourses in public debates become apparent. On the other, criteria can be derived for a solidarity-promoting use of the Corona-Warn-App.

A Principled Account of AMR Global Governance Solidarity, Subsidiarity, and Stewardship

This commentary defines what shared yet differentiated ethical responsibilities to tackle antimicrobial resistance (AMR) mean, by introducing a threefold principled account of AMR global governance. It argues that the principles of solidarity, subsidiarity, and stewardship can be especially helpful for further justifying some of the universal, differentiated, and individual responsibilities that Van Katwyk et al propose. The upshot of my threefold principled account of AMR global governance is a less ambitious AMR treaty, one that can only justify (i) universal duties of global coordination (as per the principle of solidarity); (ii) differentiated duties to local communities, which bear the primary AMR responsibilities (as per the principle of subsidiarity); and (iii) individualized duties for ensuring truthful, evidence-based, consistent, and timely shared accountable communication (as per the principle of stewardship).

A new universalism? Universal health coverage and debates about rights, solidarity and inequality in Kenya

The rise of universal health coverage (UHC) as a global policy endorsed in the Sustainable Development Goals (SGDs) appears to signal new directions in global health as it introduces a progressive language of inclusion, solidarity and social justice and advocates the right of 'everyone' to access the healthcare they need 'without financial hardship'. Since 2018 the Kenyan government has attempted to widen access to healthcare by experimenting with free health care services and expanding health insurance coverage. Such progressive moves are, however, layered onto histories of healthcare, citizenship and state responsibility that in Kenya have been dominated by forms of exclusion, differentiation, a politics of patronage, and class inequality, all of which work against universal access. In this paper, we follow recent attempts to increase access to healthcare, paying particular attention to how a language of rights and inclusion circulated among "ordinary citizens" as well as among the health workers and government officials tasked with implementing reforms. Despite being clothed in a language of universalism, solidarity and inclusion, Kenya's UHC reforms feed into an already fragmented and struggling healthcare system, reinforcing differentiated, limited and uneven access to healthcare services and reproducing inequity and exclusions. In this context, reforms for universal health coverage that promise a form of substantial citizenship are in tension with Kenyans' experiences of accessing healthcare. We explore how, amid vocal concerns about healthcare costs and state neglect, the promises and expectations surrounding universal health coverage reforms shaped the claims people made to accessing care. While our informants were cynical about these promises, they were also hopeful. The language of universality and inclusion drew people's attention to entrenched forms of inequality and difference, the limits of solidarity and the gaps between promises and realities, but it also generated expectations and a sense of new possibilities.

Democratic research: Setting up a research commons for a qualitative, comparative, longitudinal interview study during the COVID-19 pandemic

The sudden and dramatic advent of the COVID-19 pandemic led to urgent demands for timely, relevant, yet rigorous research. This paper discusses the origin, design, and execution of the SolPan research commons, a large-scale, international, comparative, qualitative research project that sought to respond to the need for knowledge among researchers and policymakers in times of crisis. The form of organization as a research commons is characterized by an underlying solidaristic attitude of its members and its intrinsic organizational features in which research data and knowledge in the study is shared and jointly owned. As such, the project is peer-governed, rooted in (idealist) social values of academia, and aims at providing tools and benefits for its members. In this paper, we discuss challenges and solutions for qualitative studies that seek to operate as research commons.

Solidaristic behavior and its limits: A qualitative study about German and Swiss residents' behaviors towards public health measures during COVID-19 lockdown in April 2020

Politicians, policymakers, and mass media alike have emphasized the importance of solidarity during the COVID-19 pandemic, calling for the need of social cohesion in society to protect risk groups and national healthcare systems. In this study, which is part of an international Consortium, we analyzed 77 qualitative interviews with members of the general public in Germany and German-speaking areas of Switzerland on solidaristic behavior and its limits during the first COVID-19 related lockdown in April 2020. We found interdependencies between the interpersonal, group, and state tiers of solidarity that offer insights into what promotes solidaristic practice and what does not. We argue that because solidarity does not have a necessary and sufficient normative value in itself, those wanting to promote solidarity need to consider these interdependencies to effectively implement policy measures. Our study shows that inter-societal solidarity was based on individual voluntary agency and promoted through recognizing a shared goal, shared values, or other communalities including group effort. It also shows that individuals held state authorities accountable for the same values and expect inter-societal reciprocity from the contractual level. Tensions between those complying or willing to follow recommendations voluntarily and those perceived as not promoting the shared goal, posed challenges for solidarity. Another challenge for solidaristic behavior was when acting in solidarity with others was in direct conflict with the needs of close ones. Our study provides a clearer picture of promoting and limiting factors concerning solidarity which is relevant when communicating health policy measures to individuals and groups.

[The carelessness and the inhospitable. Inhabiting times of pandemic.]

The pandemic has placed us in a situation of estrangement from ourselves. We have been acutely aware of our vulnerability and fragility. Through the stories of lived experiences, we have learned about and witnessed tragic circumstances in which inhospitality and neglect have become evident. We have been shocked by the awareness of the lack of recognition, accompaniment and welcome. Institutional decisions have prioritized public health, the good for all, but have forgotten the biographies of people, full of suffering. And this has produced a moral damage, a loss of trust, a feeling of injustice that we have not been able to fight against. This is why it is necessary to build hospitality, which can be achieved through care. Care with a political dimension that takes charge of reality and transforms society. The key is a responsibility in solidarity. Faced with the possibility of dehumanizing ourselves, we seek hospitality as an alternative way of narrating lives that have to be reconstructed, that have to relearn how to take care of each other amidst the multiple possibilities of estrangement that threaten us. Hospitality is at the heart of a narrative ethics at the height of our times.

[The role of solidarity in a pandemic.]

Solidarity is part of the map of values and ethical principles of the COVID-19 pandemic that has devastated the world since the end of 2019. Solidarity has been behind the justification for public health measures such as confinement, quarantines, lockdowns, the mandatory use of masks, and the financing, distribution and inoculation of vaccines against the virus; it has also been used to economic compensation, intergenerational sacrifices, the importance of public health care and even mutual aid between citizens, institutions and countries to face the worst effects of the pandemic. However, solidarity has been used interchangeably as a descriptive and normative, motivational and justificatory, sentimental and political, moral and legal idea, thus increasing confusion about its meaning, use and scope. This article reviews the rhetorical use of solidarity during the pandemic, shows the contradictions derived from that use, and sheds light on the normative use it should have in order to more rigorously address responses to future pandemics.

Solidarity and Public Health

We argue that an unqualified use of the term solidarity in public health is not only equivocal but problematic toward the ends of public health. The term may be deployed normatively by public health advocates to strengthen the bonds among public health practitioners and refer to an ideal society in which the importance of interdependence among members ought to be acknowledged throughout the polity. We propose an important distinction between partisan solidarity and societal solidarity. Because any moralized belief in a vision of a broad societal solidarity will be a contested political ideal, political reality would limit solidarity based on such a vision to partisan solidarity. An idealized vision of societal solidarity is simply not politically feasible in pluralistic, liberal, democratic societies. However, although societal solidarity is unlikely with respect to any particular policy, it might be hoped for with respect to constitutional procedures that provide boundaries for the agon of the political process. We suggest that moralizing assertions of a solidaristic ideal in a pluralistic society might be counterproductive to generating the political support necessary for public health per se and establishing legitimate public health policy. A pragmatic political approach would be for public health advocates to generate sufficient strong political support for those public health policies that are most amenable to the political and social realities of a time and place.

Doing 'our bit': Solidarity, inequality, and COVID-19 crowdfunding for the UK National Health Service

The expanding phenomenon of crowdfunding for healthcare creates novel potential roles for members of the public as fundraisers and donors of particular forms of provision. While sometimes interpreted as an empowering phenomenon (Gonzales et al., 2018), or a potentially useful communication of unmet needs (Saleh et al., 2021), scholars have predominantly been critical of the way in which crowdfunding for healthcare normalises unmet needs and exacerbates entrenched inequalities (Berliner and Kenworthy, 2017; Igra et al., 2021; Paulus and Roberts, 2018). We report a thematic analysis of the text of 945 fundraising appeals created on JustGiving and GoFundMe in the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, where the recipient was NHS Charities Together's dramatically successful COVID-19 Urgent Appeal. Unlike in existing accounts of individual healthcare crowdfunding, we identify the relative absence of both coherent problem definition and of a fundable solution within the pages. Instead, appeals are dominated by themes of solidarity and duty during the UK's 'hard' lockdown of 2020. A national appeal reduces the risks of crowdfunding exacerbating existing health inequalities, but we argue that two kinds of non-financial consequences of collective crowdfunding require further exploration. Specifically, we need to better understand how expanded practices of fundraising co-exist with commitment to dutiful, means-based funding of healthcare via taxation. We must also attend to how celebration of the NHS as a national achievement, might squeeze spaces for critique and challenge. Analyses of crowdfunding need to explore both financial and non-financial aspects of practices within different health system and historical contexts.

The Ignatian Examen in Medical Practice: A Model for Clinicians

St. Ignatius of Loyola created The Examination of Conscience (The Examen) as a daily practice for spiritual and moral formation by cultivating awareness, gratitude, and generosity. For five hundred years, people of various cultures and creeds have learned The Examen from the Jesuits and adapted it for personal reflection and spiritual growth. The practice of medicine requires dedicated time to reflect on personal and professional development, to improve oneself and advance patient care and health equity. Here we present a model for use of The Examen in medical practice.

Reconceptualizing solidarity as power from below

I propose a new concept of solidarity, which I call "solidarity from below," that highlights an aspect of solidarity widely recognized in popular uses of the term, but which has hitherto been neglected in the philosophical literature. Solidarity from below is the collective ability of otherwise powerless people to organize themselves for transformative social change. I situate this concept with respect to four distinct but intertwined questions that have motivated extant theorizing about solidarity. I explain what it means to conceptualize solidarity from below as a form of power, rather than as a feeling, disposition, duty, or scheme of social arrangements. Finally, I suggest that the moral-relational aspects of solidarity emerge secondarily from the process of collective power, and not the other way around.

Attitudes habituelles de classe envers l'État-providence et les réfugiés en Autriche]

The article examines the importance of social class in shaping solidarity orientations in Austria, especially with regard to welfare state arrangements and solidarity with refugees. It builds on 48 interviews conducted between 2016 and 2019. Distinguishing multiple dimensions of solidarity, the paper builds a typology of seven solidarity configurations, which are then systematically related to the class position of interviewees articulating them. In that context, not only objective class positions, but also latent mechanisms of habitus formation are taken into account. In so doing, the paper indicates how solidarity configurations of both privileged and non-privileged interviewees are shaped, but not determined by class. This casts new light on meaningful differences in the scope, conditions and underlying normative principles of distinct solidarity configurations. Class is key to understanding how attitudes towards the community of welfare solidarity are tied to specific preferences as to who should be included in and excluded from that community.

Precision medicine and the fragmentation of solidarity (and justice)

Solidarity is a fundamental social value in many European countries, though its precise practical and theoretical meaning is disputed. In a health care context, I agree with European writers who take solidarity normatively to mean roughly equal access to effective health care for all. That is, solidarity includes a sense of justice. Given that, I will argue that precision medicine represents a potential weakening of solidarity, albeit not a unique weakening. Precision medicine includes 150 targeted cancer therapies (mostly for metastatic cancer), all of which are extraordinarily expensive. Our critical question: Must a commitment to solidarity as defined mean that all these targeted cancer therapies should be guaranteed to all within each country in the European Union, no matter the cost, no matter the degree of effectiveness? Such a commitment would imply that cancer was ethically special, rightfully commandeering unlimited resources. That in itself would undermine solidarity. I offer multiple examples of how current and future dissemination of these targeted cancer drugs threaten a commitment to solidarity. An alternative is to fund more cancer prevention efforts. However, that too proves a threat to solidarity. Solidarity, with or without a sense of justice, is too abstract a notion to address these challenges. Further, we need to accept that we can only hope to achieve "rough justice" and "supple solidarity." The precise practical meaning of these notions needs to be worked out through a fair and inclusive process of rational democratic deliberation, which is the real and practical foundation of just solidarity.

Transnational Solidarity Within the EU: Public Support for Risk-Sharing and Redistribution

This paper aims to discover underlying, as yet theoretically and empirically unexplored, distinctions in citizens' views of transnational solidarity within the European Union (EU). Building on literature regarding national welfare states, the paper presents an original concept of transnational solidarity consisting of two latent, not directly measurable, dimensions: first, citizens' preferences for risk-sharing among EU states and, second, their preferences for intra-EU redistribution. The diverse types of transnational solidarity examined in previous research should be assignable to either one or the other dimension. Moreover, previous research is based on the idea that the concept of transnational solidarity is comparable across EU countries; however, this premise has not been empirically examined so far. To test both these assumptions, I analyze data collected in Austria, Germany, and Greece in 2019 or 2020. The study runs multi-group confirmatory factor analysis to test whether the presented concept of transnational solidarity (a) applies and (b) is comparable between these nations. The empirical analysis supports both these assumptions. The populations of the three countries share the same understanding of transnational solidarity even though the willingness to express cross-country risk-sharing and redistribution varies significantly between the states. The study contributes to current research in the fields of European integration, political sociology, and survey methodology.

The responsibility to care: lessons learned from emergency department workers' perspectives during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada

Background

This study’s objective was to examine emergency department (ED) workers’ perspectives during the Canadian COVID-19 first wave.

Methods

This qualitative study included workers from nine Canadian EDs who participated in 3 monthly video focus groups between April and July 2020 to explore (1) personal/professional experiences, (2) patient care and ED work, (3) relationships with teams, institutions and governing bodies. Framework analysis informed data collection and analysis.

Results

Thirty-six focus groups and 15 interviews were conducted with 53 participants (including 24 physicians, 16 nurses). Median age was 37.5 years, 51% were female, 79% had more than 5 years’ experience. Three main themes emerged. (1) Early in this pandemic, participants felt a responsibility to provide care to patients and solidarity toward their ED colleagues and team, while balancing many risks with their personal protection. (2) ED teams wanted to be engaged in decision-making, based on the best available scientific knowledge. Institutional decisions and clinical guidelines needed to be adapted to the specificity of each ED environment. (3) Working during the pandemic created new sources of moral distress and fatigue, including difficult clinical practices, distance with patients and families, frequent changes in information and added sources of fatigue. Although participants quickly adapted to a “new normal”, they were concerned about long-term burnout. Participants who experienced high numbers of patient deaths felt especially unprepared.

Interpretation

ED workers believe they have a responsibility to provide care through a pandemic. Trust in leadership is supported by managers who are present and responsive, transparent in their communication, and involve ED staff in the development and practice of policies and procedures. Such practices will help protect from burnout and ensure the workforce’s long-term sustainability.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43678-022-00306-z.

Solidarity, support and competition among communities of female and male sex workers in Mombasa, Kenya

Female and male sex workers are at elevated risk for HIV infection, psychological distress and other adverse health outcomes. It is therefore important to understand how sex workers' social relationships with one another might inform psychosocial support services for this population. We conducted semi-structured interviews to examine the formation and nature of social networks of 25 female and 25 male sex workers recruited from bars and clubs in Mombasa, Kenya. Relationships between and among female and male participants were often formed based on a mutual understanding of the challenging nature of sex work. Both groups described their relationships in terms of friendship and brotherhood/sisterhood and highlighted the following benefits of sex worker social networks: economic benefits, access to information about HIV/STIs and protection, and support against violence from clients and law enforcement agents. Social networks were often threatened by competition for clients and hence could result in conflict. However, sex workers explained that their sense of solidarity and reliance on one another for health, protection and economic well-being helped minimise conflict. The social networks of sex workers could therefore be used to leverage or optimise access to HIV prevention and care.

Solidarity appraisal, meaning, and markers of welfare in frontline workers in the UK and Ireland during the Covid-19 pandemic

Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, frontline workers have carried out essential roles to keep society going, while the public have been called to minimise the infection rate to limit the burden on frontline workers. In this sense, navigating Covid-19 has necessitated interdependence between frontline workers and key stakeholder groups (such as their colleagues, organisations, their government, and the public). Reports suggest that frontline workers have perceived varying degrees of solidarity with others throughout the pandemic, yet the influence of perceived solidarity on psychological welfare has received limited empirical or theoretical attention. The aim of the present study was to test the importance of perceived solidarity (or solidarity appraisal) by assessing the relationship between perceptions of solidarity and psychological welfare in frontline workers — across all sectors — during Covid-19, and explore the role of a potential mechanism (i.e., meaning in life) for explaining this relationship. To assess this proposed model, we used cross-sectional and longitudinal data from a project tracking a cohort of frontline workers in the UK and Ireland since March 2020. Participants were surveyed at baseline (T1), at six months (T2), and 12 months (T3). At T3, participants (N ​= ​414) reported their perceived solidarity (with colleagues, organisations, government, and public) along with a range of psychological welfare measures. Overall, frontline workers’ levels of meaning in life dropped significantly over time. Lower levels of perceived solidarity were predictive of poorer wellbeing, and higher anxiety, burnout, post-traumatic stress symptoms, and somatic stress symptoms, and these relationships were mediated by the presence of meaning in life. These findings suggest that perceived solidarity with interdependent social groups may imbue life with meaning, which can in turn have a positive influence on psychological welfare in chronic and cumulatively stressful occupational settings.

Solidarity and collectivism in the context of COVID-19

The coronavirus pandemic has impacted health care, economies and societies in ways that are still being measured across the world. To control the spread of the virus, governments continue to appeal to citizens to alter their behaviours and act in the interests of the collective public good so as to protect the vulnerable. Demonstrations of collective solidarity are being consistently sought to control the spread of the virus. Catchphrases, soundbites and hashtags such as ‘we’re all in this together’, ‘stronger together’ and other messages of unity are employed, invoking the sense of a collective struggle. However, this approach is fundamentally challenged as collectivist attitudes run contrary to the individualism of neoliberal ideology, to which citizens have been subjected. This paper argues that attempting to employ the concept of solidarity is inherently challenged by the deep impact of neoliberalism in health policies and draws on the work of Durkheim to examine the concept in a context in which health care has become established as an individual responsibility. The paper will argue that a dominant private-responsibility model and an underfunded public system have eroded solidarity weakening its effectiveness in generating concerns for the collective.

Who Received Informal Social Support During the First COVID-19 Lockdown in Germany, and Who Did Not? The Role of Social Networks, Life Course and Pandemic-Specific Risks

In this article, we study the receipt of informal support during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. The containment measures have had various, far-reaching consequences for the wellbeing of people, creating demands for economic, practical, and emotional support-even among individuals who hitherto were not in need of support. Existing research has shown substantial levels of informal support during the pandemic, often based on individuals' existing social networks, but has predominantly taken the perspective of donors. In this article, we focus on the "demand" or recipient "side" of informal support, and ask: (1) Who receives which type of informal social support during the pandemic? (2) Who reports unmet need? (3) Which factors explain support receipt, unmet need and the type of support received? To explain patterns of receiving social support, we identify "classic" life course and "new" pandemic-specific risks and complement this perspective with individuals' support potentials from their social networks. Empirically, we use data from an online survey, collected among a quota sample of the German population (n = 4,496) at the end of the first lockdown in late spring 2020. Our analysis shows that one in six respondents received social support, while only 3% report unmet need. Practical and emotional support are most widespread. Using logistic and multinomial logistic regression models our results show that social support in general and the type of support received can be explained by life course and pandemic risks, while unmet need is mainly a consequence of social network structure.

Face mask uptake in the absence of mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study with Swiss residents

Background

In the COVID-19 pandemic, Switzerland introduced broad nationwide face mask mandates only by October 2020, later than other Western European countries. This study aims to assess the underlying values and considerations of individuals to wear face masks in the absence of face mask mandates in the COVID-19 pandemic in German-speaking Switzerland.

Methods

As part of the “Solidarity in times of a pandemic” (SolPan) research commons, we interviewed 31 participants living in the German-speaking part of Switzerland in April 2020 and 25 of them again in October 2020. Qualitative inductive thematic analysis was applied for data analysis and interpretation. Public health ethics principles guided the interpretation and organization of findings.

Results

Five themes were identified: Trust and governmental policy; perceived benefits of mask-wearing; perceived risks of mask-wearing; social exclusion and prejudice; and decision-making in the absence of mandates. In light of increasing infection rates in October 2020, many participants started to consider the benefits higher than the risks and were willing to accept face mask mandates in that context, despite earlier reservations.

Conclusions

The absence of face mask mandates underline individual autonomy but may also suppress personal responsibility due to social influence. Face masks are only temporarily acceptable in liberal Western societies and face mask mandates should be enforced only when epidemiologically necessary.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-12215-4.

The contributions of civil society to food security in the context of COVID-19: a qualitative exploration in Uruguay

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore and analyse the actions implemented by civil society to contribute to food security in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak in Uruguay, a high-income country in South America.

DESIGN

An exploratory systematic approach was used to identify the contributions of civil society to food security through reports in news websites and Facebook posts. Data were analysed based on content analysis following a deductive-inductive approach.

SETTING

Uruguay, Latin America.

RESULTS

A total of 1220 civil society organisations were identified, which developed two main actions to increase access to food among the Uruguayan population: food baskets and 'community pots' (also known as 'common pots'). Most of the initiatives targeted citizens under socioeconomic vulnerability in the face of COVID-19, without specifying any specific requirement or population segment. Actions were mainly led by spontaneously organised community groups, and, to a lesser extent, by consolidated organisations. Interactions between organisations were identified. The foods provided by the organisations were mostly aligned with national dietary guidelines. Social media posts evidenced that the main challenge faced by organisations was related to the lack of funds or supplies.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this work suggest that the lack of funds or supplies poses challenges to the medium- and long-term contributions of civil society to food security and stresses the need for comprehensive governmental measures to guarantee food security amongst Uruguayan citizens.

Lessons from Israel's COVID-19 Green Pass program

As of the beginning of March 2021, Israeli law requires the presentation of a Green Pass as a precondition for entering certain businesses and public spheres. Entitlement for a Green Pass is granted to Israelis who have been vaccinated with two doses of COVID-19 vaccine, who have recovered from COVID-19, or who are participating in a clinical trial for vaccine development in Israel. The Green Pass is essential for retaining immune individuals' freedom of movement and for promoting the public interest in reopening the economic, educational, and cultural spheres of activity. Nonetheless, and as the Green Pass imposes restrictions on the movement of individuals who had not been vaccinated or who had not recovered, it is not consonant with solidarity and trust building. Implementing the Green Pass provision while advancing its effectiveness on the one hand, and safeguarding equality, proportionality, and fairness on the other hand may imbue this measure with ethical legitimacy despite involving a potential breach of trust and solidarity.

Peoples' Solutions to Food Systems Transformation in Asia and the Pacific

Peasants and fisherfolk around the world, supported by academic and NGO allies, have denounced the UN Food Systems Summit for its overt corporate capture instead of what should have been a democratic process with strong grassroots participation from social movements. Across the globe, food sovereignty activists and allies have organized autonomous counter-mobilizations, including in Asia and the Pacific, to share what a radical transformation of our food and agriculture systems should really look like. This article shares the peoples’ proposals and current grassroots activities towards radical food systems transformation that were shared at the Asia Pacific peoples’ regional dialogue.

Solidarity and polarisation regarding COVID-19 and related risks - A thematic analysis of comments from an international survey

COVID-19 represents a risk to people's life and societies in their current shapes and functions, with institutionalised responses redefining everyday life. Crises in society can induce fear and tensions that can unite and divide people, inducing acts of solidarity and polarisation. The study explored articulations of solidarity and polarisation in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic and related risks. A Foucault-inspired thematic analysis was pursued on qualitative data from an international survey about COVID-19 and social media. The analysis resulted in four themes illustrating articulations of solidarity and polarisation related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis showed solidarity and polarisation as each other's premise and contradiction. Socialisation into a ‘new normal’ was characterised by the balance between solidarity and polarisation as well as aspirations to enhance future solidarity. The study illustrated that social media functioned as social technology for control and manipulation towards social normalisation. However, it was also used to voice attempts to rectify (or overthrow) the dominant medico-political discourse and norms with own preferences, opinions and a functioning daily life. In short, the articulations and social media uses could be interpreted as expressions of power and counter-power.

Vaccine injury compensation: the Israeli case

Background

Following other countries, Israel passed the Vaccine Injury Compensation Law in 1989, which provides for compensation to vaccine recipients who had suffered injuries without proving negligence. In 2021, after deliberations between the ministries of health and of finance Covid-19 vaccines (administered from the beginning of the campaign on December 20, 2020 and up to December 21, 2022) were included within the compensation law. The current study aims to examine the objectives of Israel’s Vaccine Injury Compensation Law, at the time of its enactment, and to explore barriers to their fulfillment. These issues are especially relevant in light of the discussions held on the option for liability exemption which excludes the possibility of redress from the Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers in case of injury attributed to the vaccine, and considering the heavy burden of proof required in standard tort law.

Methods

The study employed a qualitative methodology which made use of both content analysis of relevant documents and in-depth interviews.

Results

In passing the Vaccine Injury Compensation Law, legislators sought to assist vaccine recipients who had suffered injuries by both lowering their burden of proof as well as establishing a short and efficient procedure for deliberating their claims. Furthermore, legislators believed that the assurance of compensation to vaccine recipients who had suffered injuries would help to encourage a high rate of vaccination compliance. An examination of the law’s implementation over time revealed that the aforementioned goals were not attained.

Conclusions

Implementation of the law since its enactment missed the opportunity to fulfill its original purposes to promote public health fundamental principles of fairness and solidarity. In addition, the adversarial proceedings as well as some of the law’s provisions have the potential to undermine public trust in the State’s willingness to grant compensation for injuries that are attributed to vaccines and thereby subvert the law’s pivotal objective of promoting trust and vaccine compliance. We suggest that allowing circumstantial evidence as to an association between vaccine and an injury, transitioning to administrative deliberation, making available to the public details of cases where compensation was awarded, as well as other possible emendations would help it better reflect the values of fairness and solidarity that underlying the law's purpose. These would also promote the level of trust in healthcare authorities which is essential to preserving high vaccine coverage.

Genomics governance: advancing justice, fairness and equity through the lens of the African communitarian ethic of Ubuntu

There is growing interest for a communitarian approach to the governance of genomics, and for such governance to be grounded in principles of justice, equity and solidarity. However, there is a near absence of conceptual studies on how communitarian-based principles, or values, may inform, support or guide the governance of genomics research. Given that solidarity is a key principle in Ubuntu, an African communitarian ethic and theory of justice, there is emerging interest about the extent to which Ubuntu could offer guidance for the governance of genomics research in Africa. To this effect, we undertook a conceptual analysis of Ubuntu with the goal of identifying principles that could inform equity-oriented governance of genomics research. Solidarity, reciprocity, open sharing, accountability, mutual trust, deliberative decision-making and inclusivity were identified as core principles that speak directly to the different macro-level ethical issues in genomics research in Africa such as: the exploitation of study populations and African researchers, equitable access and use of genomics data, benefit sharing, the possibility of genomics to widen global health inequities and the fair distribution of resources such as intellectual property and patents. We use the identified the principles to develop ethical guidance for genomics governance in Africa.

Altruism, Solidarity and Responsibility from a Committed Sociology: Contributions to Society

A careful look at the international development of Sociology highlights the centrality that the study of social problems and the approach to possible solutions to them have had in the history of this discipline, not infrequently for the sake of better social integration, stability, development, social change or even modernity. Recent approaches suggest shifting this focus of attention, arguing about the deficit in sociological research and practice concerning theor etical frameworks that pay attention to the positive aspects. This text reflects on the contributions that altruism, solidarity, and collective responsibility can have to improve the quality of life in contemporary societies and face humanitarian emergencies with a certain degree of success. For instance, the so-called refugee crisis or the current COVID-19 pandemic poses significant challenges for societies. This article also explores briefly new roles of data science in connection with responsibility and altruism. The text invites us to revisit sociology, thinking about the lights more than the shadows.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the emergence of informal helping arrangements in Germany

In this article we study the emergence of local solidarity in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis in Germany. The COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing lockdown measures have had far-reaching and quite diverse consequences for different social groups, and have increased the need for practical help, childcare, financial aid, but also emotional support to cope with the psychological consequences of social isolation. Hence, even individuals who are not traditionally receivers of informal help have suddenly become dependent on it. Existing research on volunteering, caregiving and donations has shown that the provision of help and volunteer work has a social gradient, and that social inequalities therein can partly be explained by reference to individuals' attitudes and social networks. Against this backdrop, we ask: (1) Has the COVID-19 pandemic sparked the emergence of a new local solidarity? (2) What types of help are provided, and to whom? (3) How does socio-economic position affect the provision of different forms of help during the COVID-19 crisis? (4) Which sociological mechanisms can explain these inequalities in helping? Using data from a topical online-survey based on a quota sample which was collected, during the heydays of the first lockdown in Germany, we find that one of two respondents engages in some sort of local solidarity. Depending on the recipient and the way of helping - up to half of these helping arrangements has newly emerged and does not build on already existing (pre-crisis) help-arrangements. Differences between income and educational groups can mostly be explained by attitudes and social networks. Embeddedness in formal networks is particularly important for extending help to previously unknown recipients in the community. This article contributes to the literature on the social origins of help and the initiation of social capital during crises in general, and the political discussion about solidarity in the COVID-19 pandemic in particular.

"It's Important to hear a Human Voice," Jews under COVID-19: An Oral History Project

This article presents research notes on an oral history project on the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on Jews over the age of 65 years. During the first stage of the project, we conducted nearly 80 interviews in eight cities worldwide: Amsterdam, Berlin, London, Milan, New York, Paris, Rio de Janeiro, and St. Petersburg, and in Israel. The interviews were conducted in the spring of 2020 and reflect the atmosphere and perception of interviewees at the end of the first lockdown.

Based on an analysis of the interviews, the findings are divided into three spheres: (1) the personal experience during the pandemic, including personal difficulties and the impact of the lockdown on family and social contacts; (2) Jewish communal life, manifested in changed functions and emergence of new needs, as well as religious rituals during the pandemic; and (3) perceived relations between the Jewish community and wider society, including relations with state authorities and civil society, attitudes of and towards official media, and the possible impact of COVID-19 on antisemitism. Together, these spheres shed light on how elderly Jews experience their current situation under COVID-19—as individuals and as part of a community.

COVID-19 taught interviewees to reappraise what was important to them. They felt their family relations became stronger under the pandemic, and that their Jewish community was more meaningful than they had thought. They understood that online communication will continue to be present in all three spheres, but concluded that human contact cannot be substituted by technical devices.

Alay Kapwa and community pantries during COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines

In the crisis we are facing, the importance of solidarity, as a vital component of Alay Kapwa Spirituality, in evangelizing the people to practice their faith through care and concern for others is manifested. This is the true Christian way of life. We are Christians not just because we are praying together but because we are helping one another. When the pandemic ends, we can be assured that Alay Kapwa Spirituality is already animated in the lives of the people and when we face situations where solidarity seems to be needed, we will no longer wait for the extreme hardships of the poor to be manifested before we help them.

Inequitable access to healthcare in Africa: reconceptualising the "accountability for reasonableness framework" to reflect indigenous principles

Background

The “Accountability for Reasonableness” (A4R) framework has been widely adopted in working towards equity in health for sub-Saharan Africa (SAA). Its suitability for equitable health policy in Africa hinges, at least in part, on its considerable successes in the United States and it being among the most comprehensive ethical approaches in addressing inequitable access to healthcare. Yet, the conceptual match is yet to be examined between A4R and communal responsibility as a common fundamental ethic in SAA.

Methodology

A4R and its applications toward health equity in sub-Saharan Africa were conceptually examined by considering the WHO’s “3-by-5” and the REACT projects for their accounting for the communal responsibility ethic in pursuit of health equity.

Results

Some of the challenges that these projects encountered may be ascribed to an incongruity between the underpinning ethical principle of A4R and the communitarian ethical principle dominant in sub-Saharan Africa. These are respectively the fair equality of opportunity principle derived from John Rawls’ theory, and the African communal responsibility principle.

Conclusion

A health equity framework informed by the African communal responsibility principle should enhance suitability for SAA contexts, generating impetus from within Africa alongside the affordances of A4R.

Young for old-old for young? Ethical perspectives on intergenerational solidarity and responsibility in public discourses on COVID-19

In the wake of the Coronavirus pandemic, intergenerational solidarity and responsibility have become central points of reference in public discourses. However, the use of these concepts is often unclear and ambivalent: On one hand, older people are described as a vulnerable group whose protection requires sacrifices on the part of younger generations, e.g., regarding individual freedom and economic welfare. On the other, they appear as dispensable individuals that should relinquish their claims for the sake of the young and their future prospects. Our contribution offers an analysis of intergenerational solidarity and responsibility in public discourses on COVID-19. The leading question is how both concepts are used and how the corresponding claims can be justified or criticized. We first give an overview of notions of intergenerational solidarity and responsibility in current debates. In the next step, we provide a moral philosophical clarification of both concepts and their normative presuppositions. We then conduct a descriptive ethical discourse analysis of pertinent cases from three areas of European discourse: politics, civil society, and mass media. The analysis focuses on politico-moral claims and their normative premises, ambiguities, and biases. We argue that the discourse involves assumptions about old age and generational relations that need further clarification and justification. An analysis of intergenerational solidarity and responsibility in times of COVID-19 can help understand the dynamics of social cohesion in late-modern societies.

Solidarity in Academia and its Relationship to Academic Integrity

This paper provides the theoretical analysis of forms of solidarity in academia and its relationship to academic integrity. This analysis is inspired by the Guidelines for an Institutional Code of Ethics in Higher Education drawn up by the International Association of Universities and the Magna Charta Observatory. These Guidelines refer to the principle of solidarity in the context of international cooperation between higher education institutions. However, the author of this paper believes that this principle might also be used in a broader academic context, in particular, in the field of academic ethics and academic integrity. Therefore, this paper aims at revealing the relevance of solidarity in academia and argues that the principle of solidarity can be considered as one of fundamental principles of academic ethics and should be reflected in the structure and provisions of the codes of academic ethics (conduct). For this purpose the author explores the philosophical and sociological approaches towards solidarity and defines the concept of academic solidarity, discusses the conceptual connection between academic solidarity, ethics and integrity and illustrates the impact of solidarity on the development of academic integrity. This analysis allows the author of the paper to recommend embedding the principle of solidarity in the codes of academic ethics of higher education institutions as well as extending the scope of its application by linking the rights and responsibilities of different groups within the academic community in a way that best expresses their unity, shared responsibility, mutual support in meeting the standards of social ethos.

A Call for Conscious Changes to Counter COVID-19

This article lays out the contours of a novel approach to social change and interactions, based on the organic interplay of individuals, institutions, countries and the global society. This approach is based on the POZE paradigm, which posits that change starts inside and is nurtured from the outside in - both for individuals and for durable social change. Such a holistic perspective is crucial to build society as it emerges from the Pandemic. COVID-19 is a reminder that humans around the World are fundamentally all the same; the result of 4 dimensions - soul, heart, mind and body, which find their expression in  aspirations, emotions, thoughts and sensations. These 4 dimensions constantly interact and influence each other in ways that reflect the 4-dimensional dynamic that shapes our collective existence. Individuals are the micro dimension that stands at the center of everything else. Forming part of various institutions, from families to parties, individuals are constitutive components of the meso dimension. Individuals and institutions form countries and economies, the macro-dimension. These dimensions in addition to nature and supra-national institutions form the meta-dimension. A constant interplay connects and determines what happens in each dimension and what derives from it. To thrive in the post-pandemic world, we must understand and optimize this interplay. This is the point of departure for the argumentation laid out in this article. The prevailing systemic imbalance in which many lack the means to cover their basic needs can only be addressed by planting the C-Core (completion, compassion, creativity, cooperation) at the center of human interactions. When we bring risks, responsibility and real opportunities together in one coherent framework whilst applying the proposed twice 4-dimensional paradigm-shift a set of concrete recommendations appears. Looking at individuals, and institutions, the article concludes with suggestions to seize this moment and shape not merely a response to the crises, but to lay the ground for a new social contract. In the past the C in C-Suite stood for Chief, the upper part of the leadership ladder in an institution. In the future that C must represent C-Core qualities.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42413-021-00110-0.