Paul Aubrecht, J. Essink, M. Kovač, A. Vandenberghe
{"title":"Centralised and Decentralised Responses to COVID-19: the EU and the USA Compared","authors":"Paul Aubrecht, J. Essink, M. Kovač, A. Vandenberghe","doi":"10.36633/ulr.738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European Union and the United States of America have experienced some of the most concerning outbreaks of COVID-19. This paper investigates the division of power in the EU and the USA, suggesting the radical uncertainty created by the COVID-19 pandemic means that states' procurement and distribution of the materials they need for testing and the obtaining of medical supplies to treat the seriously ill might best be centrally administered. The centralised procurement and distribution of essential medical goods can resolve the problems arising from harmful competition between states to procure them and allow states to exercise their buying power. Moreover, it might solve the moral hazard problem, which leads to the hoarding of necessary medical goods, thereby creating a cross-border externality when other states within the federal system do not have enough of the medical items needed. However, the paper argues that the importance of local information suggests that organising the provision of testing programmes is optimally done as part of a decentralised process. Finally, to enable the most effective health responses for future pandemics and achieve the most effective integration of EU Member States, the current regulatory and legal adaptations and allocation of competences should also become permanent features in the EU's constitutional landscape. © 2022,Utrecht Law Review. All Rights Reserved.","PeriodicalId":44535,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utrecht Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36633/ulr.738","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
集中和分散应对COVID-19:欧盟和美国的比较
欧洲联盟和美利坚合众国经历了一些最令人担忧的COVID-19疫情。本文调查了欧盟和美国的权力划分,表明COVID-19大流行造成的根本不确定性意味着各国采购和分发检测所需的材料以及获得治疗重病的医疗用品可能最好是集中管理。基本医疗物品的集中采购和分配可以解决国家之间为采购这些物品而进行的有害竞争所产生的问题,并使国家能够行使其购买力。此外,它可能会解决道德风险问题,道德风险导致囤积必要的医疗用品,从而在联邦系统内的其他州没有足够的所需医疗用品时产生跨境外部性。然而,这篇论文认为,地方信息的重要性表明,组织提供测试项目最好是作为分散过程的一部分来完成的。最后,为了能够对未来的大流行病采取最有效的卫生对策,并实现欧盟成员国最有效的一体化,目前的监管和法律调整以及权限的分配也应成为欧盟宪法格局的永久特征。©2022,乌得勒支法律评论。版权所有。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。