ArticleGlobalization and health2026
Strategic solidarity: solidarity and self-interest in Scandinavian contributions to global Covid-19 vaccine equity.
Article in Globalization and health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the Covid-19 pandemic, Nordic states were praised for leadership on global vaccine equity, notably through strong support for the Access to Covid-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A) and COVAX. At the same time, like other high‑income countries, they took decisive measures to secure priority access to vaccines for their own populations, contributing to global inequities. Scholarship on global health security and diplomacy often treats global solidarity and national self-interest as a binary and focuses on great powers and inter-state dynamics, overlooking how domestic drivers also shape global pandemic response. This article instead proposes the concept of "strategic solidarity" to analyse how solidarity and self‑interest were combined and justified in Norwegian and Danish global health diplomacy during the acute phase of the pandemic (2020-2022).
resultsThrough analysis of three key policy debates - support for vaccine R&D; contributions to global vaccine distributions and positions on intellectual property reforms to boost vaccine supply - the article shows how Norway and Denmark simultaneously enabled and constrained multilateral efforts for vaccine equity. Domestic political pressures, public opinion, national identity narratives, and inter-ministerial tensions shaped how authorities practiced multi‑level diplomacy and managed trade‑offs between national protection and global commitments. Strategic solidarity operated both as a policy orientation distinct from purely security‑driven logics and as a justificatory frame used to reconcile apparent policy incoherence and sustain the countries' self‑images as solidaristic states.
conclusionsStrategic solidarity better captures the empirical reality of pandemic policymaking than a strict solidarity/self‑interest dichotomy and can inform the design of future mechanisms for more equitable global health responses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.