Affiliation:
1. Nordakademie gAG , Elmshorn , Germany
Abstract
Abstract
This paper investigates the trade-off between economics and ethics applying them to “lockdowns” as a policy measure to counter the Covid-19-pandemic. This is an academic research on the nature and mechanism of trade-offs in so far as they apply to decision making. In the course of the line of inquiry pursued here, several different ways of trading off are assessed. In applying them to the pandemics, each yield a different answer to the adequacy of lockdowns as measures against the pandemic. The economic trade-off found “optimalcy” conditions, the utilitarian-ethical trade-off failed to do so revealing that there is a problem using “scientific evidence” as basis for such a trade-off. The value-ethical trade-off found out that lockdowns do not pass the test of proportionality within the usual constitutional framework.
Reference40 articles.
1. Bendavid, E., C. Oh, J. Bhattacharya, and J. Ioannidis. 2020. “Assessing Mandatory Stay‐at‐Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID‐19.” European Journal of Clinical Investigation 51 (4): e13484, doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13484.
2. Bjørnskov, C. 2020. “Did Lockdown Work? An Economist’s Cross-Country Comparison.” CESifo ifab003, https://doi.org/10.1093/cesifo/ifab003.
3. Bonardi, J.-P., Q. Gallea, D. Kalanoski, and R. Lalive. 2020. “Fast and Local: How Did Lockdown Policies Affect the Spread and Severity of the Covid-19.” Covid Economics 23: 325–51.
4. Chapman, B. 2020. “Preference, Pluralism, and Proportionality.” University of Toronto Law Journal 60 (2): 177–96. 2010.
5. Cohen-Eliya, M., and I. Porat. 2013. Proportionality and Constitutional Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献