Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 vaccine donation process allegedly prioritised national interests over humanitarian needs. We thus examined how donors allocated vaccines by recipient country needs versus donor national interests and how such decisions varied across donation channels (bilateral vs COVAX with country earmarking) or exposure to foreign aid norms (membership status in the Development Assistance Committee-DAC). METHODS: We used the two-part regression model to examine how the probability of becoming a recipient country and the volume of vaccines received were associated with recipient countries' needs (disease burden and GDP per capita), donor countries' interests (bilateral trade volume and voting distance in the United Nations General Assembly) and recipient countries' population size. The analysis further interacted the determinants with channel and DAC status. RESULTS: Donors preferentially selected countries with higher disease burden, lower GDP per capita, closer trade relations, more different voting preferences, and smaller populations. Compared with bilateral arrangements, COVAX encouraged more needs-based considerations (lower GDP per capita), less interest-based calculus (more distant economic relations and voting preferences) and larger population size. Compared with the DAC counterparts, the non-DAC donors focused more on politically and economically aligned countries but also on less economically developed countries. As for the volume of vaccines donated, countries received more vaccines if they had tighter trade relations with donors, more different voting patterns than donors, and larger populations. COVAX was associated with raising the volumes of vaccines to politically distant countries, and non-DAC donors donated more to countries with stronger trade relations and political alignment. CONCLUSION: Donors consider both recipient needs and national interests when allocating COVID-19 vaccines. COVAX and DAC partially mitigated donors' focus on domestic interests. Future global health aid can similarly draw on multilateral and normative arrangements.