Collaborative Calls

We aim, through ethical analysis and argument, to promote public understanding and inform policy debates on the impacts of the covid-19 pandemic on international aid. The Pandemic ethics accelerator’s Prioritisation workstream is therefore inviting researchers to:

• Produce an ethics review (expected to be between 3500-5000 words in length) identifying and explaining ethical issues associated with the impact of the covid-19 pandemic on international aid covering both UK and international jurisdictions. This should be academically rigorous, written in an accessible and engaging style, and aim to contribute to public understanding and debate;
• Collaborate with prioritisation workstream colleagues in developing a submission to the UK parliamentary inquiry into the philosophy of foreign aid
• Collaborate on a possible policy briefing (expected to be approximately 1500 words in length) explaining in succinct form the key issues for policy organisations to consider looking back and looking forward in relation to pandemic responses;
• Potentially write a short, public engagement piece (e.g. a blog) to summarise key aspects of the work and widen its reach.

To assist the UK Pandemic Ethics Accelerator Data use workstream in developing a broad, comprehensive, and detailed understanding of four cross-cutting key themes of interest pertinent to the ethics of self-reported data collection:

(i) Applications and impacts: How can we understand practices, applications and impacts of large-scale, self-reported data collection?

(ii) Risks and ethical concerns: What are the downsides or risks associated with self-reported data applications? Do they focus on any particular groups? What are the major ethical issues?

(iii) Stakeholders: Are some professions, communities, groups or sectors of society more or less likely to participate in self-reporting activities?  For instance healthcare workers or those in public-facing service industries?

(iv) Data: How is data quality-assured and how is self-reported data linked with other datasets and with what impacts?

We aim, through ethical analysis and argument, to promote public understanding and inform policy debates on the impacts of the covid-19 pandemic on Disabled and chronically ill communities in the UK. The Pandemic ethics accelerator’s Public health and health inequalities workstream is therefore inviting research to produce:

• An ethics review (expected to be between 3500-5000 words in length) identifying and explaining ethical issues that have arisen in relation to covid-19 and Disabled and chronically ill communities in the UK. This should be academically-rigorous, written in an accessible and engaging style, and aim to contribute to public understanding and debate;
• A policy briefing (expected to be approximately 1500 words in length) explaining in succinct form the key issues for policy organisations to consider looking back and looking forward in relation to pandemic responses;
• A short, public engagement piece (e.g. a blog) to summarise key aspects of the work and widen their reach.

We aim, through ethical analysis and argument, to promote public understanding and inform policy debates on the impacts of the covid-19 pandemic on LGBTQIA+ communities in the UK. The Pandemic Ethics accelerator’s Public health and health inequalities workstream is therefore inviting research to produce:

• An ethics review (expected to be between 3500-5000 words in length) identifying and explaining ethical issues that have arisen in relation to covid-19 and LGBTQIA+ communities in the UK. This should be academically rigorous, written in an accessible and engaging style, and aim to contribute to public understanding and debate;
• A policy briefing (expected to be approximately 1500 words in length) explaining in succinct form the key issues for policy organisations to consider looking back and looking forward in relation to pandemic responses;
• A short, public engagement piece (e.g. a blog) to summarise key aspects of the work and widen their reach.