Search

Current humanity is experiencing extraordinary levels of material and ideal connectivity. Change being constant and stability exceptional and provisional; one has to expect a significant acceleration of change in the next hundred years. The core question is therefore: What kind of future is being shaped for the next generations, our grandchildren and greatgrand children? Without going too far back in time, it is fair to say that the current world was shaped by two different, successive and antinomic global processes: imperial expansion, colonization and domination on the one hand, and resistance, struggle for liberation, and the search for a more equitable world order on the other hand. Against all the odds, European imperialism, civil war, wars of aggression, and Western ostracism, China was an influential actor in the struggle for liberation of Africa from colonialism, got its rightful place in the international world order and is now the second economy of the planet. Globalization resulted in the emergence of a de facto multipolar world, with different models of societies and organizational cultures. These are dialectic processes constantly in operation, but there is however a third crucial area of interest, generally taken granted, that of people and culture. Peaceful relations and sustainable economic development backed by greater cultural and demographic connectivity are better options for the construction of a novel future for humanity. Universities and higher education institutions can play an important role in spearheading and implementing these new orientations for the construction of a future peaceful and sustainable human world in which war will be outlawed. This paper outlines what academics can do to promote such a vision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vaccine hesitancy has gained renewed attention as an important public health concern worldwide. Against this backdrop, over the last decade, we have conducted various qualitative, social science studies with the broad shared aim of better understanding this complex phenomenon. This has included various Cochrane systematic reviews of qualitative research globally, systematic reviews of qualitative research in Africa, and primary research studies in South Africa. These studies have also explored vaccine hesitancy for various vaccines, including routine childhood vaccination, HPV vaccination and other routine vaccinations for adolescents, and, most recently, COVID-19 vaccination. In this reflective and critical commentary piece we reflect on seven key overarching insights we feel we have gained about this complex phenomenon from the varying studies we have conducted over the past decade. These insights comprise the following: (1) the relationship between vaccine knowledge and hesitancy is complex and may operate in multiple directions; (2) vaccine hesitancy is driven by multiple socio-political forces; (3) vaccine hesitancy may be many things, rather than a single phenomenon; (4) vaccine hesitancy may be an ongoing 'process', rather than a fixed 'stance'; (5) vaccine hesitancy may sometimes be about a 'striving', rather than a 'resisting'; (6) 'distrust' as a driver of vaccine hesitancy needs to be better contextualized and disaggregated; and (7) the 'demand-side' versus 'supply/access-side' distinction of the drivers of suboptimal vaccination may be misleading and unhelpful. In unpacking these insights, we problematize some of the common assumptions within the vaccine hesitancy literature and flag topics that we think could benefit from further scrutiny and debate. Our hope is that this can provide a platform for further engagement on these issues and ultimately contribute towards fostering a more critical public health understanding of vaccine hesitancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]