ABSTRACT
Purpose>This paper aims to provide an in-depth conceptualization of service exclusion by drawing on our exploratory research as well as thick and rich insights from the authors’ qualitative data.Design/methodology/approach>Qualitative research was used to explore service exclusion practices against customers experiencing vulnerabilities. A total of 28 semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with refugees residing within Malaysia. The Gioia methodology was used for the authors’ data analysis and the findings were validated by an independent moderator.Findings>The authors’ empirical findings challenge how service exclusion is currently understood, by adding substantial depth and complexity beyond simply describing “the lack of access to services”. The authors also offer rich empirical findings describing 29 forms of exclusion, which were further reduced to seven types of service exclusion practices: discrimination, restriction, cost barriers, language and technology barriers, poor servicing, non-accountability and non-inclusivity.Originality/value>This study conceptualizes service exclusion from a process perspective, that is, “how” customers experiencing vulnerabilities are being excluded, rather than “what” is excluded.
ABSTRACT
Background: Globally, vulnerable populations have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent responses, such as lockdown measures and mass vaccinations. Numerous ethical challenges have arisen at different levels, be it at the policy-making level or on the ground. For example, policymakers have to contain a highly contagious disease with high morbidity using scarce resources, while minimizing the medium- to long-term social and economic impacts induced by containment measures. This study explores the impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable populations in Malaysia by using an intersectional framework that accounts for overlapping forms of marginalization. Methods: This study utilizes in-depth qualitative data obtained from 34 individuals and organizations to understand the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on vulnerable populations in Malaysia. We utilize four principles of ethics to guide our coding and interpretation of the data - namely beneficence, non-maleficence, justice and autonomy. We utilize a frequency analysis to roughly understand the types of ethical issues that emerged. Using hermeneutic content analysis (HCA), we then explore how the principles interact with each other. Results: Through the frequently analysis, we found that although beneficence was very prevalent in our dataset, so was a significant amount of harm - as perpetuated through injustice, the removal or lack of autonomy and maleficence. We also unearthed a worrying landscape of harm and deep systemic issues associated with a lack of support for vulnerable households - further exacerbated during the pandemic. Conclusions: Policy recommendations for aid organizations and society to mitigate these ethical problems are presented, such as long overdue institutional reforms and stronger ethical practices rooted in human rights principles, which government agencies and aid providers can then use in the provision of aid to vulnerable populations.
ABSTRACT
Background: Globally, vulnerable populations have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent responses, such as lockdown measures and mass vaccinations. Numerous ethical challenges have arisen at different levels, be it at the policy-making level or on the ground. For example, policymakers have to contain a highly contagious disease with high morbidity using scarce resources, while minimizing the medium- to long-term social and economic impacts induced by containment measures. This study explores the impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable populations in Malaysia by using an intersectional framework that accounts for overlapping forms of marginalization. Methods: This study utilizes in-depth qualitative data obtained from 34 individuals and organizations to understand the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on vulnerable populations in Malaysia. We utilize four principles of ethics to guide our coding and interpretation of the data - namely beneficence, non-maleficence, justice and autonomy. We utilize a frequency analysis to roughly understand the types of ethical issues that emerged. Using hermeneutic content analysis (HCA), we then explore how the principles interact with each other. Results: Through the frequently analysis, we found that although beneficence was very prevalent in our dataset, so was a significant amount of harm - as perpetuated through injustice, the removal or lack of autonomy and maleficence. We also unearthed a worrying landscape of harm and deep systemic issues associated with a lack of support for vulnerable households - further exacerbated during the pandemic. Conclusions: Policy recommendations for aid organizations and society to mitigate these ethical problems are presented, such as long overdue institutional reforms and stronger ethical practices rooted in human rights principles, which government agencies and aid providers can then use in the provision of aid to vulnerable populations.
ABSTRACT
Background: Globally, vulnerable populations have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent responses, such as lockdown measures and mass vaccinations. Numerous ethical challenges have arisen at different levels, be it at the policy-making level or on the ground. For example, policymakers have to contain a highly contagious disease with high morbidity using scarce resources, while minimizing the medium- to long-term social and economic impacts induced by containment measures. This study explores the impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable populations in Malaysia by using an intersectional framework that accounts for overlapping forms of marginalization. Methods: This study utilizes in-depth qualitative data obtained from 34 individuals and organizations to understand the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on vulnerable populations in Malaysia. We utilize four principles of ethics to guide our coding and interpretation of the data – namely beneficence, non-maleficence, justice and autonomy. We utilize a frequency analysis to roughly understand the types of ethical issues that emerged. Using hermeneutic content analysis (HCA), we then explore how the principles interact with each other. Results: Through the frequently analysis, we found that although beneficence was very prevalent in our dataset, so was a significant amount of harm – as perpetuated through injustice, the removal or lack of autonomy and maleficence. We also unearthed a worrying landscape of harm and deep systemic issues associated with a lack of support for vulnerable households – further exacerbated during the pandemic. Conclusions: Policy recommendations for aid organizations and society to mitigate these ethical problems are presented, such as long overdue institutional reforms and stronger ethical practices rooted in human rights principles, which government agencies and aid providers can then use in the provision of aid to vulnerable populations.