Human Enhancement and Equality of Opportunity

This research explores the moral and political implications of biomedical moral enhancement technologies. Its primary contribution lies in distinguishing among different egalitarian concerns regarding enhancement projects. Whereas much of the literature focuses on potential threats to political equality, the article argues that the more significant concern involves possible threats to fair equality of opportunity.

The study analyzes the conditions under which such concerns may arise and evaluates whether they justify rejecting enhancement technologies. It concludes that although genuine risks exist, they do not provide sufficient grounds for a blanket rejection of biomedical moral enhancement.

Representative Publication

• Ram-Tiktin, E. (2014). “The Possible Effects of Moral Bioenhancement on Political Privileges and Fair Equality of Opportunity.” The American Journal of Bioethics, 14(4): 43–44.

Distributive Justice in Conditions of Disaster and Extreme Scarcity

This research examines distributive justice under conditions of severe medical resource scarcity, such as natural disasters and large-scale emergencies. Contrary to approaches that regard such circumstances as lying beyond the domain of justice, the study develops a normative framework for patient prioritization based on a set of complementary and balancing principles.

Using the Israeli Defense Forces field hospital in Haiti as a case study, the research demonstrates how these principles can be applied in practice and offers broader insights into resource allocation under emergency conditions.

Building on this work, Dr. Ram-Tiktin participated in the Israeli public committee on the prioritization of critically ill patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and contributed to the position paper submitted to the Ministry of Health.

Representative Publication

• Ram-Tiktin, E. (2017). “Ethical Consideration of Triage Following Natural Disaster: The IDF Experience in Haiti as a Case Study.” Bioethics, 31(6): 467–475.

Population Health as a Common Good: Challenges for Regulation and Public Policy

This research reexamines the concept of population health and its implications for public policy. Contrary to approaches that treat public health as a non-rival public good, the study argues that population health is more appropriately understood as a common good that is vulnerable to depletion in the absence of appropriate regulation.

This distinction provides a new basis for evaluating governmental interventions designed to promote population health, including food labeling, consumer regulation, and preventive health measures. The study argues that such interventions need not restrict individual freedom and may, under certain conditions, expand individuals’ effective freedom by improving the background conditions for informed choice.

Representative Publication

• Ram-Tiktin, E. (2018). “The Tragedy of the Commons and Population Health: The State’s Intervention in an Individual’s Actions and Choices from a Capability Perspective.” Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 19(4): 438–455.