Malaria is still a significant cause of death and suffering throughout much of the developing world. Fortunately, the global community provides significant (though, not sufficient) resources to combat the disease and the parasite that causes it. How ought we to allocate these resources? One option is to purchase and distribute perhaps the best tool we have to prevent malaria: insecticide-treated nets. Another route would see us invest in research and development of a novel biotechnology that could eradicate the disease in perpetuity. If we choose to spend our money on insecticide-treated nets, we will be rescuing current individuals at risk of being infected with the parasite. Though, we can be almost certain there will be future individuals who will also need rescuing. If we instead invest in the novel biotechnology, we could benefit countless future individuals who never have to experience the threat of malaria. Hence, this would mean that some number of current individuals will die due to the lack of insecticide-treated nets that otherwise could have saved their lives. So, ought we to rescue current, identifiable individuals, or ought we invest in research for the sake of the future? After an exploration of the duty to rescue and cost-effectiveness analysis, I suggest we look towards the literature on intergenerational justice for a justifiable answer to the question of how we ought to allocate our malaria resources.

在整个发展中世界，疟疾仍然是造成死亡和痛苦的重要原因。幸运的是，全球社会提供了大量（尽管不足）的资源来抗击这种疾病和引起该疾病的寄生虫。我们应该如何分配这些资源？一种选择是购买和分发也许是我们预防疟疾的最佳工具：杀虫剂处理过的蚊帐。另一种途径将使我们投资于研发可以永久根除疾病的新型生物技术。如果我们选择将钱花在经过杀虫剂处理的蚊帐上，我们将解救目前有被寄生虫感染风险的个人。不过，我们几乎可以肯定，将来还会有需要救援的人员。如果我们改为投资新型生物技术，我们可以使无数未来的人受益，他们永远不必经历疟疾的威胁。因此，这意味着由于缺乏经过杀虫剂处理的蚊帐，否则一些目前的人将会丧生，否则这些蚊帐可以挽救他们的生命。因此，我们应该营救目前可以识别的个人，还是应该为了未来而在研究上进行投资？在探究了救援和成本效益分析的职责之后，我建议我们参考有关代际正义的文献，以合理地回答我们应该如何分配疟疾资源的问题。我们应该拯救当前的，可识别的个人，还是为了未来而在研究上进行投资？在探究了救援和成本效益分析的职责之后，我建议我们参考有关代际正义的文献，以合理地回答我们应该如何分配疟疾资源的问题。我们应该拯救当前的，可识别的个人，还是为了未来而在研究上进行投资？在探究了救援和成本效益分析的职责之后，我建议我们参考有关代际正义的文献，以合理地回答我们应该如何分配疟疾资源的问题。