Fawole Ayodamope, Boyer Beth, Shahid Minahil, Bharali Ipchita, McAdams David, Yamey Gavin
Center for Policy Impact in Global Health, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
Duke-Margolis Institute for Health Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
Vaccine. 2025 Aug 13;61:127377. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127377. Epub 2025 Jun 11.
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed significant weaknesses in global health multilateralism, particularly in its failure to achieve fair and equitable global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines. Soon after vaccines were available, huge inequities in vaccination rates between populations in the global north and the global south became apparent. This study explores why multilateralism fell so short during the pandemic and identifies the steps that must be taken now to ensure global vaccine equity in the next pandemic.
We conducted in-depth interviews with 20 expert key informants (KIs) worldwide from May 2023 to January 2024, comprising 16 individual interviews and two group interviews (each group interview had two KIs). The experts included representatives of academia, multilateral health and development agencies, civil society organizations, non-governmental organizations, think tanks, and the pharmaceutical industry. We used a qualitative study design to explore the perspectives, experiences, and insights of global health experts. We used purposive sampling to select participants based on their experience and knowledge of pandemic vaccines and pandemic preparedness. We continued conducting interviews until we had reached theoretical saturation.
Five key themes emerged on why multilateralism fell short when it came to global COVID-19 vaccine distribution. Prioritization of national interests-so-called "vaccine nationalism"-was a barrier to sharing doses. COVAX, the global vaccine sharing mechanism, lacked incentives for high-income and upper-middle-income nations to participate or compulsory mechanisms to make them do so, undercutting its ability to serve as an equitable distribution platform. COVAX also left out important constituents from the decision-making process. Rich countries benefitted from having stronger market power in the global economy due to their established, long-term relationships with the pharmaceutical companies. Inadequate vaccine supply fed into inequitable distribution. Five key themes emerged on ways to avert global vaccine inequity in the next pandemic. Promoting regional self-sufficiency in research and development and vaccine manufacturing is crucial. Building manufacturing capacity cannot be deferred until the next pandemic-it must begin now. International collective action will still be important, especially technology transfer agreements between large companies in the global north and partners in the global south as well as south-south partnerships. Public funding for pandemic vaccine development should include conditionalities that support global access. Finally, new kinds of intellectual property agreements are essential in preparing for the next pandemic.
Vaccine nationalism-combined with vaccine supply constraints, the dominance of manufacturing by countries in the global north, and the greater purchasing power of wealthy nations-created a "perfect storm" for rich nations to buy up the supply and to leave COVAX and many low- and middle-income countries at the back of the queue. To prevent such inequity in the next pandemic, regions should build capacity not just in manufacturing vaccines but also in regulatory approval and the financing and procurement of vaccines at scale. Such capacity needs to be built now-it cannot be deferred until the next crisis.
This study was funded by a research grant to Duke University from the Carnegie Corporation of New York (https://www.carnegie.org/grants/grants-database/?q=duke&per_page=25#!/grants/grants-database/grant/937399121.0/).
新冠疫情暴露出全球卫生多边主义存在的重大弱点,尤其是在未能实现新冠疫苗在全球的公平公正分配方面。疫苗问世后不久,全球北方和南方人群在疫苗接种率上的巨大不平等就显现出来。本研究探讨了多边主义在疫情期间为何如此不力,并确定了当下必须采取的措施,以确保在下一次疫情中实现全球疫苗公平。
2023年5月至2024年1月,我们对全球20名专家关键信息提供者(KIs)进行了深入访谈,包括16次个人访谈和两次小组访谈(每次小组访谈有两名KIs)。专家包括学术界、多边卫生与发展机构、民间社会组织、非政府组织、智库和制药行业的代表。我们采用定性研究设计来探索全球卫生专家的观点、经验和见解。我们基于他们在大流行疫苗和大流行防范方面的经验和知识,采用目的抽样法选择参与者。我们持续进行访谈,直到达到理论饱和。
在全球新冠疫苗分配方面,多边主义为何不力出现了五个关键主题。国家利益至上,即所谓的“疫苗民族主义”,是疫苗剂量共享的障碍。全球疫苗共享机制“新冠肺炎疫苗实施计划”(COVAX)缺乏激励高收入和中高收入国家参与的措施,也没有强制机制促使它们这样做,削弱了其作为公平分配平台的能力。COVAX还将重要参与者排除在决策过程之外。由于与制药公司建立了长期关系,富裕国家在全球经济中拥有更强的市场力量,从而从中受益。疫苗供应不足导致了分配不公。关于在下一次疫情中避免全球疫苗不平等的方法出现了五个关键主题。促进区域在研发和疫苗生产方面的自给自足至关重要。不能将建设生产能力推迟到下一次疫情——现在就必须开始。国际集体行动仍然很重要,特别是全球北方的大公司与全球南方的伙伴之间的技术转让协议以及南南伙伴关系。为大流行疫苗研发提供的公共资金应包括支持全球获取的条件。最后,新型知识产权协议对于为下一次疫情做准备至关重要。
疫苗民族主义,再加上疫苗供应限制、全球北方国家在制造业中的主导地位以及富裕国家更强的购买力,为富国抢购疫苗供应、将COVAX以及许多低收入和中等收入国家甩在后面创造了一场“完美风暴”。为防止在下一次疫情中出现这种不平等,各地区不仅应在疫苗生产方面建设能力,还应在监管审批以及大规模疫苗融资和采购方面建设能力。这种能力现在就需要建设——不能推迟到下一次危机。
本研究由纽约卡内基公司授予杜克大学的一项研究资助提供资金(https://www.carnegie.org/grants/grants-database/?q=duke&per_page=25#!/grants/grants-database/grant/937399121.0/)。