世界本不公平,新冠疫苗接种进度先后不一也在预料之中。富国早已开始给民众接种疫苗,而穷国则仍然处于起步阶段。以德国为例,该国计划在夏末前完成疫苗的全民接种,而马里、苏丹等国要想实现大面积接种可能要等到2024年才有希望。
虽然这种情况并非意料之外,但许多人认为我们仍有办法避免、解决“疫苗不平等”问题,他们还认为,如果不及时采取相应措施,那么占据大量疫苗资源的富国可能也无法达到自己想要的防疫效果。
各界人士明确警告:除非“南方国家”能够尽快完成疫苗接种,否则必将拖长全球“抗疫”战线。
MTN Group是南非一家电信巨头,总部位于约翰内斯堡,该公司总裁兼首席执行官拉尔夫•穆皮塔表示:“在抗击新冠疫情的战斗中,全球需要在许多方面开展前所未有的合作,如果只有发达国家能够接种到疫苗,而欠发达国家得不到疫苗,那么所有努力都将付之东流,问题也不会得到解决。在当今这样一体化的世界里,人员流动已成常态。”
私人部门走到台前
一周半前,MTN宣布将向非洲联盟发起的疫苗接种计划捐赠2500万美元,非盟希望通过该计划在未来两、三年内帮助非洲大陆60%的民众完成疫苗接种。一般而言,当疫苗接种比例达到60%时即有可能实现群体免疫。非洲疾病控制和预防中心警告称,如果非洲未能如期达到目标,则新冠肺炎有可能会成为地方病。
作为非洲最大的移动网络运营商,MTN已与非洲疾控中心合作,通过群发短信的方式发布有关口罩和公共卫生信息。此外,该公司还在协助数字疫苗证书的开发工作。穆皮塔称,其所属公司也可以协助有关部门开发数字疫苗证书,甚至可以将MTN数据中心的基础设施用于疫苗物流。
“部分数据中心设有冷却设施,可能有一定的物流处理能力,” 穆皮塔说。你知道,(非洲部分地区的)电力设施建设较为落后,所以我们有许多数据中心依靠发电机和电池运转,也许可以为部分国家的冷链运输提供帮助。”
但目前MTN的2500万美元捐款将用于紧急提供700万剂非盟专供阿斯利康疫苗,未来数周,这批疫苗将被分配给非洲各国。截至目前,非盟已预订约6.7亿剂疫苗。(此项目与联合国发起的COVAX项目彼此独立,通过该项目,非洲今年将获得约6亿剂疫苗。特朗普政府对COVAX采取抵制态度,而拜登政府则已加入其中。)
南非总统西里尔•拉马福萨上周一表示:“我对MTN的慷慨捐赠表示赞赏,并呼吁更多私营企业效仿MTN(的善举)。”上周四,矿业巨头英美资源集团(Anglo American)承诺向其业务所在国提供3000万美元用于购买疫苗,其中1000万美元将提供给南非。
但捐款并不能解决疫苗生产上的瓶颈,而产能瓶颈则会阻碍疫苗在全球的推广,并导致穷国无法及早获得疫苗。
疫苗不平等问题
上周五,由乐施会(Oxfam)、联合国艾滋病规划署和“全球正义”(Global Justice Now)等组织组成的人民疫苗联盟(People 's Vaccine Alliance)指责三大新冠疫苗生产商通过知识产权保护扼杀了在全球供应安全、有效疫苗的希望。
该联盟表示,辉瑞/BioNTech、Moderna和阿斯利康今年计划生产的疫苗数量仅能覆盖全球1.5%人口,并补充称,辉瑞/BioNTech和Moderna的疫苗“对许多贫穷国家来说仍然过于昂贵、令人望而却步”
当然,富国展现出的是另一番景象,比如欧盟获得的疫苗数量已足够该地区民众人均接种两次,而加拿大获得的疫苗数量更是足以为其青少年和成年人接种五次以上。
乐施会(Oxfam)私营部门经理罗比•西尔弗曼表示:“我们认为,这种不平等现象在道义上非常不公平,但更重要的是,这不是我们在抗击全球疫情时应当采取的方法。”他指出,国际商会(International Chamber of Commerce)最近预测,由于发达经济体的疫苗民族主义,全球经济损失将达到9.2万亿美元,而这其中一半可能将会由发达经济体承担,该组织还指出,未接种疫苗的人口将为病毒变异提供“沃土”。
“一处有新冠,等于处处有新冠,” 西尔弗曼说。
那么该联盟提出的解决方案是什么呢?那就是暂停知识产权保护,允许其他生产商紧急生产已知有效的疫苗,并分享相关技术和配方,让生产成为可能。
知识产权
实施上述两项建议的基础已经存在,但两项建议目前都处于停滞不前的状态。
去年10月,印度和南非向世界贸易组织提议,在全球大多数民众产生免疫力前,暂时执行TRIPS协议(全球知识产权规则手册)中有关新冠疫苗与治疗药物的部分条款。
此后,肯尼亚和巴基斯坦等国对此表示复议,但提案遭到了美国、英国、欧盟和其他富裕国家的反对。由于世贸组织以协商一致方式运作,该想法要想取得进展,国际政治必须发生重大转变。
与此同时,世界卫生组织去年5月启动了一个名为“新冠肺炎技术库”(COVID-19 Technology Access Pool,CTAP)的技术和专利库,让开发出有效疫苗或治疗方法的公司贡献技术,方便其他制造商利用既有技术开发疫苗和药品。
十几家仿制药公司已经加入其中,但大公司方面尚无加入迹象,而该项目恰恰最需要后者的贡献。
人民疫苗联盟呼吁疫苗制造商改变策略,加入CTAP。但当《财富》就此问及辉瑞时,辉瑞仅表示会“坚持”国际药品制造商与协会联合会(International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations,IFPMA)去年5月提出的立场。辉瑞预计今年将从其新冠疫苗中获得约40亿美元的利润。
去年5月,世卫组织发出了“团结行动呼吁”,敦促“通过汇集知识、知识产权和数据,让全球能够公平获得抗击新冠肺炎的卫生技术”,而IFPMA则拒绝了该项倡议。该贸易组织表示,世卫组织的呼吁是“提倡一种放之四海而皆准的模式,而忽略了不同环境、不同产品和不同国家的具体情况。”
阿斯利康对CTAP的回应则是,该公司已通过COVAX倡议“让全球多达190个国家得到了获得疫苗的机会”。COVAX倡议将于本周开始向非洲国家分配近9000万剂疫苗,交付工作将于本月进行。
在一定程度上,西尔弗曼对阿斯利康的做法持赞赏态度,后者曾表示自己不会在疫情期间从疫苗中获利,此外,阿斯利康还与印度血清研究所等机构达成了许可协议,为发展中国家生产低成本疫苗。西尔弗曼表示“其他制造商并未效仿阿斯利康的做法,各国政府可以采取更多措施鼓励大型制药公司签定此类许可协议。”
但归根结底,西尔弗曼认为,由于所有疫苗的开发工作都使用了公共资金,那么开发出的疫苗也应该是公共产品。他表示:“创新应该得到回报,但这是用公共资金产生的创新,鉴于这场危机前所未有的性质,我们需要的是造福全人类的解决方案。”
MTN的首席执行官穆皮塔也有同感,他说:“由于此种疫情前所未有,所以我们可能需要进行一些调整,”,并呼吁全球知识产权保护应以“负责任的”方式进行。
“对于将疫苗视为公益产品并从知识产权方面进行特殊安排的说法……我们当然是支持的。”
放宽专利保护的想法在欧洲可能也有一定市场。虽然欧盟仍坚决反对暂停新冠药品专利保护的想法,但欧洲理事会主席查尔斯•米歇尔和德国经济部长彼得•阿尔特迈尔最近都表示支持对疫苗相关知识产权进行强制许可。
但当富国民众完成疫苗接种后,那些多订的疫苗该如何处理呢?
疫苗外交
美国不仅加入了COVAX倡议和世卫组织的“抗击新冠研究合作计划”(ACT-Accelerator COVID-19 research partnership),还计划将多余疫苗提供给贫穷国家。
美国国务院在一份通过电子邮件发布的声明中称:“在获得充足的疫苗供应之后,美国会制定相应的机制框架,酌情通过COVAX等项目将美国政府的剩余疫苗提供给有需要的国家。”
但西尔弗曼提醒称,各方不应依赖富国政府这种慷慨解囊的承诺。他指出,各国政府与制药巨头的交易一直处于保密状态便是问题之一,该问题最近还导致欧盟委员会和阿斯利康之间因交付争端引发了纠纷。也就是说,我们对订单量及交付时间表的条款仅有模糊认知。
他说:“由于缺乏透明度,我们无法充分了解相关协议的具体内容。尤其令人恼火的是,开展相关项目用的都是公共资金,公众却完全没有知情权。考虑到制度如此不公,我们很难依靠富裕国家的善行来摆脱危机。”
与此同时,由于缺乏来自西方的供应,一些低收入和中等收入国家已转向俄罗斯和中国提供的疫苗。
比如采购俄罗斯疫苗可能就是一个不错的选择,该国生产的Sputnik V疫苗已经得到了匈牙利、埃及、尼泊尔和墨西哥等国的订单,并证明了绝佳的免疫效果。这也让用着高价疫苗的欧盟邻国头疼不已,但好在至少疫苗还是有效的。(财富中文网)
译者:梁宇
审校:夏林
世界本不公平,新冠疫苗接种进度先后不一也在预料之中。富国早已开始给民众接种疫苗,而穷国则仍然处于起步阶段。以德国为例,该国计划在夏末前完成疫苗的全民接种,而马里、苏丹等国要想实现大面积接种可能要等到2024年才有希望。
虽然这种情况并非意料之外,但许多人认为我们仍有办法避免、解决“疫苗不平等”问题,他们还认为,如果不及时采取相应措施,那么占据大量疫苗资源的富国可能也无法达到自己想要的防疫效果。
各界人士明确警告:除非“南方国家”能够尽快完成疫苗接种,否则必将拖长全球“抗疫”战线。
MTN Group是南非一家电信巨头,总部位于约翰内斯堡,该公司总裁兼首席执行官拉尔夫•穆皮塔表示:“在抗击新冠疫情的战斗中,全球需要在许多方面开展前所未有的合作,如果只有发达国家能够接种到疫苗,而欠发达国家得不到疫苗,那么所有努力都将付之东流,问题也不会得到解决。在当今这样一体化的世界里,人员流动已成常态。”
私人部门走到台前
一周半前,MTN宣布将向非洲联盟发起的疫苗接种计划捐赠2500万美元,非盟希望通过该计划在未来两、三年内帮助非洲大陆60%的民众完成疫苗接种。一般而言,当疫苗接种比例达到60%时即有可能实现群体免疫。非洲疾病控制和预防中心警告称,如果非洲未能如期达到目标,则新冠肺炎有可能会成为地方病。
作为非洲最大的移动网络运营商,MTN已与非洲疾控中心合作,通过群发短信的方式发布有关口罩和公共卫生信息。此外,该公司还在协助数字疫苗证书的开发工作。穆皮塔称,其所属公司也可以协助有关部门开发数字疫苗证书,甚至可以将MTN数据中心的基础设施用于疫苗物流。
“部分数据中心设有冷却设施,可能有一定的物流处理能力,” 穆皮塔说。你知道,(非洲部分地区的)电力设施建设较为落后,所以我们有许多数据中心依靠发电机和电池运转,也许可以为部分国家的冷链运输提供帮助。”
但目前MTN的2500万美元捐款将用于紧急提供700万剂非盟专供阿斯利康疫苗,未来数周,这批疫苗将被分配给非洲各国。截至目前,非盟已预订约6.7亿剂疫苗。(此项目与联合国发起的COVAX项目彼此独立,通过该项目,非洲今年将获得约6亿剂疫苗。特朗普政府对COVAX采取抵制态度,而拜登政府则已加入其中。)
南非总统西里尔•拉马福萨上周一表示:“我对MTN的慷慨捐赠表示赞赏,并呼吁更多私营企业效仿MTN(的善举)。”上周四,矿业巨头英美资源集团(Anglo American)承诺向其业务所在国提供3000万美元用于购买疫苗,其中1000万美元将提供给南非。
但捐款并不能解决疫苗生产上的瓶颈,而产能瓶颈则会阻碍疫苗在全球的推广,并导致穷国无法及早获得疫苗。
疫苗不平等问题
上周五,由乐施会(Oxfam)、联合国艾滋病规划署和“全球正义”(Global Justice Now)等组织组成的人民疫苗联盟(People 's Vaccine Alliance)指责三大新冠疫苗生产商通过知识产权保护扼杀了在全球供应安全、有效疫苗的希望。
该联盟表示,辉瑞/BioNTech、Moderna和阿斯利康今年计划生产的疫苗数量仅能覆盖全球1.5%人口,并补充称,辉瑞/BioNTech和Moderna的疫苗“对许多贫穷国家来说仍然过于昂贵、令人望而却步”
当然,富国展现出的是另一番景象,比如欧盟获得的疫苗数量已足够该地区民众人均接种两次,而加拿大获得的疫苗数量更是足以为其青少年和成年人接种五次以上。
乐施会(Oxfam)私营部门经理罗比•西尔弗曼表示:“我们认为,这种不平等现象在道义上非常不公平,但更重要的是,这不是我们在抗击全球疫情时应当采取的方法。”他指出,国际商会(International Chamber of Commerce)最近预测,由于发达经济体的疫苗民族主义,全球经济损失将达到9.2万亿美元,而这其中一半可能将会由发达经济体承担,该组织还指出,未接种疫苗的人口将为病毒变异提供“沃土”。
“一处有新冠,等于处处有新冠,” 西尔弗曼说。
那么该联盟提出的解决方案是什么呢?那就是暂停知识产权保护,允许其他生产商紧急生产已知有效的疫苗,并分享相关技术和配方,让生产成为可能。
知识产权
实施上述两项建议的基础已经存在,但两项建议目前都处于停滞不前的状态。
去年10月,印度和南非向世界贸易组织提议,在全球大多数民众产生免疫力前,暂时执行TRIPS协议(全球知识产权规则手册)中有关新冠疫苗与治疗药物的部分条款。
此后,肯尼亚和巴基斯坦等国对此表示复议,但提案遭到了美国、英国、欧盟和其他富裕国家的反对。由于世贸组织以协商一致方式运作,该想法要想取得进展,国际政治必须发生重大转变。
与此同时,世界卫生组织去年5月启动了一个名为“新冠肺炎技术库”(COVID-19 Technology Access Pool,CTAP)的技术和专利库,让开发出有效疫苗或治疗方法的公司贡献技术,方便其他制造商利用既有技术开发疫苗和药品。
十几家仿制药公司已经加入其中,但大公司方面尚无加入迹象,而该项目恰恰最需要后者的贡献。
人民疫苗联盟呼吁疫苗制造商改变策略,加入CTAP。但当《财富》就此问及辉瑞时,辉瑞仅表示会“坚持”国际药品制造商与协会联合会(International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations,IFPMA)去年5月提出的立场。辉瑞预计今年将从其新冠疫苗中获得约40亿美元的利润。
去年5月,世卫组织发出了“团结行动呼吁”,敦促“通过汇集知识、知识产权和数据,让全球能够公平获得抗击新冠肺炎的卫生技术”,而IFPMA则拒绝了该项倡议。该贸易组织表示,世卫组织的呼吁是“提倡一种放之四海而皆准的模式,而忽略了不同环境、不同产品和不同国家的具体情况。”
阿斯利康对CTAP的回应则是,该公司已通过COVAX倡议“让全球多达190个国家得到了获得疫苗的机会”。COVAX倡议将于本周开始向非洲国家分配近9000万剂疫苗,交付工作将于本月进行。
在一定程度上,西尔弗曼对阿斯利康的做法持赞赏态度,后者曾表示自己不会在疫情期间从疫苗中获利,此外,阿斯利康还与印度血清研究所等机构达成了许可协议,为发展中国家生产低成本疫苗。西尔弗曼表示“其他制造商并未效仿阿斯利康的做法,各国政府可以采取更多措施鼓励大型制药公司签定此类许可协议。”
但归根结底,西尔弗曼认为,由于所有疫苗的开发工作都使用了公共资金,那么开发出的疫苗也应该是公共产品。他表示:“创新应该得到回报,但这是用公共资金产生的创新,鉴于这场危机前所未有的性质,我们需要的是造福全人类的解决方案。”
MTN的首席执行官穆皮塔也有同感,他说:“由于此种疫情前所未有,所以我们可能需要进行一些调整,”,并呼吁全球知识产权保护应以“负责任的”方式进行。
“对于将疫苗视为公益产品并从知识产权方面进行特殊安排的说法……我们当然是支持的。”
放宽专利保护的想法在欧洲可能也有一定市场。虽然欧盟仍坚决反对暂停新冠药品专利保护的想法,但欧洲理事会主席查尔斯•米歇尔和德国经济部长彼得•阿尔特迈尔最近都表示支持对疫苗相关知识产权进行强制许可。
但当富国民众完成疫苗接种后,那些多订的疫苗该如何处理呢?
疫苗外交
美国不仅加入了COVAX倡议和世卫组织的“抗击新冠研究合作计划”(ACT-Accelerator COVID-19 research partnership),还计划将多余疫苗提供给贫穷国家。
美国国务院在一份通过电子邮件发布的声明中称:“在获得充足的疫苗供应之后,美国会制定相应的机制框架,酌情通过COVAX等项目将美国政府的剩余疫苗提供给有需要的国家。”
但西尔弗曼提醒称,各方不应依赖富国政府这种慷慨解囊的承诺。他指出,各国政府与制药巨头的交易一直处于保密状态便是问题之一,该问题最近还导致欧盟委员会和阿斯利康之间因交付争端引发了纠纷。也就是说,我们对订单量及交付时间表的条款仅有模糊认知。
他说:“由于缺乏透明度,我们无法充分了解相关协议的具体内容。尤其令人恼火的是,开展相关项目用的都是公共资金,公众却完全没有知情权。考虑到制度如此不公,我们很难依靠富裕国家的善行来摆脱危机。”
与此同时,由于缺乏来自西方的供应,一些低收入和中等收入国家已转向俄罗斯和中国提供的疫苗。
比如采购俄罗斯疫苗可能就是一个不错的选择,该国生产的Sputnik V疫苗已经得到了匈牙利、埃及、尼泊尔和墨西哥等国的订单,并证明了绝佳的免疫效果。这也让用着高价疫苗的欧盟邻国头疼不已,但好在至少疫苗还是有效的。(财富中文网)
译者:梁宇
审校:夏林
In an unequal world, it is not surprising that COVID-19 vaccines are being rolled out in an unequal way. Rich countries are well into the process of inoculating their populaces, while poorer countries are still on the starting blocks. For example, Germany aims to have all its citizens vaccinated by the end of the summer, but countries such as Mali and Sudan will probably only achieve significant coverage in 2024.
Unsurprising as this may be, though, many say it is not inevitable—there are ways to fix the situation and, if they are not taken up, the effects will likely rebound on the richer countries that are gobbling up the lion's share of the vaccines.
The warning is clear: unless the "Global South" gets vaccinated soon, the pandemic will drag on for everyone. And this is a warning coming not just from human rights campaigners, but from business too.
"There needs to be an unprecedented global effort to fight COVID-19 and, in many respects, if the developed markets get vaccinated but the undeveleoped markets don’t, the problem hasn’t been solved," says Ralph Mupita, president and CEO of MTN Group, the Johannesburg, South Africa-based telecoms giant. "In an integrated world, people move around."
Private sector steps up
A week and a half ago, MTN announced it was donating $25 million to the African Union's vaccination program, which aims to inoculate 60% of the continent's population within the next two or three years. This proportion could allow for herd immunity; if it takes longer, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has warned, COVID-19 may become endemic.
MTN, Africa's largest mobile network operator, had already been working with the Africa CDC on getting out the message—literally, via bulk SMS—about masks and proper sanitation. It is also aiding the development of digital vaccine certificates. Mupita says his company may also be able to aid the development of digital vaccine certificates, and even floats the idea of using MTN's data center infrastructure for vaccine logistics.
"There may be capacity in data centers where there's cooling," he says. "Remember, electricity infrastructure is poorly developed [in parts of Africa]. We run a lot of our sites on generators and batteries. There may be an opportunity to participate in the cold chains of some countries."
But right now, MTN's $25 million is paying for the urgent delivery of 7 million AU-secured AstraZeneca vaccine doses, which will be distributed among African countries in the coming weeks. The AU has so far pre-secured around 670 million vaccine doses overall. (This initiative is separate from the United Nations-sponsored COVAX facility, through which Africa is supposed to get around 600 million doses this year—the United States was a COVAX holdout under the Trump administration, but is joining under President Joe Biden.)
"I would like to applaud MTN for this generous donation and I call upon private sector companies to follow the example of MTN," South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said Monday. On Thursday, the mining giant Anglo American pledged $30 million towards the vaccine rollout in countries where it operates, with $10 million of that cash going to South Africa's program.
However, donations can't fix the vaccine-production bottleneck that is hampering rollouts around the world—and effectively pushing poorer countries to the back of the queue.
Vaccine inequality
On Friday, the People's Vaccine Alliance—a coalition of organizations such as Oxfam, UNAIDS and Global Justice Now—accused the three biggest COVID-19 vaccine producers of strangling the global supply of safe and effective vaccines through their intellectual-property protections.
Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and AstraZeneca only have plans to produce enough vaccines to cover 1.5% of the global population this year, the alliance said, adding that Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna's vaccines remained "prohibitively expensive for many poor nations."
The situation is different in richer countries, of course. The European Union, for example, has already secured enough doses to vaccinate its population twice, while Canada's orders could vaccinate its teenage and adult population five times over.
"We believe that this inequity is deeply morally unfair, but, more than that, it's not the way to combat a global pandemic," says Robbie Silverman, a private sector advocacy manager at Oxfam. He points out that the International Chamber of Commerce recently forecast $9.2 trillion of global economic losses due to vaccine nationalism in advanced economies—which could up to half of that hit—and noted that unvaccinated populations provide fertile ground for new COVID-19 mutations.
"Coronavirus anywhere is coronavirus everywhere," Silverman says.
The alliance's proposed solution? The suspension of intellectual-property rules that are stopping other producers from urgently manufacturing the vaccines that are known to work, and the sharing of the technology and recipes that make such production possible.
Intellectual property
The groundwork for both these proposals has been laid, but both remain stalled for now.
Last October, India and South Africa proposed to the World Trade Organization that it temporarily waive parts of the TRIPS Agreement—the global intellectual-property rulebook—in the case of COVID-19 vaccines and treatments, until most of the world's population has developed immunity.
Countries such as Kenya and Pakistan have since co-sponsored the proposal, but it faces opposition from the U.S., the U.K., the EU and other rich countries. As the WTO operates by consensus, a major international political shift would be needed if the idea is to get anywhere.
Meanwhile, the World Health Organization launched a technology and patent repository, called the COVID-19 Technology Access Pool (CTAP), last May. The idea is for companies that develop effective vaccines or treatments to contribute their knowhow, so other manufacturers can easily get to work.
More than a dozen generic pharmaceutical companies have jumped into the pool, but there's no sign of any of the big players whose contributions are needed.
The People's Vaccine Alliance is calling on the vaccine makers to change their tack and join CTAP. But, asked by Fortune for its response, Pfizer—which expects to make around $4 billion in profits from its COVID-19 vaccine this year—said only that it "stands by" the position set out last May by the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA).
At the time, the IFPMA rejected the WHO's "Solidarity Call to Action", which urged "equitable global access to COVID-19 health technologies through pooling of knowledge, intellectual property and data." The trade group said the call "promotes a one-size-fits all model that disregards the specific circumstances of each situation, each product and each country."
AstraZeneca, meanwhile, responded to the CTAP question by saying it is "enabling access to the vaccine in up to 190 countries worldwide" through the COVAX initiative, which this week started allocating nearly 90 million doses to African countries, for delivery this month.
Oxfam's Silverman offers a degree of praise for AstraZeneca, which says it won't profit from its vaccine during the pandemic, and which has struck licensing deals with the likes of the Serum Institute of India to make low-cost vaccines for developing countries. "The other manufacturers really haven't followed suit," he says. "Governments could do much more to encourage those licensing deals."
But ultimately, Silverman argues, all the vaccines' development drew on public funding, and the results should be public goods. "Innovation should be rewarded, but this was created using public money and, given the unprecedented nature of this crisis, we need solutions that work for all people," he says.
That sentiment is shared by MTN's CEO. "We may need to make some amendments, because this is an unprecedented situation," says Mupita, who calls for any global securing of intellectual property to be "done responsibly".
"To that narrative of seeing vaccines as a public good and therefore creating special arrangements with intellectual property…we are certainly supportive from our perspective."
A form of this idea may be catching on in Europe, too. While the EU remains resolutely opposed to the idea of TRIPS waivers for COVID-19 drugs, European Council President Charles Michel and German Economy Minister Peter Altmaier have both recently indicated support for the compulsory licensing of vaccine-related intellectual property.
But what about all those doses that rich countries have ordered but that won't be needed, once their populations have been vaccinated?
Vaccine diplomacy
The U.S. isn't just joining the COVAX initiative and the WHO's ACT-Accelerator COVID-19 research partnership; it's also planning to offer poorer countries its unneeded doses.
"The United States will…develop a framework for providing surplus U.S. government vaccine doses to countries in need, once there is sufficient supply in the United States, including through the COVAX Facility as appropriate," the State Department said in an emailed statement.
However, Oxfam's Silverman warns against relying on such largesse. One problem, he notes, is that governments' deals with the pharma giants have been shrouded in secrecy—an issue that recently caused ructions in a delivery dispute between the European Commission and AstraZeneca. This means we know only vague terms around order volumes and delivery schedules.
"The lack of transparency really prevents us from having full knowledge of what these agreements are," he says. "It's especially galling as this is public money, but the public have no visibility. It's hard to rely on the beneficence of rich countries to get out of the crisis, in this deeply inequitable system."
Meanwhile, in the absence of supplies from the West, some low and middle-income countries have been turning to the vaccines being proffered by Russia and China.
In the case of Russia, that may not have been a bad bet. Its Sputnik V vaccine, which has already been ordered by countries such as Hungary, Egypt, Nepal and Mexico, was this week shown to be extremely effective in fending off the coronavirus. That creates a vaccines-but-at-what-cost headache for the neighboring EU, but at least the vaccine works.