Countries reconvened on Monday to work towards finalising a landmark global agreement on handling future pandemics, with the recent outbreaks of mpox, Marburg, and H5N1 adding fresh urgency to reach a deal.
After over two years of negotiations, there is optimism for completing an accord by 15 November, though key elements—such as sharing pathogens and vaccines—are to be finalised later.
In December 2021, fearing a repeat of the devastation wrought by COVID-19—which killed millions, overwhelmed health systems, and impacted economies—the World Health Organisation’s 194 member states agreed to draft an accord on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.
The emergence of a new strain of mpox, a deadly Marburg virus outbreak in Rwanda, and the spread of H5N1 bird flu in recent months have given the talks fresh impetus.
“You face a balancing act between concluding your work in a timely manner and reaching the strongest possible text. I urge you not to let the perfect become the enemy of the good,” WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told negotiators as the latest round of talks began.
“Time is not on our side. Covid is still circulating; mpox remains a global health emergency; we have a Marburg outbreak, and H5N1 spillovers. The next pandemic will not wait.”
Equity struggle
G20 health ministers, meeting in Rio de Janeiro last Thursday, added momentum by expressing support for an agreement that is “ambitious, balanced, effective, and fit-for-purpose, including equitable access to medical countermeasures during pandemics.”
Many of the draft text’s 37 articles were concluded during the previous 11 rounds of talks.
The remaining critical section concerns the sharing of pathogens identified within countries, followed by the equitable distribution of vaccines and other pandemic-fighting resources derived from that data.
This issue has created a standoff between wealthier nations with significant pharmaceutical industries and poorer countries that felt marginalised during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The proposed roadmap would defer detailed discussions on how the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System (PABS) will operate until after the broader agreement has been concluded.
Sangeeta Shashikant, intellectual property and development coordinator at the Third World Network NGO, expressed concern that many of the PABS proposals from developing nations had been “diluted and deleted.”
“The sense is that there is no meaningful deliverable to address the inequities experienced during Covid-19,” she told journalists. “The negotiation has somewhat lost its purpose.”
The 12th round of talks follows the recent global nature conservation conference in Colombia, which ended without consensus on a roadmap for increased species protection funding, as wealthy and developing nations reached an impasse.
Consensus as ‘Magic Bullet’
The pandemic agreement talks are being held at WHO headquarters in Geneva.
The International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations expressed the desire for a pandemic agreement “that works, addressing the needs of countries while enabling the private sector to innovate.”
“Intellectual property needs to be respected, and technology transfer must be voluntary and based on mutually agreed terms,” the group insisted.
Country representatives outlined their positions, with some opposing hasty decision-making for expediency’s sake.
Malaysia, speaking on behalf of a coalition of developing countries known as the Group for Equity, argued that “major improvements are still desperately needed in many areas.”
“We cannot leave all critical details regarding the PABS system for future resolution,” the group said, calling for at least 20% of real-time vaccine, test, and treatment production to be allocated to developing countries.
Tanzania, representing 48 African countries, stated, “We cannot accept an agreement that does not uphold equity.”
Indonesia’s negotiator asserted that a pandemic accord that merely preserves the status quo is unacceptable, emphasising that “empty promises will not save lives.”
Eswatini cautioned against rushing to conclude an agreement that is “not worth the paper it is written on,” while China insisted, “Quality should not be sacrificed for the sake of time.”
Germany’s representative urged faster progress with a focus on realistic goals.
“Consensus is the magic bullet here,” he said. “The final agreement needs to be palatable to all. We all have to consume it in the end.”
Read the full article here
