key: cord-0704946-5ic5o3hb
authors: Torres, Irene; Artaza, Osvaldo; Profeta, Barbara; Alonso, Cristina; Kang, JaHyun
title: COVID-19 vaccination: returning to WHO's Health For All
date: 2020-09-25
journal: Lancet Glob Health
DOI: 10.1016/s2214-109x(20)30415-0
sha: 01370a6382ece8ddffa13d7aca87a29696dd1904
doc_id: 704946
cord_uid: 5ic5o3hb

nan

The development and distribution of a COVID-19 vaccine has the potential to greatly change the course of the pandemic; however, ensuring equitable access will require countries, organisations, and corporations to place their trust in global health. The COVID-19 vaccine initiative (COVAX) shows how public-private partnerships can exacerbate existing chasms 1 or allow organisations, such as WHO, to guide a realistic and adequate approach. Development of vaccines that meet regulatory and licensing requirements involves high costs in terms of facilities, equipment, and human resources and is a lengthy process that often fails. The high cost restricts many countries from developing a vaccine, 2 which causes low income and middle-income countries to rely on research and development from more powerful economies. Additionally, research highlights the challenges in reaching population-level effectiveness with a vaccine, regardless of production capacity, because of weak delivery infrastructures and barriers to access that determine uptake. 3 Many countries still do not have universal health coverage; therefore, existing delivery gaps must be addressed in distribution strategies and networks. Private enterprise could support the search for a vaccine but, because COVID-19 can spread rapidly across countries and disrupt entire communities, transportation systems, economic sectors, and geographical regions, the COVID-19 vaccine must be treated as a global public good. This global need for equitable access to a vaccine is why returning to the WHO so-called Health For All agenda might bring new significance to the organisation and help in planning future steps for managing COVID-19.

Similar to the WHO Science Council (to be established in late 2020), civil, societal, and community representation in COVAX could remain reserved for English-speaking individuals who do not require compensation for their time. 4 Selection mechanisms might be reinforcing traditional structures of participation, in which many countries and stakeholders are under-represented while privileging those who live or work in high-income countries or organisations. Furthermore, public-private partnerships that are similar to COVAX have previously withheld data from WHO. 5 Public oversight of transnational companies, privatepublic partnerships, and states will create resistance; however, increased transparency and accountability on decision making at WHO are needed to address setbacks and build on progress in favour of the populations that are most susceptible to COVID-19 and its consequences. A so-called people's WHO 6 providing impartial advice has been proposed to transform and re-legitimise the organisation. At least two instances of civil society engagement (WHO Watch and Global Health Watch) 7 have shown the value of vigilance. Inclusion of a mechanism similar to WHO Watch and Global Health Watch in current and planned WHO initiatives, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic, could also help to build necessary trust for effective global health governance.

The aim to remain neutral might have led WHO to emphasise diplomacy over addressing the risks and effect of global transmission of COVID-19 and prevented the organisation from investigating potentially biased data. After the 2013-16 Ebola virus epidemic in west Africa, it was expected that this outbreak would be an opportunity for WHO to restructure and strengthen local and national health responses; we are now waiting for COVID-19 to become that game changer. 8 With insufficient capacity for a decisive global health stewardship, mainly because its budget is too small to reach set goals, WHO is at risk of becoming irrelevant and further undermined. Its financing scheme makes it dependent on large economies that are heavily influenced by powerful corporations, many of which work in the health sector and are connected to philanthropic organisations that lead international collaborations. The power of WHO rests in the understanding that it truly represents all its member countries' best interests and is committed to providing a COVID-19 vaccine for all.

Given the challenges of WHO to be reactive, responsive, and reliable during the COVID-19 pandemic, structural reform will be slow and difficult. First, an example could be set by evaluating initial steps, when necessary, to guarantee meaningful inclusion of countries and voices that have been traditionally excluded in WHO's Science Council and in COVAX. Second, formal conditions for organisations to directly

How the race for a Covid-19 vaccine is getting dirty

The complexity and cost of vaccine manufacturing-an overview

Vaccine production, distribution, access and uptake

ACT-Accelerator Vaccine Pillar (COVAX) Civil Society and Community Representation. Notes to assist in nomination of representatives

History of global burden of disease assessment at the World Health Organization

Re-)Making a people's WHO

What is the people's health movement? Saúde Debate

Will Ebola change the game? Ten essential reforms before the next pandemic. The report of the Harvard-LSHTM independent panel on the global response to Ebola