Legal agreements: barriers and enablers to global equitable COVID-19 vaccine access

Which roads lead to access? A global landscape of six COVID-19 vaccine innovation models

BACKGROUND

Unequal and inequitable access to Covid-19 vaccines in low- and middle-income countries (L&MICs) was a major political, ethical and public health failure in the pandemic. However, vaccine developers' practices were not monolithic, but rather, took diverse approaches to supplying different countries, with important implications for global access.

RESULTS

Using data on R&D investments, regulatory approvals, manufacturing and purchase agreements, and vaccine deliveries, we identified six distinct innovation models that apply across the 14 COVID-19 vaccines with more international presence from 2020-2022. "Western Early Arrivers" Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna supplied the largest volumes quickly and prioritized high-income countries (HICs) from registration to vaccine delivery. "Western Latecomers" Janssen and Novavax supplied intermediate volumes later, also prioritizing HICs but with a greater proportion to L&MICs. "Major Chinese Developers" Sinopharm and Sinovac supplied intermediate volumes early, primarily to middle-income countries (MICs). "Russian Developer" Gamaleya completed development early but ultimately supplied small volumes, primarily to middle-income countries (MICs). "Cosmopolitan Developer" Oxford/AstraZeneca supplied large volumes early to HICs and MICs at the lowest prices. Finally, "Small MIC Developers" CanSino, Bharat Biotech, Medigen, Finlay Institute and the Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CGEB), exported relatively small volumes to a few MICs. Low-income countries (LICs) were not targeted by any developer, and received far fewer doses, later, than any other income group. Almost all developers received public funding and other forms of support, but we found little evidence that such support was leveraged to expand global access.

CONCLUSIONS

Each of the six innovation models has different implications for which countries get access to which vaccines, how quickly, and at which prices. Each offers different strengths and weaknesses for achieving equitable access. Our findings also suggest that Western firms had the greatest capacity to develop and deliver vaccines quickly during the pandemic, but such capacity is rapidly becoming more globally distributed with MICs playing a significant role, especially in supplying other MICs. Given the critical role of public support in enabling pandemic vaccine development and supply, governments have both the capacity and responsibility to craft international rules that will make responses to future pandemics more equitable and effective.

Public opinion on global COVID-19 vaccine procurement and distribution policies: A nationally representative survey in Aotearoa New Zealand 2022

The World Health Organisation and many health experts have regarded vaccine nationalism, a "my country first" approach to vaccines procurement, as a critical pandemic response failure. However, few studies have considered public opinion in this regard. This study gauged public support for vaccine nationalism and vaccine internationalism in a representative survey in New Zealand (N = 1,135). Support for vaccine internationalism (M (mean rating) = 3.64 on 5-point scales) was significantly stronger than for vaccine nationalism (M = 3.24). Additionally, support for openly sharing COVID-19 vaccine manufacturing knowledge and technology (M = 4.17 on 5-point scales) was significantly stronger than support for safeguarding vaccine manufacturers' intellectual property (M = 2.66). The public also supported a utilitarian approach that would see distributions based on need (M = 3.76 on 5-point scales) over an equal proportional international distribution (M = 3.16). Akin to the few preceding studies, the present observations suggest that the public is likely to be more supportive of pandemic responses that are globally equitable and long-term orientated. Our findings have substantial implications for pandemic preparedness as the congruence or lack thereof of public vaccine-related values with government policies can affect public trust, which, in turn, can affect public cooperation. It may pay for governments to invest in proactive public engagement efforts before and during a pandemic to discuss critical ethical issues and inequities in global vaccine procurement and distributions.

Expertise as a Response to Limited Multilateralism: The Case of South Korea's Vaccine Procurement Task Force for COVID-19 Vaccines amid Unequal Access via the COVAX Facility

This study investigates South Korea's trials and errors in procuring COVID-19 vaccines from abroad, amid the limitations of a multilateral scheme for global provision through the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) program via the World Health Organization (WHO) and the discussions on COVID-19 vaccine patent waivers at the World Trade Organization. Using the framework of "self-help" in the international system and country categorization to explicate country behaviors by state-business relations and expertise to explain South Korea's COVID-19 vaccine procurement process, this study argues that in the absence of a global mechanism that guarantees adequate and timely vaccine provision, countries are left to the sole option of depending on their own capabilities: expertise, budget, and policy planning by consolidating public and private capacities to acquire vaccines for the public. To support the argument, an in-depth case investigation of South Korea's Vaccine Procurement Task Force is presented. The case study focuses on the policy assessment of critical elements in South Korea's vaccine procurement and rollout on facing obstacles to sufficient procurement through COVAX: decision-making impacting the timing and dosage of procurement, diplomatic and business channels to sign bilateral contracts, setup of a smart-factory vaccination hub, and indigenous vaccine development for WHO approval.

Lessons learnt from COVID-19 to reduce mortality and morbidity in the Global South: addressing global vaccine equity for future pandemics

COVID-19, which killed more than 6 million people, will not be the last pandemic. Vaccines are key to preventing and ending pandemics. Therefore, it is critical to move now, before the next pandemic, towards global vaccine equity with shared goals, intermediate steps and long-term advocacy goals. Scientific integrity, ethical development, transparency, accountability and communication are critical. Countries can draw on lessons learnt from their response to the HIV pandemics, which has been at the vanguard of ensuring equitable access to rights-based services, to create shared goals and engage communities to increase access to and delivery of safe, quality vaccines. Access can be increased by: fostering the spread of mRNA intellectual property (IP) rights, with mRNA vaccine manufacturing on more continents; creating price transparency for vaccines; creating easily understandable, accessible and transparent data on vaccines; creating demand for a new international legal framework that allows IP rights to be waived quickly once a global pandemic is identified; and drawing on scientific expertise from around the world. Delivery can be improved by: creating strong public health systems that can deliver vaccines through the lifespan; creating or strengthening national regulatory agencies and independent national scientific advisory committees for vaccines; disseminating information from reliable, transparent national and subnational surveillance systems; improving global understanding that as more scientific data become available, this may result in changes to public health guidance; prioritising access to vaccines based on scientific criteria during an epidemic; and developing strategies to vaccinate those at highest risk with available vaccines.

A critical analysis of COVAX alliance and corresponding global health governance and policy issues: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

The COVAX alliance is a novel approach to international partnership in global health intended to achieve the worthy goal of 'COVID-19 vaccine equity'. This study aimed to identify the implementation challenges and framework gaps of COVAX and to explore the interconnected global health policy and governance gaps in ensuring equity, accessibility and affordability of vaccines.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted to identify the implementation challenges and framework gaps of COVAX and related global health policy and governance gaps. A search was carried out in PubMed, Scopus, Springer Link and Embase databases. Manually searched the grey literature, such as official reports and articles. EndNote V.20 was used to manage the evidence screening, and data extraction was carried out in Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

Searches of four electronic databases and official UN, GAVI and WHO websites identified 4686 pieces of evidence. The 937 duplicates were removed, and the remaining 3749 articles were screened for the title and abstract. Most articles were eliminated as they do not address global COVAX or COVID-19 vaccine equity. The remaining 53 pieces of evidence were reviewed for full text, and ultimately 40 articles found eligible were included in the scoping review.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation challenges of COVAX were attributed mainly to the phenomenon of vaccine nationalism by rich countries. The future global health policy and governance structure must be re-examined to address the inadequacies of such novel super public-and-private partnership models.

Increasing Equity in the Transnational Allocation of Vaccines Against Emerging Pathogens: A Multi-Modal Approach

This article proposes the adoption of a multi-modal system for allocating vaccine doses during large transnational outbreaks of infectious diseases. The chosen allocative criteria (public health need; country-income level; qualification through funding; and, subsidiarily, a modified lottery system) are adapted from a current embodiment of allocative multi-modality outside the context of public health: the New York City Marathon.

Decolonization of Global Health Law: Lessons from International Environmental Law

Global health law for pandemics currently lacks legal obligations to ensure distributional and reparative justice. In contrast, international environmental law contains several novel international legal mechanisms aimed at addressing the effects of colonialism and global injustices that arise from the disproportionate contributions to - and impacts of - climate change and biodiversity loss.

Negotiating public-health intellectual property licensing agreements to increase access to health technologies: an insider's story

Public health voluntary licensing of intellectual property has successfully been applied to increase access to medicines in certain disease areas, producing health benefits and economic savings, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. There is however limited understanding of the intricacies of the approach, the modalities by which it works in practice, its levers and the trade-offs made. Such knowledge may be critical in deciding what role licensing should have in pandemic preparedness and equitable access to health technologies more broadly. This paper examines the case for licensing, the considerations for balancing public health needs, the challenges of negotiations, and the processes for validating proposed agreements. No access mechanism is perfect, but evidence suggests that public-health licensing has an important role to play, although it remains underused. Understanding some of the realities, strengths, limitations and complexities of applying the model may help calibrate expectations and develop incentives to expand its applications.

Reliability and validity evaluation of the chinese revision of the attitude towards adult vaccination scale

BACKGROUND

Although vaccination is one of the critical interventions to address global health issues, inadequate vaccination rates has become an international challenge. Vaccine hesitancy is the key to affecting inadequate vaccination rates. According to the WHO SAGE working group's definition, vaccine hesitancy refers to delaying or refusing vaccination and has been ranked as one of the top 10 health threats. There has yet to be a scale that evaluates vaccination attitudes among Chinese adults. However, an attitude quantity, the adult vaccination attitude scale, has been developed to assess adult vaccination attitudes and reasons for vaccine hesitancy.

OBJECTIVE

The Adult Attitudes to Vaccination Scale (ATAVAC) was initially developed by Professor Zoi Tsimtsiou et al. This study aimed to analyze the structure of the Chinese version of the ATAVAC and explore the relationship between adult vaccination attitudes, e-health literacy, and medical distrust.

METHODS

After obtaining author permission for the initial scales, the study was translated using the Brislin back-translation method. 693 adults were enrolled to the study. To validate this hypothesis, participants finished the socio-demographic questionnaire, the Chinese version of the ATAVAC, the electronic Health Literacy Scale (e-HEALS) and the Medical Mistrust Index (MMI). The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to examine the underlying structure of the factors of the Chinese version of the Adult Vaccination Attitude Scale and to measure its reliability and validity.

RESULTS

The Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the Chinese version of the ATAVAC was 0.885, with Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranging from 0.850 to 0.958 for each dimension. The content validity index was 0.90, and the retest reliability was 0.943. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) supported the 3-factor structure of the translation instrument, and the scale had good discriminant validity. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed a degree of freedom of 1.219, a model fit index (GFI) of 0.979, a normative fit index (NFI) of 0.991, a Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) of 0.998, a comparability index (CFI) of 0.998 and a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.026.

CONCLUSION

The results show that the Chinese version of the ATAVAC has demonstrated good reliability and validity. Hence, it can be used as an effective tool to assess vaccination attitudes among Chinese adults.

Business as Usual? Centering Human Rights to Advance Global COVID-19 Vaccine Equity Through COVAX

This essay examines the extent to which COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) has been a successful mechanism for global COVID-19 vaccine equity as a component of the human right to health. First, I provide background on COVID-19 vaccine equity and COVAX as part of the Access to COVID-19 Tools ACT-Accelerator. Second, I situate access to COVID-19 vaccines within the context of human rights to exemplify how the international community intended COVAX to advance both health equity and the human right to health. Third, I assess how those intentions have played out in practice due to challenges of vaccine nationalism, lack of transparency, funding shortfalls, unreliable donations, inadequate civil society participation, and inequitable resource allocation. Fourth, I suggest how COVAX might function differently if human rights were centered within its purpose, strategy, and operations. Ultimately, I argue that COVAX is upholding a largely market-oriented approach to making essential medicines accessible and that COVAX would be a more effective mechanism for vaccine equity and global health if it were grounded in human rights.

Emerging challenges to prisoners vaccination of covid-19: Historical, legal and humanitarian view

This research aims to present a legal history of the prisoners’ treatment in global crises along with presenting an overview of prisoners’ treatment during Covid-19 in view of International Humanitarian Laws. Using the formative research method with a conceptual approach and statute approach, data was gathered from various legal documents related to prisoners’ health laws linked to legal purpose theories. This study further explains the need to treat old age prisoners on a priority basis and to what extent international health organizations are making efforts to establish criteria to vaccinate this societal segment. The international regulatory framework was deeply analyzed to draw conclusions and recommendations along with WHO efforts. It was revealed that there exist adequate laws regarding priority health treatment of the prisoners in crises times but existed an enormous need to highlight and address the sensitive humanitarian issue. Additionally, WHO and other international organizations have also revised the international laws during Covid-19 to treat the prisoners. However, there is an immense need to devise explicit regulations regarding the accessibility of the vaccine to all the groups of society, including prisoners. The provision of a detailed overview of international laws and treaties regarding prisoners’ priority health treatment is a major advance of this research. Further recommendations for the developed and developing nations and future research directions are suggested.

Community Health Resources, Globalization, Trust in Science, and Voting as Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccination Rates: A Global Study with Implications for Vaccine Adherence

The COVID-19 global pandemic requires, not only an adequate supply of, but public adherence to safe and effective vaccinations. This study analyzes the human and economic resources and political and public attitudinal factors that influence widely varying country-level coronavirus vaccination rates. Using data on up to 95 countries, we found that countries’ strength of community health training and research (CHTR), education index, globalization, and vaccine supply are associated with a greater COVID-19 vaccination rate. In a separate analysis, certain political factors, and public attitudes (perceived government effectiveness, government fiscal decentralization, trust in science, and parliamentary voter turnout) predicted vaccination rates. Perceived corruption and actual freedoms (political rights and civil liberties) related to vaccination rates in prior studies were not significantly predictive when controlling for the above factors. The results confirm our prior findings on the importance of CHTR resources for increasing COVID-19 vaccination rates. They also suggest that to motivate vaccine adherence countries need, not only an adequate vaccine supply (which depends on a country having either its own resources or effective global political, social, and economic connections) and community health workforce training and research, but also a population that trusts in science, and is actively engaged in the political process.

Barriers to COVID-19 Health Products in Low-and Middle-Income Countries During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Rapid Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis

Introduction

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has intensified the urgency in addressing pressing global health access challenges and has also laid bare the pervasive structural and systemic inequities that make certain segments of society more vulnerable to the tragic consequences of the disease. This rapid systematic review analyses the barriers to COVID-19 health products in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). It does so from the canon of global health equity and access to medicines by proposing an access to health products in low-and middle-income countries framework and typology adapted to underscore the complex interactive and multiplicative nature and effects of barriers to health products and their root cause as they coexist across different levels of society in LMICs.

Methods

Modified versions of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) reviewers' manual for evidence synthesis of systematic reviews and the PRISMA-ScR framework were used to guide the search strategy, identification, and screening of biomedical, social science, and gray literature published in English between 1 January 2020 and 30 April 2021.

Results

The initial search resulted in 5,956 articles, with 72 articles included in this review after screening protocol and inclusion criteria were applied. Thirty one percent of the articles focused on Africa. The review revealed that barriers to COVID-19 health products were commonly caused by market forces (64%), the unavailability (53%), inaccessibility (42%), and unaffordability (35%), of the products, incongruent donors' agenda and funding (33%) and unreliable health and supply systems (28%). They commonly existed at the international and regional (79%), health sectoral (46%), and national cross-sectoral [public policy] (19%) levels. The historical heritage of colonialism in LMICs was a commonly attributed root cause of the barriers to COVID-19 health products in developing countries.

Conclusion

This review has outlined and elaborated on the various barriers to health products that must be comprehensively addressed to mount a successful global, regional, national and subnational response to present and future epidemics and pandemics in LMICs.

"No Regrets" Purchasing in a pandemic: making the most of advance purchase agreements

“No regrets” buying – using Advance Purchase Agreements (APAs) – has characterized the response to recent pandemics such as Avian flu, Zika Virus, and now COVID-19. APAs are used to reduce demand uncertainty for product developers and manufacturers; to hedge against R&D and manufacturing risks; and to secure availability of products in the face of spiking demand. Evidence on the use of APAs to buy vaccines, medicines, diagnostics, and personal protective equipment during recent pandemics illustrates how these contracts can achieve their intended objectives for buyers. But, transferring risk from suppliers to buyers - as APAs do - can have consequences, including overbuying and overpaying. Furthermore, the widespread use of APAs by high-income countries has contributed to the striking inequities that have characterized the Swine flu and COVID-19 responses, delaying access to vaccines and other supplies for low- and middle-income countries (L&MICs).

We identify seven ways to address some of the risks and disadvantages of APAs, including adoption of a global framework governing how countries enter into APAs and share any resulting supplies; voluntary pooling through joint or coordinated APAs; a concessional-capital-backed facility to allow international buyers and L&MICs to place options on products as an alternative to full purchase commitments; greater collection and sharing of market information to help buyers place smarter APAs; support for a resale market; building in mechanisms for donation from the outset; and transitioning away from APAs as markets mature. While a binding global framework could in theory prevent the competitive buying and hoarding that have characterized country/state responses to pandemics, it will be very challenging to put in place. The other solutions, while less sweeping, can nonetheless mitigate both the inequities associated with the current uncoordinated use of APAs and also some of the risks to individual buyers.

Analysis of recent experiences can provide useful lessons on APAs for the next pandemic. It will be important to keep in mind, however, that these contractual instruments work by transferring risk to the buyer, and that buyers must therefore accept the consequences. In the spirit of “no regrets” purchasing, having bought what hindsight suggests was too much is generally preferable to having bought not enough.

Taking Systems Thinking to the Global Level: Using the WHO Building Blocks to Describe and Appraise the Global Health System in Relation to COVID-19

Adequately preparing for and containing global shocks, such as COVID-19, is a key challenge facing health systems globally. COVID-19 highlights that health systems are multilevel systems, a continuum from local to global. Goals and monitoring indicators have been key to strengthening national health systems but are missing at the supranational level. A framework to strengthen the global system-the global health actors and the governance, finance, and delivery arrangements within which they operate-is urgently needed. In this article, we illustrate how the World Health Organization Building Blocks framework, which has been used to monitor the performance of national health systems, can be applied to describe and appraise the global health system and its response to COVID-19, and identify potential reforms. Key weaknesses in the global response included: fragmented and voluntary financing; non-transparent pricing of medicines and supplies, poor quality standards, and inequities in procurement and distribution; and weak leadership and governance. We also identify positive achievements and identify potential reforms of the global health system for greater resilience to future shocks. We discuss the limitations of the Building Blocks framework and future research directions and reflect on political economy challenges to reform.

It is not too late to achieve global covid-19 vaccine equity

Gavin Yamey and colleagues say that a new, urgent push for global vaccine equity could help avert suffering and deaths, protect economies, and prevent new virus variants

Expert Views on COVAX and Equitable Global Access to COVID-19 Vaccines

Objectives: We face the impossibility of having enough COVID-19 vaccines for everyone in the near future. This study aims to contribute to the debate on equitable global access to COVID-19 vaccines, tackling key ethical discussions and policy challenges regarding early phases of COVAX, the global cooperation mechanism for supporting fair vaccine allocation.

Methods: We conducted in-depth interviews with twelve experts and a literature research on academic articles, media sources and public statements. We built a data analysis matrix and conducted a thematic analysis.

Results: Our findings show, first, that interviewed experts who hold different views on vaccine allocation, including moderate nationalist perspectives, agree on joining a global cooperation mechanism. Second, incentives to join COVAX vary greatly among countries. Third, specific barriers to COVAX emerged in the early implementation phase. And fourth, countries might be trapped in a zero-sum game regarding the global vaccine supply.

Conclusion: We present findings that enrich analyses of early phases of COVAX (April 2020–21), we introduce three ethical discussions that provide a common ground for equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines, and we highlight policy challenges.

Short and Long-term Impacts of COVID-19 Pandemic on Health Equity: A Comprehensive Review

Background: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on human life has led to profound consequences in almost all societies worldwide, and this includes its significant impact on all aspects of health. Health equity has been among the main challenges in any healthcare system. However, with the COVID-19 crisis worsening health inequalities, the need to prioritize health equity in upstream national and international plans must receive scholarly attention. Therefore, this paper reports the findings of a review of the current synthesized evidence about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health equity. Methods: This is a comprehensive review in which we retrieved relevant studies during the period starting from 12/01/2019 to 01/15/2021 are retrieved from various databases. The PRISMA flow diagram and a narrative approach are used for synthesizing the evidence. Results: We initially retrieved 1173 studies, and after a primary quality appraisal process, 40 studies entered the final phase of analysis. The included studies were categorized into five main outcome variables: Accessibility (95%), Utilization (65.8%), Financial protection: 15 (36.5%), Poverty (31.7%), and Racism (21.9%) Conclusion: COVID-19 pandemic has been the most devastating global challenge in recent history. While the COVID-19 crisis is still unfolding, its multidimensional adverse effects are yet to be revealed. Nevertheless, some people, e.g., the elderly, minorities, as well as marginalized and poor persons, have suffered the COVID-19 consequences more than others. In line with the whole government/whole society approach, we advocate that governments need to strengthen their special efforts to reduce the extra burden of the pandemic on the most vulnerable populations.

The race for a COVID-19 vaccine: where are we up to?

INTRODUCTION

A novel strain of coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, has triggered a global pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in late 2019. In January 2020, the WHO declared this pandemic a public health emergency. This pandemic has already caused over 5.3 million deaths from more than 272 million infections. The development of a successful vaccine is an urgent global priority to halt the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and prevent further fatalities. Researchers are fast-tracking this process, and there have already been significant developments in preclinical and clinical phases in a relatively short period of time. Some vaccines have been approved either for emergency use or mass application in recent months.

AREAS COVERED

Herein, we provide a general understanding of the fast-tracked clinical trial procedures and highlight recent successes in preclinical and clinical trials to generate a clearer picture of the progress of COVID-19 vaccine development.

EXPERT OPINION

A good number of vaccines have been rolled out within a short period a feat unprecedented in medical history. However, the emergence of new variants over time has appeared as a new threat, and the number of infections and casualties is still on the rise and this is going to be an ongoing battle.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Chinese Population: A Large-Scale National Study

Globally, vaccine hesitancy is a growing public health problem. It is detrimental to the consolidation of immunization program achievements and elimination of vaccine-targeted diseases. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in China and explore its contributing factors. A national cross-sectional online survey among Chinese adults (≥18 years old) was conducted between August 6, 2021 and August 9 via a market research company. We collected sociodemographic information; lifestyle behavior; quality of life; the knowledge, awareness, and behavior of COVID-19; the knowledge, awareness, and behavior of COVID-19 vaccine; willingness of COVID-19 vaccination; accessibility of COVID-19 vaccination services; skepticism about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccine; doctor and vaccine developer scale; and so on. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to estimate the associations by using logistic regression models. A total of 29,925 residents (48.64% men) were enrolled in our study with mean age of 30.99 years. We found an overall prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy at 8.40% (95% CI, 8.09–8.72) in primary vaccination and 8.39% (95% CI, 8.07–8.70) in booster vaccination. In addition, after adjusting for potential confounders, we found that women, higher educational level, married residents, higher score of health condition, never smoked, increased washing hands, increased wearing mask, increased social distance, lower level of vaccine conspiracy beliefs, disease risks outweigh vaccine risk, higher level of convenient vaccination, and higher level of trust in doctor and developer were more willing to vaccinate than all others (all p < 0.05). Age, sex, educational level, marital status, chronic disease condition, smoking, healthy behaviors, the curability of COVID-19, the channel of accessing information of COVID-19 vaccine, endorsement of vaccine conspiracy beliefs, weigh risks of vaccination against risks of the disease, making a positive influence on the health of others around you, and lower trust in healthcare system may affect the variation of willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine (all p < 0.05). The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was modest in China, even with the slight resulting cascade of changing vaccination rates between the primary and booster vaccination. Urgent action to address vaccine hesitancy is needed in building trust in medical personnel and vaccine producers, promoting the convenience of vaccination services, and spreading reliable information of COVID-19 vaccination via the Internet and other media.

The emergence of post-Westphalian health governance during the Covid-19 pandemic: the European Health Union

The response to the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020-21 was dominated by the Westphalian primacy of national territory and sovereignty, significantly worsening and prolonging this crisis. Global platforms for cross-border coordination and cooperation were constrained by national self-interest. Arguably, the lack of a worldwide supranational (or post-Westphalian) authority in health governance is one important structural reason for the fragmented, chaotic, and ineffective response to Covid-19. The failure of Westphalian governance responses to the pandemic provides a unique opportunity for post-Westphalian governance structures to be established and contribute to reforming international pandemic preparedness. While this is unlikely to happen soon at the global level, a comprehensive framework is emerging at the European Union level in the form of a European Health Union. Through a combined conceptualisation of supranational governance and the securitisation process of international health crises, Covid-19 has opened the door to post-Westphalian health governance coordinated by the European Commission.

The future of zoonotic risk prediction

In the light of the urgency raised by the COVID-19 pandemic, global investment in wildlife virology is likely to increase, and new surveillance programmes will identify hundreds of novel viruses that might someday pose a threat to humans. To support the extensive task of laboratory characterization, scientists may increasingly rely on data-driven rubrics or machine learning models that learn from known zoonoses to identify which animal pathogens could someday pose a threat to global health. We synthesize the findings of an interdisciplinary workshop on zoonotic risk technologies to answer the following questions. What are the prerequisites, in terms of open data, equity and interdisciplinary collaboration, to the development and application of those tools? What effect could the technology have on global health? Who would control that technology, who would have access to it and who would benefit from it? Would it improve pandemic prevention? Could it create new challenges? This article is part of the theme issue 'Infectious disease macroecology: parasite diversity and dynamics across the globe'.

Advocating for Greater Inclusion of Marginalized and Forgotten Populations in COVID19 Vaccine Rollouts

Objectives: Many countries recently approved a number of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. There is therefore growing optimism around the world about their future availability and effectiveness. However, supplies are likely to be limited and restricted to certain categories of individuals, at least initially. Thus, governments have suggested prioritization schemes to allocate such limited supplies. The majority of such schemes are said to be developed to safeguard the weakest sections of society; that is, healthcare personnel and the elderly. Methods: In this work, we analyse three case studies (incarcerated people; homeless people, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants). We propose a bioethical argument that frames the discussion by describing the salient facts about each of the three populations and then argue that these characteristics entail inclusion and prioritization in the queue for vaccination in their country of residence. Results: Through an analysis informed by ethical considerations revolving around the concepts of fairness and equality, we try to raise awareness of these important issues among decision makers. Conclusion: Our goal is to advocate for the development of more inclusive policies and frameworks in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine allocation and, in general, in all scenarios in which there is a shortage of optimal care and treatments.

Global access to COVID-19 vaccines: a scoping review of factors that may influence equitable access for low and middle-income countries

OBJECTIVE

To identify the factors contributing to equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines for low and middle-income countries (LMIC).

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review following the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews and a five-stage framework for scoping studies. We performed systematic searches for published peer-reviewed literature in five databases: Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus and COVID-19 Evidence Epistemonikos (August 2020, updated May 2021).

RESULTS

Systematic selection according to predefined criteria resulted in the final inclusion of 45 peer-reviewed articles, with no limitations on study design or publication type. We derived four key factors that potentially influence equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines in LMICs: (1) collectively agreed global mechanisms or frameworks; (2) bilateral purchasing, contracting, and vaccine prices; (3) vaccine manufacturing that is supported by sharing know-how; and (4) countries' strength in implementing vaccination programmes.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review highlights the ongoing challenges for the international community in ensuring equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines for LMICs. The literature suggests that vaccine manufacturing can influence the supply of vaccines, as can the role of patent holders who can influence global governance through their role in the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines. Our findings indicate that including the principles of equitable access throughout vaccine research and development, procurement, scale-up and distribution processes can support equitable access for LMICs. Advances made with mRNA vaccines may have additional benefits in relation to expanding the manufacturing of other vaccine. Finally, the exploration and scale-up of such capacities of LMICs are likely to prove to be a valuable investment, even after the pandemic.

Vaccine injury compensation: the Israeli case

Background

Following other countries, Israel passed the Vaccine Injury Compensation Law in 1989, which provides for compensation to vaccine recipients who had suffered injuries without proving negligence. In 2021, after deliberations between the ministries of health and of finance Covid-19 vaccines (administered from the beginning of the campaign on December 20, 2020 and up to December 21, 2022) were included within the compensation law. The current study aims to examine the objectives of Israel’s Vaccine Injury Compensation Law, at the time of its enactment, and to explore barriers to their fulfillment. These issues are especially relevant in light of the discussions held on the option for liability exemption which excludes the possibility of redress from the Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers in case of injury attributed to the vaccine, and considering the heavy burden of proof required in standard tort law.

Methods

The study employed a qualitative methodology which made use of both content analysis of relevant documents and in-depth interviews.

Results

In passing the Vaccine Injury Compensation Law, legislators sought to assist vaccine recipients who had suffered injuries by both lowering their burden of proof as well as establishing a short and efficient procedure for deliberating their claims. Furthermore, legislators believed that the assurance of compensation to vaccine recipients who had suffered injuries would help to encourage a high rate of vaccination compliance. An examination of the law’s implementation over time revealed that the aforementioned goals were not attained.

Conclusions

Implementation of the law since its enactment missed the opportunity to fulfill its original purposes to promote public health fundamental principles of fairness and solidarity. In addition, the adversarial proceedings as well as some of the law’s provisions have the potential to undermine public trust in the State’s willingness to grant compensation for injuries that are attributed to vaccines and thereby subvert the law’s pivotal objective of promoting trust and vaccine compliance. We suggest that allowing circumstantial evidence as to an association between vaccine and an injury, transitioning to administrative deliberation, making available to the public details of cases where compensation was awarded, as well as other possible emendations would help it better reflect the values of fairness and solidarity that underlying the law's purpose. These would also promote the level of trust in healthcare authorities which is essential to preserving high vaccine coverage.

Germline genome modification through novel political, ethical, and social lenses

Much has been written about gene modifying technologies (GMTs), with a particularly strong focus on human germline genome editing (HGGE) sparked by its unprecedented clinical research application in 2018, shocking the scientific community. This paper applies political, ethical, and social lenses to aspects of HGGE to uncover previously underexplored considerations that are important to reflect on in global discussions. By exploring 4 areas-(1) just distribution of HGGE benefits through a realist lens; (2) HGGE through a national interest lens; (3) "broad societal consensus" through a structural injustice lens; and (4) HGGE through a scientific trustworthiness lens-a broader perspective is offered, which ultimately aims to enrich further debates and inform well-considered solutions for developments in this field. The application of these lenses also brings to light the fact that all discussions about scientific developments involve a conscious or unconscious application of a lens that shapes the direction of our thinking.

The legal nature of the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on contractual obligations applied in human rights

Purpose

Under international human rights law, states can limit the exercise of most human rights if it is necessary to protect the rights of others or collective interests. The hazards of epidemics and diseases have raised many legal, economic and social issues in their link with global health security, which renew the discussion regarding the effects of the COVID-19 on some civil and commercial transactions and financial and tax obligations. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to discuss the effects of COVID-19 on contractual obligations.

Design/methodology/approach

In this research, we are going to follow the method of the analytical and applied approach at the same time by analyzing the cases in which contractual obligations are affected by the circumstances of the COVID-19 and its legal implications, as well as to apply the theories related to this aspect to different cases.

Findings

The result of the study funded that the legal adaptation of the COVID-19 pandemic is limited to the theory of emergency circumstances and the theory of the force majeure, and the matter remains in the hands of the trial judge to attribute the incident imposed on him to one of the two cases according to the circumstances of the case.

Originality/value

The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on contractual obligations should be applied on each contract separately according to the extent of its impact on the contractors because the spread of the virus may have an impact on the obligations of one of the contractors, leading to exhaustion of the debtor, or it may lead to the impossibility of implementing the obligation.

Ethical Dimensions of Public Health Actions and Policies With Special Focus on COVID-19

During pandemics, the ethicists, public health professionals, and human rights advocates raise a red flag about different public health actions that should, at best, be addressed through integrated, global policies. How to rationalize the healthcare resources and prioritize the cases is not a recent challenge but the serious concern about that is how to achieve this while not increasing the vulnerability of the disadvantaged population. Healthcare professionals use different scoring systems as a part of their decision-making so the medical teams and triage committees can allocate resources for predictable health outcomes and prognosis as well as to appropriately triage the patients accordingly. However, the value of the existing scoring systems to manage COVID-19 cases is not well-established yet. Part of this problem includes managing non-COVID patients with chronic medical conditions like non-communicable diseases and addressing their medical needs during the pandemic complex context in a way to avoid worsening their conditions and, on the other hand, avoid hindering the establishment of comprehensive standards for dealing with COVID-19. In this article, we discuss this dilemma as well as how preexisting ethical standards were challenged by COVID-19. We also discuss how monitoring the consistent application of ethical standards during the medical trials of new medications, vaccines, or unproven medical interventions is also a critical issue.

A data driven agent-based model that recommends non-pharmaceutical interventions to suppress Coronavirus disease 2019 resurgence in megacities

Before herd immunity against Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is achieved by mass vaccination, science-based guidelines for non-pharmaceutical interventions are urgently needed to reopen megacities. This study integrated massive mobile phone tracking records, census data and building characteristics into a spatially explicit agent-based model to simulate COVID-19 spread among 11.2 million individuals living in Shenzhen City, China. After validation by local epidemiological observations, the model was used to assess the probability of COVID-19 resurgence if sporadic cases occurred in a fully reopened city. Combined scenarios of three critical non-pharmaceutical interventions (contact tracing, mask wearing and prompt testing) were assessed at various levels of public compliance. Our results show a greater than 50% chance of disease resurgence if the city reopened without contact tracing. However, tracing household contacts, in combination with mandatory mask use and prompt testing, could suppress the probability of resurgence under 5% within four weeks. If household contact tracing could be expanded to work/class group members, the COVID resurgence could be avoided if 80% of the population wear facemasks and 40% comply with prompt testing. Our assessment, including modelling for different scenarios, helps public health practitioners tailor interventions within Shenzhen City and other world megacities under a variety of suppression timelines, risk tolerance, healthcare capacity and public compliance.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, where do we stand?

Vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the Covid-19 pandemic, represents a major infection control strategy in the absence of effective treatment of the disease to date. Unprecedented mobilization has led to the development of a large number of projects, some of which have already been in test in humans for several months. The first efficacy and safety data are expected in the coming weeks. New vaccine technologies are being evaluated (RNA, replicating or non-replicating viral vectors), further increasing the chances of success. The criteria for evaluating vaccines-despite the exceptional speed of their development-must remain rigorous enough to ensure their acceptance by the population. Beyond their development, mass production and equitable distribution raise many questions. Finally, vaccination can only be successfully implemented if health professionals and the population are convinced of its validity, which implies particular attention to the quality of the information given and the methods of communication.

International Collaboration to Ensure Equitable Access to Vaccines for COVID-19: The ACT-Accelerator and the COVAX Facility

Policy Points Equitable access to a COVID-19 vaccine in all countries remains a key policy objective, but experience of previous pandemics suggests access will be limited in developing countries, despite the rapid development of three successful vaccine candidates. The COVAX Facility seeks to address this important issue, but the prevalence of vaccine nationalism threatens to limit the ability of the facility to meet both its funding targets and its ambitious goals for vaccine procurement. A failure to adequately address the underlying lack of infrastructure in developing countries threatens to further limit the success of the COVAX Facility.

CONTEXT

Significant effort has been directed toward developing a COVID-19 vaccine, which is viewed as the route out of the pandemic. Much of this effort has coalesced around COVAX, the multilateral initiative aimed at accelerating the development of COVID-19 vaccines, and ensuring they are equitably available in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This paper represents the first significant analysis of COVAX, and the extent to which it can be said to have successfully met these aims.

METHODS

This paper draws on the publicly available policy documents made available by the COVAX initiatives, as well as position papers and public statements from governments around the world with respect to COVID-19 vaccines and equitable access. We analyze the academic literature regarding access to vaccines during the H1N1 pandemic. Finally, we consider the WHO Global Allocation System, and its principles, which are intended to guide COVAX vaccine deployment.

FINDINGS

We argue that the funding mechanism deployed by the COVAX Pillar appears to be effective at fostering at-risk investments in research and development and the production of doses in advance of confirmation of clinical efficacy, but caution that this represents a win-win situation for vaccine manufacturers, providing them with opportunity to benefit regardless of whether their vaccine candidate ever goes on to gain regulatory approval. We also argue that the success of the COVAX Facility with respect to equitable access to vaccine is likely to be limited, primarily as a result of the prevalence of vaccine nationalism, whereby countries adopt policies which heavily prioritize their own public health needs at the expense of others.

CONCLUSIONS

Current efforts through COVAX have greatly accelerated the development of vaccines against COVID-19, but these benefits are unlikely to flow to LMICs, largely due to the threat of vaccine nationalism.

Leave no one behind: ensuring access to COVID-19 vaccines for refugee and displaced populations

The Spanish translation of this Comment, provided as Supplementary Information , has not been edited by the publisher.

Epidemiological impact of prioritising SARS-CoV-2 vaccination by antibody status: mathematical modelling analyses

BACKGROUND

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been developed, but their availability falls far short of global needs. This study aimed to investigate the impact of prioritising available doses on the basis of recipient antibody status, that is by exposure status, using Qatar as an example.

METHODS

Vaccination impact (defined as the reduction in infection incidence and the number of vaccinations needed to avert one infection or one adverse disease outcome) was assessed under different scale-up scenarios using a deterministic meta-population mathematical model describing SARS-CoV-2 transmission and disease progression in the presence of vaccination.

RESULTS

For a vaccine that protects against infection with an efficacy of 95%, half as many vaccinations were needed to avert one infection, disease outcome or death by prioritising antibody-negative individuals for vaccination. Prioritisation by antibody status reduced incidence at a faster rate and led to faster elimination of infection and return to normalcy. Further prioritisation by age group amplified the gains of prioritisation by antibody status. Gains from prioritisation by antibody status were largest in settings where the proportion of the population already infected at the commencement of vaccination was 30%-60%. For a vaccine that only protects against disease and not infection, vaccine impact was reduced by half, whether this impact was measured in terms of averted infections or disease outcomes, but the relative gains from using antibody status to prioritise vaccination recipients were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Major health and economic gains can be achieved more quickly by prioritizing those who are antibody-negative while doses of the vaccine remain in short supply.

Vaccine ethics: an ethical framework for global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines

This paper addresses the just distribution of vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 virus and sets forth an ethical framework that prioritises frontline and essential workers, people at high risk of severe disease or death, and people at high risk of infection. Section I makes the case that vaccine distribution should occur at a global level in order to accelerate development and fair, efficient vaccine allocation. Section II puts forth ethical values to guide vaccine distribution including helping people with the greatest need, reducing health disparity, saving the most lives and promoting narrow social utility. It also responds to objections which claim that earlier years have more value than later years. Section III puts forth a practical ethical framework to aid decision-makers and compares it with alternatives.

COVID-19 vaccine: Call for employees in international transportation industries and international travelers as the first priority in global distribution

While countries are in a hurry to obtain SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, we are concerned with the availability of vaccine and whether a vaccine will be available to all in need. We predicted three possible scenarios for vaccine distributions and urge an international united action on the worldwide equitable access. In case the international community does not reach a consensus on how to distribute the vaccine to achieve worldwide equitable access, we call for a distribution plan that includes the employees in international transportation industries and international travelers to halt the disease transmission and promote the recovery of the global economy.

Vaccines for COVID-19

Since the emergence of COVID-19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus at the end of 2019, there has been an explosion of vaccine development. By 24 September 2020, a staggering number of vaccines (more than 200) had started preclinical development, of which 43 had entered clinical trials, including some approaches that have not previously been licensed for human vaccines. Vaccines have been widely considered as part of the exit strategy to enable the return to previous patterns of working, schooling and socializing. Importantly, to effectively control the COVID-19 pandemic, production needs to be scaled-up from a small number of preclinical doses to enough filled vials to immunize the world's population, which requires close engagement with manufacturers and regulators. It will require a global effort to control the virus, necessitating equitable access for all countries to effective vaccines. This review explores the immune responses required to protect against SARS-CoV-2 and the potential for vaccine-induced immunopathology. We describe the profile of the different platforms and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. The review also addresses the critical steps between promising preclinical leads and manufacturing at scale. The issues faced during this pandemic and the platforms being developed to address it will be invaluable for future outbreak control. Nine months after the outbreak began we are at a point where preclinical and early clinical data are being generated for the vaccines; an overview of this important area will help our understanding of the next phases.