The United States is well placed to help these efforts and dozens of others in the global south because it is a scientific superpower, with some of the strongest research institutions in the world as well as a thriving biotechnology and pharmaceutical sector. Moreover, collaboration between scientists in the United States and developing countries has the added benefit of fostering good will and communication that’s vital in a fast-moving epidemic.
However, U.S. support is modest thus far. The National Institutes of Health has signed agreements to collaborate with the W.H.O.’s initiative, but this partnership does not include direct funding. And the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation has given loans totaling approximately $125 million to two African vaccine manufacturers, Aspen Pharmacare and the Pasteur Institute in Dakar. But to develop a biotechnology sector capable of producing vaccines throughout the developing world, much more is needed.
Country regulatory systems need to be strengthened to ensure that vaccines produced in the global south are safe and of high quality. Countries also need a scientific work force capable of vaccine research and production. On both fronts, the United States could help through training programs at the Food and Drug Administration, the N.I.H. and at universities. “We want to make investments strategically so that this is long-lasting,” said Nafisa Jiwani, the managing director for health initiatives at the Development Finance Corporation.
Nascent vaccine manufacturers will also need buyers to stay afloat. As one of the top donors to the Gavi vaccine alliance, which procures vaccines for dozens of lower-income countries, the United States could encourage the organization to pay a premium for vaccines made in Africa or Latin America, Mr. Konyndyk said.
A new crop of manufacturers in Africa and Latin America may not be able to develop their own unique vaccines at first, because many countries in those regions lack the well-funded foundation for research that the United States has. Therefore, technology transfer, in which companies in the global north share their knowledge and intellectual property with researchers in the global south, is essential. But a strictly voluntary approach to technology transfer is unlikely to deliver. And once a pharmaceutical company exclusively owns the rights to a lucrative product, it’s difficult for the U.S. government to compel it to share. “The dynamic we saw in the pandemic was that companies held all the leverage because everyone’s priority was to just get doses,” Mr. Konyndyk said.
But going forward, the U.S. government can change how it funds research so that more technology transfer happens in the future.
For example, the N.I.H. could share its vaccine-related intellectual property with the W.H.O., and the organization could transfer it to vetted groups in the global south. Or in the case of another Operation Warp Speed, public investments could come with a stipulation that companies transfer technology to specific companies in developing countries if supplies are limited in a health emergency.