The International journal of health planning and management · 2025
'I Think From the Beginning, the Ambitions Were Compromised': A Case Study of COVAX as Vaccine Equity Policy Operationalisation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nunes Charnele, Mckee Martin, Rushton Simon, Howard Natasha
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: COVAX was designed to support the discovery, development, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines globally, at scale and pace. This article examines how COVAX promoted vaccine equity and what lessons can be learnt.
METHODS: Informed by a scoping review of lessons learnt from GHPs, we reviewed 109 documents related to COVAX and other GHPs and conducted 23 key informant interviews with representatives from GHPs, civil society, academia, and the private sector. Data were synthesised thematically using Rushton and Williams's framework.
RESULTS: Data showed how the global health policy context shaped COVAX, with experience with Gavi and CEPI influencing its governance structure. We highlighted weaknesses in transparency and accountability, limited engagement with civil society organisations [CSO] and LMIC stakeholders, contested policy debates (e.g., different framing) and paradigms (e.g., prioritising technical and financial over political solutions).
CONCLUSIONS: COVAX largely replicated existing GHP approaches, subsidising research and development and then paying for resulting discoveries. While recognising how this reflects global power structures, in the inevitable next global health crisis, the international health community must advocate for greater LMIC and CSO involvement in decision-making, sharing of intellectual property and technology transfer, and rebalancing of flows of innovation costs and benefits to a broader range of actors across public and private sectors.
METHODS: Informed by a scoping review of lessons learnt from GHPs, we reviewed 109 documents related to COVAX and other GHPs and conducted 23 key informant interviews with representatives from GHPs, civil society, academia, and the private sector. Data were synthesised thematically using Rushton and Williams's framework.
RESULTS: Data showed how the global health policy context shaped COVAX, with experience with Gavi and CEPI influencing its governance structure. We highlighted weaknesses in transparency and accountability, limited engagement with civil society organisations [CSO] and LMIC stakeholders, contested policy debates (e.g., different framing) and paradigms (e.g., prioritising technical and financial over political solutions).
CONCLUSIONS: COVAX largely replicated existing GHP approaches, subsidising research and development and then paying for resulting discoveries. While recognising how this reflects global power structures, in the inevitable next global health crisis, the international health community must advocate for greater LMIC and CSO involvement in decision-making, sharing of intellectual property and technology transfer, and rebalancing of flows of innovation costs and benefits to a broader range of actors across public and private sectors.