Law and power in pandemic negotiations
Policymaking via contract in South Africa’s dealings with Covid-19 vaccine companies
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 15541509 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Fatima Hassan (0000-0001-5633-0568, Center for Health Justice), Luis Gil Abinader (Georgetown University), Matthew M Kavanagh (0000-0003-1751-4828, Georgetown University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 2537688-2537688 |
| Publication date | 2025-07-23 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Global Public Health (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1744-1692 • E-ISSN: 1744-1706 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/17441692.2025.2537688 |
| PMID | 40700540 |
| OpenAlex | W4412605042 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 26 |
COVID-19 vaccine distribution was marked by deeply unequal access for Africa, Asia, and Latin America. This article analyzes negotiations between government and pharmaceutical companies, through the case of South Africa, to better understand the mechanisms through which the international order produced this inequality. A process we label policymaking via contract undermined state power during the pandemic. Using a unique archive of unredacted contracts and negotiation documents obtained through court order, our analysis shows that, given limited supply, monopolised production, and fragmented global governance, companies exercised exceptional power and made allocations between countries. South African officials objected, but eventually acceded, to 'unacceptable' provisions requiring large payments without binding commitments on volume or delivery timing and little recourse for non-delivery. This helps explain South Africa's delayed vaccine roll-out. New policy was made via contract on vaccine indemnification, intellectual property, and export controls. Secrecy provisions particularly disempowered government. In future pandemics, power dynamics revealed in these negotiations call into question whether voluntary mechanisms for allocating medical countermeasures globally can ever achieve equity. Instead of focusing on funding pooled procurement, global health actors should make greater use of international law, technology transfer, and cooperation on contract transparency to shift dynamics and empower states
2019-20 coronavirus outbreak · Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19 · Development economics · Economic growth · Economics · Negotiation · Outbreak · Pandemic · Political science · Power (physics · Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 · HIV/AIDS Impact and Responses · Human Rights and Development · Law · Legal Issues in South Africa · Medicine · Virology
The political origins of health inequity
Addressing power asymmetries in global health
Challenges in ensuring global access to Covid-19 vaccines
Rethinking Social Inquiry
Transparency in Negotiation of European Union With Big Pharma on Covid-19 Vaccines
“A passion to change the landscape and drive a renaissance”
Understanding and comparing HIV-related law and policy environments
Vaccine politics
Covax, vaccine donations and the politics of global vaccine inequity
Analysing power and politics in health policies and systems
Practice and power
Buying power and human rights in the supply chain
Doing' health policy analysis
Policy process theories in autocracies
Resistance and the Cultural Power of Law
| Citations per year | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |