[ad_1]
Boris Johnson has attributed the success of UK vaccines to “capitalism” and “greed”. Although these were crude comments, if the prime minister’s words are any indication of his vision of how the UK can recover from the pandemic, there are worrying implications for the country’s policies at home and abroad.
This is not the first time that Johnson has learned the wrong economic lessons from the Covid crisis. A few months ago he said with the same spirit that for “those on the left, who think that everything can be financed by Uncle Sugar the taxpayer… there comes a time when the State must step back and let the private sector move forward ”. . Johnson is also not the first person to see vaccines as a hit from the private sector. It is worth remembering that the “AstraZeneca” vaccine was created by scientists at the University of Oxford and developed and distributed by the pharmaceutical giant. However, the private sector has emerged as the winner of the public celebration of Covid vaccines.
In fact, an unprecedented amount of public funds has been invested in vaccine research, development and manufacturing. The top six vaccine candidates have received an estimated $ 12 billion (£ 8.7 billion) of public and taxpayer money, including $ 1.7 billion for the Oxford / AstraZeneca jab and $ 2.5 billion for the candidate from Pfizer / BioNTech. This level of investment represents a great risk, but it is not the only risk that the public sector has assumed. Governments have used “advanced market commitments” to ensure that private companies that successfully produce a Covid-19 vaccine are widely rewarded with large orders.
Public funds spent on research and development tend to be more entrepreneurial, in the sense that governments are investing in the early and riskiest stages of health innovation, before any market is viable. This is part of the reason that companies were able to develop a Covid vaccine in record time. As a new report from the UK Industrial Strategy Council makes clear, the rapid turnaround from Covid-19 vaccines would have been unthinkable without state involvement. Effective, “mission-oriented” Government coordination, from industrial policy to investment in life sciences, strategic public procurement and public-private partnerships, has been key to the success story of Covid-19 vaccines.
But there is an important caveat in this narrative. Despite the government’s awareness of the UK’s strength in the life sciences sector and its intention to push it forward through two new sectoral agreements, Britain’s ability to manufacture sufficient doses is far from a fact. Britain’s long-term failure to support its domestic manufacturing base is reflected in Recent disputes between the EU and the UK over the supply of the Oxford / AstraZeneca jab. Before the crisis, the UK was not interested in investing in a land-based industrial base to mass produce vaccines and other life science products. Had ministers come up with a plan to invest in British vaccine factories ahead of the coronavirus pandemic, they would likely have met with a less enthusiastic reception.
This is the benefit of hindsight. However, the hindsight also shows why a forward-thinking, long-term industrial strategy that invests in productivity and economic growth while focusing on broader challenges, such as the climate crisis and future pandemics, is vital. Rather than seeing now as the time to establish such a plan, Johnson is biding time for a sensible industrial strategy. The recently announced demise of the Industrial Strategy Council does not bode well for the assimilation of its valuable knowledge. While the government has pledged to double UK public R&D spending to £ 22bn a year by 2024-25, it is proposing cuts to the UK’s Research and Innovation (UKRI) budget, with the funding for international development projects cut in half.
If this undermines the infrastructure that was critical to the success of the vaccine in the UK, as seems likely, then the government’s newly founded Agency for Advanced Research and Invention (Aria) could risk becoming a costly distraction. In the US, the Advanced Research Projects Agency (Arpa) model, from which Aria is inspired, has been a huge success precisely because it sits within a vibrant, decentralized research infrastructure backed by public investment. in science, which the Biden administration is planning. boost.
The fact that these UK research cuts are coming during a global pandemic sends a troubling message about Johnson’s priorities. When he spoke of greed, he identified what is wrong with the system, not what deserves praise. A vaccine alone will not be enough to stop the coronavirus in its tracks, and the UK will not be safe from Covid-19 until the majority of the world’s population has been vaccinated. It is extremely difficult to see how greed will help ensure that the vaccine is available to all people, in all countries, for free.
Addressing the monopoly of pharmaceutical companies on science, knowledge and technology, and sharing it with as many countries as possible, will be critical to expanding and decentralizing vaccine manufacturing around the world. The World Health Organization has established a voluntary Covid-19 Technology Access Group (C-Tap) to enable governments and businesses to do just this. Additionally, South Africa and India have submitted a proposal to the WHO, supported by more than 100 countries, to temporarily relinquish intellectual property rights to Covid-related technologies. A recent poll found that 74% of people in the UK support these positions. In response, the government has bypassed the C-Tap and blocked the temporary waiver of intellectual property.
When greed is the guiding philosophy of a government, the “apartheid vaccine” is practically guaranteed. Already, 56% of the more than 455 million doses of vaccine have gone to people in high-income countries and only 0.1% have been administered in the 29 lowest-income countries. Covax, which aims to vaccinate up to 27% of the population in 92 of the poorest countries, is unlikely to be enough on its own.
Having done well with its own vaccine program, the UK should now be on a solid footing to help distribute a popular vaccine to the world. The UK government’s promise to donate surplus vaccines is a start, but it will be far from enough. What is needed is strong leadership and hope. Instead, however, the prime minister seems to have the anachronistic and counterproductive view that capitalism and greed are the ones that will vaccinate the world and help rebuild it after the pandemic.
-
Mariana Mazzucato is Professor of Innovation Economics and Public Value at University College London and Founding Director of the UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose (IIPP). His latest book is Mission Economy: A Moonshot Guide to Changing Capitalism; Henry Lishi Li is a researcher on health policy innovation and engagement at IIPP
