Why would compulsory licensing of vaccines and COVID-19 treatments not lead to better access to innovation and benefits for patients?

There is an ongoing debate about certain national and international policy initiatives concerning the mandatory licensing of COVID-19 vaccine patents and we see the need to clarify certain concepts.

In the event of mandatory licensing, it is more than likely that the necessary manufacturing capacity, production conditions and health guarantees would not be met. Indeed, they are not easy to comply with as it is. The complexity of biomedical innovation requires highly professional and knowledgeable companies and entities with high production capacity, which also have expertise in risk and in complicated manufacturing and preservation processes. Currently, just over a dozen companies worldwide are capable of this. It would therefore be impossible for vaccines and treatments to reach patients on time and in the sanitary conditions required to deal with a global health pandemic such as COVID-19.

Innovation is planned, generated and sustained based primarily on its protection, among other important factors. Patent protection. Without patents, and without the exclusive right that a patent provides, there is no incentive to innovate.

If COVID-19 vaccines are subjected to mandatory licensing, there will be no future vaccines, no future treatments, and no future innovation in this field, while a dangerous precedent would be set across the board. R&D in this field would not be adequately recognised, rewarded and incentivised. With no reward for innovation, exorbitant funding costs and a high risk that innovation will not succeed, we would be left without vaccines and treatments. Patient health would, in turn, be directly affected. In short, it would be a terrible strategic decision and would lead innovation towards a dead end.

So what are the keys to equitable and adequate access to COVID-19 vaccines and treatments?

Joint procurement, corporate social responsibility policies that facilitate access to developing countries, and private and public-private partnerships. All three are currently under way:

The European Commission’s pandemic-time joint procurement mechanism for vaccines and antiviral treatments, known as ‘Joint Procurement Agreements’. These agreements allow for equitable access, balanced pricing and security of supply and have been successfully used during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the conclusion of contracts with major vaccine and antiviral companies for coronavirus vaccines and treatments.

Corporate social responsibility policies and actions aimed at meeting the needs of developing countries, such as sending surplus vaccines and donating vaccines and treatments.

Clear commitment to private collaboration between companies, as well as public-private collaboration, to address global health challenges. There are many examples in the current health crisis of financing agreements and manufacturing agreements with companies that develop vaccines to increase and guarantee production with the highest standards of quality and safety. These agreements involve technology transfer for production, within a clear intellectual property framework.

The processes are so complex that strict controls are needed, including regulatory and legal ones, which compulsory licensing would not guarantee, instead running the risk of parallel markets that would prevent access to safe, quality vaccines and treatments.

This post is also available in: Spanish