Negotiators have missed a deadline to settle how countries share dangerous pathogens and receive vaccines, tests and treatments in return, delaying a global pandemic treaty. The impasse ahead of the World Health Assembly in Geneva has drawn warnings that the world remains unprepared for another major outbreak.
Pathogen sharing dispute blocks signatures on accord
At the centre of the negotiations is the "pathogen access and benefit sharing" (Pabs) system. It would govern how countries supply information on bacteria or viruses capable of causing pandemics, and what access they're guaranteed to medical products developed using that information. The unresolved bargain links scientific cooperation directly to the distribution of its benefits. Originally reported by The Guardian.
The pandemic agreement was adopted in May 2025, but governments left Pabs for an annexe requiring further negotiations. Without that annexe, the accord can't open for signatures. It will enter into force 30 days after 60 countries have ratified it. Adoption therefore hasn't yet produced an operational framework for the international response to future outbreaks.
For countries being asked to share potentially dangerous material, the unresolved question is what enforceable assurances they receive in exchange. For researchers, the system would establish terms for accessing it.
Negotiators had intended to submit the system for approval at this month's assembly. Instead, they said more time was needed and suggested the 2027 World Health Assembly as a new deadline. That's a delay to completing the machinery of the deal, not simply a disagreement over wording. The treaty's implementation remains tied to resolving that gap.
African and European blocs divide over obligations
The dispute broadly pits developed countries against developing ones. The Group for Equity and the Africa Group want a standard contract requiring pharmaceutical companies to share medical products resulting from access to dangerous pathogens. For those negotiating blocs, access to the research material and obligations to supply the resulting products belong in the same arrangement. They don't want benefit sharing left entirely to voluntary decisions.
Several European countries argue that mandatory requirements could stifle research and development. They have reportedly proposed a hybrid model combining compulsory and voluntary provisions. The disagreement goes beyond who receives vaccines: it concerns how pharmaceutical companies would be bound to provide vaccines, tests and treatments after benefiting from countries' pathogen information.
Mistrust between richer and poorer countries has slowed work since world leaders announced plans for a pandemic treaty in March 2021. Disinformation circulating on social media has added another obstacle, including false claims that the accord would surrender national sovereignty to the World Health Organization. Those claims misrepresent the agreement; they aren't a description of what countries adopted.
But agreement on the overall aim hasn't settled the competing demands. Governments still need a formula that reconciles access for research with guarantees of shared benefits.
Sirleaf and Clark warn against further delay
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, former president of Liberia, and Helen Clark, former prime minister of New Zealand, called the failure to agree before the assembly "deeply regrettable" in a joint statement. They co-chaired the WHO's Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response, which recommended a pandemic agreement five years ago.
The panel's review of the international response to Covid-19 found that millions of lives could have been saved through faster, better coordinated action. Its warning now is that the underlying vulnerability hasn't gone away.
"If a new pathogen emerged today, the world remains largely unprepared for it. A lack of action to prevent and prepare for the next pandemic threat is a disservice to humanity," Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Helen Clark said in their statement.
Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO's director general, urged countries to "continue approaching the outstanding issues with a sense of urgency because the next pandemic is a matter of when, not if". His appeal puts the timetable for negotiations against the unpredictable arrival of another threat.
The May 2025 adoption was hailed as a public health victory amid fragmenting global cooperation and the US withdrawal from the WHO. But the Pabs negotiations remained unfinished.
Countries now face the task of turning that political commitment into workable obligations. Unless the Pabs annexe is completed, the pandemic treaty won't move to signatures, leaving its promised framework unavailable before the next disease emergency.
Originally reported by The Guardian. View original.