Read on Twitter
@Neil_Irwin from @nytimes: "capitalism can save the day but only when the government exercises its power to guide the economy and act as the ultimate absorber of risk" ... Great point about markets' failure to incentivize R&D, but gov not complete (1) https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/14/upshot/coronavirus-capitalism-vaccine.html?smid=tw-share
@Neil_Irwin explains purchase agreements from government as _the_ way to bridge the incentive gap. Not true: philanthropy like @gatesfoundation and public-private partnerships like @gavi have done advance market commitments in #GlobalHealth for decades (2) https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/what-advance-market-commitment-and-how-could-it-help-beat-covid-19
In fact, it's arguably one of the best applications of big philanthropy like the @gatesfoundation. A one-time spend that creates a lasting public good. Once the R&D is done, it doesn't have to be done again. (3) https://bit.ly/35w9lbX
AMCs have been used successfully many times already, for example to create the #pneumococcal conjugate vaccine at costs that are low enough to meet demand. (4) https://www.gavi.org/investing-gavi/innovative-financing/pneumococcal-amc
There are other mechanisms bridge the incentives too:
"Push" systems like grants and product development partnerships
"Pull" systems like patents, price discrimination, priority review vouchers, advance purchase agreements, advance market commitments (5) https://bit.ly/35woGcn
"Push" systems like grants and product development partnerships
"Pull" systems like patents, price discrimination, priority review vouchers, advance purchase agreements, advance market commitments (5) https://bit.ly/35woGcn
Finally, the Health Impact Fund ( @HealthImpact) represents the most ambitious type of mechanism for this problem. They pay for lives saved, not doses given. Leading minds like @aidanhollis might argue that this is better than a purchase agreement for #COVID19 #Vaccines
