WHO Pandemic Agreement Nears Finish Line After Brazil’s Compromise

Introduction

On 13 April 2025, negotiators at the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that they were “very close” to a full pandemic agreement, with an accord “in principle” reached after three years of often tense talks.:contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}

The breakthrough came after an overnight negotiating marathon in Geneva, where delegates worked from Friday morning through to 9 a.m. Saturday to clean up outstanding brackets in the draft text. By sunrise, the entire agreement was effectively done except for one thorny issue: how far countries must go in sharing pandemic-related technology.:contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}

Brazil stepped in with a compromise formulation on technology transfer, easing a standoff between countries demanding stronger obligations for sharing know-how and those insisting that transfers remain voluntary. With that, member states prepared to reconvene for final formal talks, aiming to present a finished treaty to the World Health Assembly the following month.:contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}

This piece unpacks what has actually been agreed, why the last clause was so controversial, and what governments, health systems and citizens can start doing now to get ready for the next pandemic era.

Key Points

1. What Is the WHO Pandemic Agreement?

The WHO Pandemic Agreement is a new international treaty designed to strengthen global prevention, preparedness and response for future pandemics.:contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}

According to the draft text:

• Its objective is to reduce the risk and impact of pandemics by improving surveillance, information-sharing, access to countermeasures and long-term health system resilience.
• It is guided by equity, recognizing that low- and middle-income countries need fairer access to vaccines, medicines, diagnostics and protective equipment.:contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}
• It complements — rather than replaces — the existing International Health Regulations (IHR), aiming to close gaps exposed by COVID-19.:contentReference[oaicite:5]{index=5}

The agreement also includes provisions on sustainable financing, governance (a Conference of the Parties), transparency, and periodic reporting on implementation.

2. A Marathon Negotiation and an “Accord in Principle”

By the second week of April 2025, negotiators in the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) had entered what many described as make-or-break talks.

Key moments:

• All-night session: Delegates negotiated from Friday into Saturday, finally emerging around 9 a.m. with nearly all text agreed.:contentReference[oaicite:6]{index=6}
• Accord in principle: INB co-chair Anne-Claire Amprou told reporters that WHO member states had reached an “accord in principle” on how to tackle future pandemics, with national capitals still needing to sign off on the final text.:contentReference[oaicite:7]{index=7}
• Final steps: Delegations planned to reconvene on Tuesday to “green” the remaining sections, meaning full consensus, so that a final draft could be sent to the World Health Assembly (WHA) for adoption.:contentReference[oaicite:8]{index=8}

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus publicly thanked states for negotiating “more than 24 hours non-stop,” underlining the political weight behind the near-deal.:contentReference[oaicite:9]{index=9}

3. The Last Sticking Point: Technology Transfer

The only unresolved issue by 13 April concerned technology transfer for pandemic-related health products — vaccines, treatments, diagnostics and other tools.:contentReference[oaicite:10]{index=10}

The dispute revolved around whether the agreement should say that technology transfer must always be:

• “Voluntary” and
• “On mutually agreed terms”

Many developing countries and public-health advocates argued that inserting the word “voluntary” would undercut countries’ existing legal rights to use compulsory measures — such as compulsory licensing or emergency production orders — in extreme situations.:contentReference[oaicite:11]{index=11}

Their concerns were that:

• Some states already rely on laws like the U.S. Defense Production Act or Germany’s emergency health legislation to bypass purely voluntary arrangements in crises.:contentReference[oaicite:12]{index=12}
• Over-emphasising voluntariness could tilt the balance too far towards pharmaceutical companies and intellectual property holders.

On the other side, several high-income countries insisted that keeping transfers voluntary is crucial to protect incentives for innovation and private investment in new health technologies.:contentReference[oaicite:13]{index=13}

4. Brazil’s Compromise Formula

To bridge the divide, Brazil proposed a compromise interpretation for the phrase “as mutually agreed” in the article on technology transfer.:contentReference[oaicite:14]{index=14}

The compromise text:

• Affirms that technology transfer should be “willingly undertaken and on mutually agreed terms”.
• Clarifies that this is “without prejudice to the rights and obligations of the Parties under other international agreements.”:contentReference[oaicite:15]{index=15}

In practice, this does two things:

1. Reassures innovators and some wealthy states that transfers will not automatically be forced in every case.
2. Preserves legal space for governments, especially in emergencies, to use existing powers (like compulsory licenses) where international law already allows it.

Negotiators and observers signalled that this wording likely hit the sweet spot needed to unlock full agreement, paving the way for the text to be “greened” at the next session.:contentReference[oaicite:16]{index=16}

5. Why This Agreement Matters

If adopted by the World Health Assembly:

• It will become the first global, legally binding framework specifically focused on pandemics.
• Countries will commit to:
  • Strengthening core public health capacities (surveillance, labs, workforce).
  • Sharing information, samples and data more rapidly and transparently.
  • Improving equitable access to vaccines, medicines and diagnostics, including through financing and cooperation mechanisms.:contentReference[oaicite:17]{index=17}
• A new Coordinating Financial Mechanism will help channel resources, particularly to low- and middle-income countries, for preparedness and surge response.:contentReference[oaicite:18]{index=18}

For many health advocates, this is a hard-won but historic moment: an attempt to ensure that the next pandemic is not marked by the same brutal inequalities seen during COVID-19.

How To: Prepare for the New Pandemic Agreement Era

The agreement is negotiated by governments, but its impact will depend on how states, health systems, industry and civil society move from words to action. Here are practical steps for different actors.

For Governments

1. Map Legal Space for Technology and Access

• Review national laws on:
  • Compulsory licensing
  • Emergency production orders
  • Export controls and IP flexibilities
• Ensure they are compatible with the new agreement’s language yet still allow agile responses when access to vaccines or medicines is constrained.:contentReference[oaicite:19]{index=19}

A clear legal map will help avoid confusion in the next crisis.

2. Turn Commitments into Budget Lines

• Translate obligations on surveillance, workforce, labs and stockpiles into:
  • Medium-term investment plans
  • Annual budgets and contingency funds
• Use the forthcoming Coordinating Financial Mechanism and other global funds strategically, aligning national priorities with available support.:contentReference[oaicite:20]{index=20}

3. Build Whole-of-Government Pandemic Plans

Move beyond health ministries:

• Involve finance, trade, education, interior, agriculture and transport ministries in national pandemic strategies.
• Run regular simulation exercises that test decision-making across sectors — from border control to school closures and economic support.

For Health Systems and Institutions

1. Stress-Test Core Capacities

• Use the agreement’s objectives as a checklist to:
  • Evaluate lab networks and genomic surveillance.
  • Assess ICU capacity, oxygen access and supply chains for essential medicines.:contentReference[oaicite:21]{index=21}
• Identify vulnerabilities (rural areas, specific hospitals, data gaps) and prioritise upgrades.

2. Strengthen Data and Sample Sharing Protocols

• Update standard operating procedures for:
  • Reporting unusual outbreaks quickly to national authorities and WHO.
  • Sharing samples and genetic sequences while respecting privacy and biosecurity.
• Ensure legal and ethical frameworks are clear before the next emergency.

3. Deepen Partnerships

• Formalise partnerships with:
  • Neighbouring countries’ health facilities.
  • Universities and research institutes.
  • Non-governmental organisations active in outbreak response.

These networks can accelerate response when local capacity is overwhelmed.

For Industry and Innovators

1. Plan for “Mutually Agreed” Technology Sharing

• Map which parts of your portfolio could be:
  • Licensed to manufacturers in other regions.
  • Produced under tech-transfer partnerships in low- and middle-income countries.:contentReference[oaicite:22]{index=22}
• Develop template agreements in advance so that negotiations during a crisis focus on specifics, not starting from zero.

2. Align R&D with Equity Commitments

• Consider including access clauses in contracts linked to public funding, ensuring that publicly supported innovations can be deployed where they are most needed.
• Work with governments on mechanisms that reward innovation while guaranteeing affordability during declared pandemics.

For Civil Society and Citizens

1. Watch How Your Government Implements the Agreement

• Follow national debates on:
  • Ratification or approval of the treaty.
  • Changes to health, IP, and emergency legislation.
• Advocate for:
  • Transparency in pandemic planning.
  • Community participation in preparedness and response strategies, especially for marginalised groups.

2. Push for Community-Level Preparedness

• Encourage local authorities to:
  • Maintain updated emergency plans (for schools, workplaces, care homes).
  • Run regular public information campaigns on hygiene, vaccination and misinformation management.

3. Keep the Focus on Equity

• Support organisations that work on:
  • Vaccine equity.
  • Access to medicines.
  • Strengthening health systems in low-resource settings.

The pandemic agreement’s promise of fairness will only be real if it is backed by public pressure and sustained political will.

Conclusion

By 13 April 2025, the long-debated WHO Pandemic Agreement had crossed a critical threshold: an accord “in principle” after years of argument over sovereignty, equity and who controls life-saving technologies in a crisis.:contentReference[oaicite:23]{index=23}

The final hurdle — how to describe technology transfer — exposed deep tensions between the need for rapid, fair access and the desire to protect innovation incentives. Brazil’s compromise, clarifying “mutually agreed” terms while preserving existing legal flexibilities, appears to have unlocked consensus without satisfying everyone completely.:contentReference[oaicite:24]{index=24}

If the World Health Assembly approves the agreement, the world will have, for the first time, a comprehensive legal framework for pandemics. But its real impact will depend less on the elegance of its clauses and more on what happens next:

• Whether governments invest in resilient health systems rather than waiting for the next emergency.
• Whether industry embraces responsible sharing of technology when lives are at stake.
• Whether citizens and civil society keep pressing for equity and accountability.

The near-deal in Geneva is not the end of the story; it is the starting gun. The next pandemic will be the real test of whether this agreement is a historic turning point — or just another document filed away while the world repeats old mistakes.