Public-private cooperation for pandemic preparedness (PANPREP) (completed)

• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée, Sophie Harman, Simon Rushton & Katerini Storeng (2025). Global health partnerships for a post-2030 agenda. The Lancet. ISSN 0140-6736. 405(10477), p. 514–516. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)02816-2. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2025). The Business of Pandemic Intelligence: Implications for Global Health Governance. Global Policy. ISSN 1758-5880. 16(5), p. 1039–1050. doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.70050. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  During the Covid-19 pandemic, tech startups emerged as important providers of pandemic intelligence, leveraging diverse data sources and advanced computational methods to advise public policy on disease spread and response strategies. This article presents a case study of two tech startups, Airfinity and BlueDot, situating their rise within the increasing private-sector influence in a domain traditionally dominated by the World Health Organization (WHO) and its national public health agencies. It examines how these firms established epistemic authority through the integration of proprietary data, artificial intelligence and novel expertise, enhancing their scientific credibility and gaining access to key global and national policy arenas and public-sector contracts. The article discusses how the emergence of a commercial market for pandemic intelligence dilutes the WHO's authority within global disease surveillance and raises concerns about outsourcing essential public health insights to the private sector. Further, it explores how the business of pandemic intelligence transforms public health data into commercial products, challenging norms that posit equity and public purpose as basis for the digital transformation of the public health sphere. This analysis contributes to ongoing debates about the technology sector's expanding influence over public health and policy, highlighting the growing role of private power in global governance.

• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée, Katerini Storeng & Simon Rushton (2025). The Gates Foundation’s network diplomacy in European donor countries. Globalization and Health. 21. doi: 10.1186/s12992-025-01112-9. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The Gates Foundation is the most influential private philanthropic foundation in global health and development. This article examines how the Foundation has developed an unparalleled capacity to rally other donors to its priorities, which include the development and distribution of technological tools to reduce the burden of infectious disease and child mortality in the world’s most impoverished regions. Using publicly available data, the article analyses the Gates Foundation’s strategic engagement in Europe, focusing on its bureaucratic presence, government relations, and grant-making in its three European focus countries: the United Kingdom (UK), Germany and France. It highlights that, since 2010, the Gates Foundation has built a bureaucratic infrastructure akin to a diplomatic service, establishing country offices in London and Berlin alongside representation in Paris, Brussels and Stockholm. Through regular engagement with elected officials and bureaucrats in these nations, the Foundation has forged many strategic partnerships, effectively leveraging European states’ diplomatic power in wider political forums and alliances. Moreover, the Foundation has disbursed billions in grants to recipients in the UK, Germany, and France to advance research and innovation on its priority health issues, implement programs in poor countries, and develop policy and advocacy related to global health and development. Combined, these efforts have contributed to securing substantial and recurrent government co-investment in Gates-supported initiatives. The article proposes that the Foundation exercises a form of ‘network diplomacy’ that entails building and maintaining wide networks across European societies with the aim of aligning donor governments’ overseas development assistance and policies with the Foundation’s strategic objectives in global health and development. The concept of network diplomacy offers a new perspective on how the Gates Foundation has consolidated and expanded its transnational political presence through an approach that is strategic, bureaucratised and institutionalised, rather than simply a product of its financial might. The findings amplify existing concerns regarding the sway of private foundations over public policy, their impact on democratic accountability and governance in donor states, and the resultant implications for the Foundation’s intended beneficiaries in low- and middle-income countries.

• Felix Stein & Desmond James Mcneill (2025). Blended finance to the rescue? Subsidies, vaccine bonds and matching funds in global health. Global Public Health. ISSN 1744-1692. 20(1). doi: 10.1080/17441692.2025.2468338. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  To close persistent global health financing gaps, policymakers have in recent years promoted the idea of ‘blended finance’, i.e. the strategic use of public funds to attract additional private sector investment. To better understand this trend, this paper studies three major blended finance instruments, namely vaccine bonds, advanced market commitments, and matching funds. In doing so, this paper makes two important contributions. On a practical level, it shows that these three blended finance instruments tend to be expensive and of questionable effectiveness. Their high costs favour large corporate actors, private investors and middlemen, while their benefits for potential beneficiaries in low- and middle-income countries and for public donors remain unclear. On a theoretical level, the paper asks why these instruments remain popular in policy circles despite their shortcomings. It finds that blended finance mechanisms proliferate thanks to their seemingly innovative nature, a constant emphasis on urgency or crisis, and the promise of combining market-based self-interest with positive social impact. The paper ends on a call for much greater critical scrutiny concerning blended financing mechanisms.

• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2024). The rising authority and agency of public-private partnerships in global health governance. Policy and Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Policy Research. ISSN 1449-4035. 43(1), p. 25–40. doi: 10.1093/polsoc/puad032. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Global public–private partnerships (PPPs) have become prominent in efforts to address global challenges, particularly in the health field. In the scholarly literature, global PPPs have been conceptualized as arenas for voluntary public–private cooperation rather than agents of global governance. This paper challenges this approach, arguing that a sub-class of highly institutionalized partnerships have developed into transnational bureaucracies that, much like international organizations, can draw from their administrative capacities to exercise agency and gain and consolidate authority over time. To substantiate this argument, I present an in-depth analysis of five global health partnerships that played a leading role in the Access to Covid-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A), the initiative that sought to coordinate the global response to covid-19. Based on extensive document review and analysis of the ACT-A PPPs —Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation, Unitaid, and The Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics — I show how these partnerships’ leadership role during the pandemic emerged from a decade long build-up of PPP agency. These organizations gained administrative capacities that enabled them to increase their authority vis-à-vis their donors, boards, and other external actors through three interlinked strategies: (a) developing greater financial autonomy; (b) expanding their mandates (including toward pandemic preparedness and response); and (c) establishing inter-partnership cooperation and mutual representation to other forums. My analysis suggests the need for future research to consider highly institutionalized PPPs as agents of global governance and to explore empiric

• Desmond James Mcneill (2024). Global ethics in practice. Journal of Global Ethics. ISSN 1744-9626. 20(1), p. 120–126. doi: 10.1080/17449626.2024.2339442. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Katerini Storeng (2022). COVAX, vaccine donations and the politics of global vaccine inequity. Globalization and Health. 18(1). doi: 10.1186/s12992-022-00801-z. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Background In 2021, donor countries, the pharmaceutical industry, and the COVAX initiative promoted vaccine donation or “dose-sharing” as a main solution to the inequitable global distribution of Covid-19 vaccines. COVAX positioned itself as a global vaccine-sharing hub that promised to share doses “equitably, effectively and transparently,” according to rational criteria overseen by independent scientists. This article provides a critical analysis of the principles and practice of “dose-sharing,” showing how it reveals the politics at play within COVAX. Results Donated doses were an important source of COVAX’s vaccine supply in 2021, accounting for 60% of the doses the initiative delivered (543 million out of 910 million). However, donations could not compensate fully for COVAX’s persistent procurement struggles: it delivered less than half of the two billion doses it originally projected for 2021, a fraction of the 9.25 billion doses that were administered globally in 2021. Donor countries and vaccine manufacturers systematically broke COVAX’s principles for maximizing the impact of dose-sharing, delivering doses late, in smaller quantities than promised, and in ad hoc ways that made roll-out in recipient countries difficult. Some donors even earmarked doses for specific recipients, complicating and potentially undermining COVAX’s equitable allocation mechanism. Conclusions COVAX’s pivot from global vaccine procurement mechanism to dose-sharing hub can be seen as a “win-win-win” solution for COVAX itself (who could claim success by having access to more doses), for donor countries (who could rebrand themselves as charitable donors rather than “vaccine hoarders”), and for the pharmaceutical industry (maintaining the status quo on intellectual property rights and protecting their commercial interests). Although dose-sharing helped COVAX’s vaccine delivery, its impact was undermined by donors’ and industry’s pursuit of national security, diplomatic and commercial interests, which COVAX largely accommodated. The lack of transparency and accountability mechanisms within COVAX’s overly complex governance structure as a global public-private partnership enabled these practices.

• Felix Stein, Katerini Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2022). Global health nonsense. The BMJ. 379. doi: 10.1136/bmj.o2932. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Spin, hyperbole, meaningless buzzwords, and technocratic jargon have become increasingly common in global health discourse. They are part of a broader phenomenon labelled “global health nonsense” Three main forms of global health nonsense are obfuscation, misrepresentation, and omission of relevant information Global health nonsense must be called out, because it stifles collective efforts to understand, critically assess, and improve global health governance

• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng, Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Felix Stein (2021). COVAX and the rise of the ‘super public private partnership’ for global health. Global Public Health. ISSN 1744-1692. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2021.1987502. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  COVAX, the vaccines pillar of the Access to Covid-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A), has been promoted as ‘the only global solution' to vaccine equity and ending the Covid-19 pandemic. ACT-A and COVAX build on the public-private partnership (PPP) model that dominates global health governance, but take it to a new level, constituting an experimental form that we call the ‘super-PPP'. Based on an analysis of COVAX's governance structure and its difficulties in achieving its aims, we identify several features of the super-PPP model. First, it aims to coordinate the fragmented global health field by bringing together existing PPPs in an extraordinarily complex Russian Matryoshka doll-like structure. Second, it attempts to scale up a governance model designed for donor-dependent countries to tackle a health crisis affecting the entire world, pitting it against the self-interest of its wealthiest government partners. Third, the super-PPP's structural complexity obscures the vast differences between constituent partners, giving pharmaceutical corporations substantial power and making public representation, transparency, and accountability elusive. As a super-PPP, COVAX reproduces and amplifies challenges associated with the established PPPs it incorporates. COVAX's limited success has sparked a crisis of legitimacy for the voluntary, charity-based partnership model in global health, raising questions about its future.

• Marlee Tichenor, Janelle Winters, Katerini Storeng, Jesse B. Bump, Jean-Paul Gaudilliére & Martin Gorsky [Show all 17 contributors for this article] (2021). Interrogating the World Bank’s role in global health knowledge production, governance, and finance. Globalization and Health. doi: 10.1186/s12992-021-00761-w. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Background In the nearly half century since it began lending for population projects, the World Bank has become one of the largest financiers of global health projects and programs, a powerful voice in shaping health agendas in global governance spaces, and a mass producer of evidentiary knowledge for its preferred global health interventions. How can social scientists interrogate the role of the World Bank in shaping ‘global health’ in the current era? Main body As a group of historians, social scientists, and public health officials with experience studying the effects of the institution’s investment in health, we identify three challenges to this research. First, a future research agenda requires recognizing that the Bank is not a monolith, but rather has distinct inter-organizational groups that have shaped investment and discourse in complicated, and sometimes contradictory, ways. Second, we must consider how its influence on health policy and investment has changed significantly over time. Third, we must analyze its modes of engagement with other institutions within the global health landscape, and with the private sector. The unique relationships between Bank entities and countries that shape health policy, and the Bank’s position as a center of research, permit it to have a formative influence on health economics as applied to international development. Addressing these challenges, we propose a future research agenda for the Bank’s influence on global health through three overlapping objects of and domains for study: knowledge-based (shaping health policy knowledge), governance-based (shaping health governance), and finance-based (shaping health financing). We provide a review of case studies in each of these categories to inform this research agenda. Conclusions As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to rage, and as state and non-state actors work to build more inclusive and robust health systems around the world, it is more important than ever to consider how to best document and analyze the impacts of Bank’s financial and technical investments in the Global South.

• Felix Stein (2021). Risky business: COVAX and the financialization of global vaccine equity. Globalization and Health. doi: 10.1186/s12992-021-00763-8. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Background During the first year and a half of the COVID-19 pandemic, COVAX has been the world’s most prominent effort to ensure equitable access to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Launched as part of the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator (Act-A) in June 2020, COVAX suggested to serve as a vaccine buyers’ and distribution club for countries around the world. It also aimed to support the pharmaceutical industry in speeding up and broadening vaccine development. While COVAX has recently come under critique for failing to bring about global vaccine equity, influential politicians and public health advocates insist that future iterations of it will improve pandemic preparedness. So far COVAX’s role in the ongoing financialization of global health, i.e. in the rise of financial concepts, motives, practices and institutions has not been analyzed. Methods This article describes and critically assesses COVAX’s financial logics, i.e. the concepts, arguments and financing flows on which COVAX relies. It is based on a review of over 109 COVAX related reports, ten in-depth interviews with global health experts working either in or with COVAX, as well as participant observation in 18 webinars and online meetings concerned with global pandemic financing, between September 2020 and August 2021. Results The article finds that COVAX expands the scale and scope of financial instruments in global health governance, and that this is done by conflating different understandings of risk. Specifically, COVAX conflates public health risk and corporate financial risk, leading it to privilege concerns of pharmaceutical companies over those of most participating countries – especially low and lower-middle income countries (LICs and LMICs). COVAX thus drives the financialization of global health and ends up constituting a risk itself - that of perpetuating the downsides of financialization (e.g. heightened inequality, secrecy, complexity in governance, an ineffective and slow use of aid), whilst insufficiently realising its potential benefits (pandemic risk reduction, increased public access to emergency funding, indirect price control over essential goods and services). Conclusion Future iterations of vaccine buyers’ and distribution clubs as well as public vaccine development efforts should work towards reducing all aspects of public health risk rather than privileging its corporate financial aspects. This will include reassessing the interplay of aid and corporate subsidies in global health.

View all works in NVA

• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Katerini Storeng (2025). 25 years of public-private partnerships and the future of global health collaboration. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Partnership is essential for solving complex global challenges. In global health, however, partnership has become associated with a specific model: public–private partnerships (PPPs), in which the key actors are governments, philanthropic foundations, and the private firms that produce drugs and vaccines. Leading PPPs like Gavi and the Global Fund are facing tough replenishment rounds within an uncertain context marked by major cuts to development assistance and US President Trump’s assault on multilateralism. Drawing on research from the recently completed PANPREP project, this seminar reflects on 25 years of global health partnerships, reviews current reform proposals put forth after the Covid-19 pandemic and argues that these proposals need to herald the start, not the end of a conversation to rethink the models of partnership needed to drive an ambitious post-2030 global health agenda. The seminar draws on research conducted collaboratively with Felix Stein and Desmond McNeill, and a Lancet Viewpoint co-authored with Simon Rushton and Sophie Harman, Global health partnerships for a post-2030 agenda .

• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Katerini Storeng (2024). WHO’s ‘Investment Round’ - will mimicking global health partnerships’ replenishment model pay off? Global Policy. ISSN 1758-5880. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2024). Public-private partnerships and pandemic preparedness. Full text in Research Archive
• Felix Stein (2024). Innovative financing for pandemic preparedness. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2024). The privatization of pandemic intelligence. Full text in Research Archive
• Adam Strobeyko, Caesar A Atuire, Ruth Faden, Calvin W L Ho, Vitor Ido & Mohga Kamal-Yanni [Show all 13 contributors for this article] (2024). Equitable access to pandemic products demands stronger public governance. The Lancet. ISSN 0140-6736. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)02258-X. Full text in Research Archive
• Felix Stein (2024). Interview with Nathalie Rhodes and Emma Elson at the UK governments Foreign Commonwealth & Dev Office (FCDO). [Journal]. Foreign Commonwealth & Dev Office (FCDO). Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Julie M. Andersen (2024). Internasjonalt samarbeid, kappløpet om en koronavaksine og global urettferdighet. [Internet]. Senter for pandemi- og en-helseforskning. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & S Samantaroy (2024). Should global health initiatives have a termination date? [Internet]. Health Policy Watch. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng, Anders Nordstrom, Justice Nonvignon & Mercy Mwangangi (2024). Replenish or perish? The way forward for global health partnerships. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  presentation at a side event to the World Health Assembly, followed by a panel discussion with Anders Nordstrom, Justice Nonvignon, Mercy Mwangangi; and Katerini Storeng. Co-organized by the Geneva Graduate Institute and the Centre for Development and the Environment. Video recording available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thJ-bwANLeU&t=3s

• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & G Gillund (2024). Varsler om inkompetanse og grådighet. [Journal]. Klassekampen. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2024). Healthcare innovations driven by covid-19. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2023). From public-private partnerships (PPP) to ‘global organizations’: Covid-19 and the agency of PPPs in pandemic preparedness and response. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2023). When Pandemic Intelligence Becomes Big Business. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Katerini Storeng (2023). Public-private partnership in pandemic preparedness and response. Full text in Research Archive
• Felix Stein (2023). Financial innovation for pandemic preparedness. Full text in Research Archive
• Ann Danaiya Usher & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2023). COVAX: the unspent billions. [Journal]. The Lancet. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Katerini Storeng (2023). Roundtable: The Future of Global Health Initiatives. Full text in Research Archive
• Jon Kåre Time, Katerini Storeng, Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Felix Stein (2023). En pandemi av bullshit. [Journal]. Morgenbladet. Full text in Research Archive
• Jon Kåre Time, Felix Stein, Katerini Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2023). Pølsevev, nonsense eller bullshit – kall det hva du vil. Nå har helseforskere fått nok. [Journal]. Morgenbladet. Full text in Research Archive
• Desmond James Mcneill (2023). The World Economic Forum: An unaccountable force in global health governance? 14(5), p. 782–790. doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.13254. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Abstract The World Economic Forum is a major player in global health governance, promoting the role of the private sector and specific public–private partnerships (PPPs). It exerts influence in three main ways: by exercising convening power, most notably in Davos where the most powerful representatives of the private sector meet with heads of governments and international organisations; by shaping ideas through its role as a think tank; by its engagement in PPPs, most recently as a founder member of CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations). But its organisational status is ambiguous, and it appears to lack accountability—even to its own members, which casts doubt on the legitimacy of such an influential organisation.

• Felix Stein (2022). False beginnings and false endings in Haiti’s Cholera Epidemic. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2022). COVAX – the “only global solution” to vaccine equity? Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2022). The privatization of health data and expertise during the Covid-19 pandemic. Full text in Research Archive
• Felix Stein (2022). Unsettling Finance? An Examination of Esg and Impact. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Katerini Storeng (2022). COVAX and the unfulfilled promise of vaccine sharing. Full text in Research Archive
• Kristian Bjørkdahl (2022). Kan vi ha tillit til tilliten? Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift (NNT). ISSN 0800-336X. 39(4). doi: 10.18261/nnt.39.4.7. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  I en utbredt fortelling om Norges pandemihåndtering heter det at vi lyktes eksepsjonelt godt takket være den norske befolkningens særegent høye tillit til sine myndigheter. I denne artikkelen tar jeg for meg en rekke eksempler som bidro til å skape denne fortellingen, men stiller så spørsmål ved hva den utelukker og forviser til bakgrunnen. Jeg påpeker at mange kommersielle og/eller utenlandske aktører som var av stor betydning for Norges pandemirespons, knapt var en del av den offentlige samtalen, og gir tre eksempler på dette. Til slutt diskuterer jeg hva som måtte skjedd for at vi skulle hatt en mer sammensatt, og dermed mer realistisk, fortelling om Norges pandemirespons.

• Åsne Gullikstad & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2022). Koronavaksinering: Europa slått av tre verdensdeler. [Journal]. Dagsavisen. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Lise Barneoud (2022). Vaccin anti-Covid : le favori Novavax arrivé trop tard. [Journal]. Le Monde. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2022). Researching Global Health: Challenges and Opportunities. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2022). Hylland og Wig: Pandemien er over, men bare for de rike. [Internet]. Universitetsplassen podcast. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Katerini Storeng (2022). Slik ble vaksinedonasjoner til et maktspill under pandemien. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Ann Danaiya Usher (2022). Donors ignore urgent pandemic funding appeal, covid response is ‘flying on fumes’. [Journal]. Development Today. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). What is COVAX and is it helping poor countries get access to COVID-19 vaccines? [Internet]. EuroNews. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Fargekoder, sirkler, tall og bokstaver. Mange sliter med å forstå smittetiltakene. [Journal]. Aftenposten. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Nå er silkehanskene av i kampen om vaksinedosene. [Journal]. Morgenbladet. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Liten åpenhet rundt vaksineprodusentenes aktiviteter. [Radio]. NRK P2 Nyhetsettermiddag. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). NRK Radio Nyhetsmorgen - Vaksinekrangel etter forsinkelser til EU. [Radio]. NRK Radio Nyhetsmorgen. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Why Norway shouldn’t go solo in the global vaccine race. [Internet]. Blog - International Health Policies. Full text in Research Archive
• Felix Stein (2021). False beginnings and false endings in Haiti’s Cholera Epidemic. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Rettferdig global fordeling av vaksiner haster. [TV]. NRK Urix. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). «Overraskende at flere EU-land nå forsøker å få takk i vaksinedoser utenfor EU-samartbeidet». [TV]. TV2 Nyhetskanalen . Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). The uncomfortable truth about Norway's pandemic leadership. [Journal]. Blog - International Health Policies. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Målet om likeverdig vaksinetilgang er ikke oppnådd. [Journal]. Morgenbladet. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Norway has donated almost 700,000 corona vaccine doses to poorer nations. [Journal]. Blog - Development Today. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Fargekoder, sirkler, tall og bokstaver. Mange sliter med å forstå smittetiltakene. [Journal]. Aftenposten. Full text in Research Archive
• Desmond McNeill (2021). The Limitation of Bond Schemes. [Journal]. Development Today. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Is COVAX part of the problem or the solution? [Journal]. Blog - Devex. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Ett år siden WHO erklærte global pandemi. [Radio]. NRK Nyhetsmorgen plus NRK Nyheter TV. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Podcast: "Vaccine nationalism and vaccine diplomacy". [Radio]. Dan Banik, In Pursuit of Development podcast. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2021). Tredje vaksinedose. [TV]. NRK TV Dagsnytt 18. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Gikk fra forhandlingene. [Journal]. Klassekampen. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Vaksineplan slår sprekker. [Journal]. Klassekampen. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). NRK Radio: Liten åpenhet rundt vaksineprodusentenes aktiviteter. [Radio]. NRK P2 Nyhetsettermiddag. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Danmark inngår vaksinesamarbeid med Østerrike og Israel. [TV]. TV2.no. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Vaksinekappløpet. [Journal]. Klassekampen. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Legemiddelselskapene har voldsom makt, selv over rike land. [Journal]. Morgenbladet. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2021). Vaccine donations moving slowly. ‘Nordics should lead by example,’ Swedish WHO expert urges. [Journal]. Development Today blog. Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Sololøp er ikke veien å gå i den globale vaksinekampen. Full text in Research Archive
• Anna Myklebust Hodne & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Enorme forskjeller i vaksinekappløpet – dette er de største utfordringene nå. [Journal]. TV2. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Biden har videreført Amerika først-politikken. [Journal]. Morgenbladet. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Det er på høy tid at USA bidrar til å rette opp den enorme globale skjevfordelingen, selv om veien til en global løsning på krisen fortsatt er langt, skriver Katerini Storeng og Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée.

• Katerini Storeng, Felix Stein & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). COVAX and the many meanings of sharing. BMJ Global Health. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility (COVAX) has been promoted as the ‘only global solution’ to end the accute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. The notion of ‘sharing’ has been a central trope in policy debate about this ‘vaccine-sharing’ scheme. In the first eighteen months of the pandemic, COVAX has struggled to share the risks and benefits of vaccine development, wealthy countries’ excess vaccine doses, and the burden of financing COVAX and the wider Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A), of which it is part. In the global pandemic response, the term ‘sharing’ glosses various kinds of transactions, some of which jar with commonplace understandings of what it means ‘to share’. COVAX’s approach to vaccine sharing obscures what it does not share: decision-making power and the knowledge and technology to produce vaccines everywhere.

• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Katerini Storeng (2021). Tredje dose hjemme eller vaksinere verden? [Journal]. Aftenposten. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2021). How Covax failed on its promise to vaccinate the world. [Journal]. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2021). Bare 4,4 prosent er fullvaksinert i Afrika. [Journal]. Transit Magasin. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2021). Hvem bør få en tredje vaksinedose? [TV]. NRK Debatten. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2021). Norsk Folkehjelp ut mot norske milliarder til global vaksineinnsats. [Journal]. Aftenposten. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Verdibørsen - NRK radio. [Radio]. NRK Radio Nyhetsmorgen. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Den urettferdige vaksinen.Fattige land taper vaksinekampen. Det angår oss alle, for pandemien er global og vi er ikke trygge før alle er det. Den snilleste aktøren vil tape.Rike land bør gi vaksiner til de fattige. Men det snilleste landet vil selv bli en taper.

• Katerini Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Den ubehagelige sannheten om Norges globale vaksineinnsats. [Journal]. Aftenposten. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng, Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Felix Stein (2021). GLOBVAC 2021, Symposium 3: Politics of Pandemic Preparedness. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). Norge bør bruke plassen i Sikkertsrådet til å bidra til mer rettferdig internasjonal helsepolitikk. [Journal]. Morgenbladet. Full text in Research Archive
• Elie Dolgin & Felix Stein (2021). Omicron is supercharging the COVID vaccine booster debate. [Internet]. Nature. Full text in Research Archive
• Hanne Jones Solfjeld & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). UiO-forskar er imot tredje dose til friske. [Journal]. Universitas. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2021). Håpet svinner. [Journal]. Klassekampen. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng, Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Felix Stein (2021). Norge har gitt 4 milliarder til pandemisamarbeid nesten ingen forstår. [Journal]. Morgenbladet. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2021). What went wrong with COVAX? [Radio]. Podcast, In Pursuit of Development. Full text in Research Archive
• Morten Schwenke & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2021). «Kunne Norge «tatt en New Zealand?» Flere tror det ville kostet for mye». [Journal]. Aftenposten. Full text in Research Archive
• Felix Stein (2021). Vaccine prices may become a political powder keg. [Journal]. The Loop blog. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Storeng (2021). Politisk valgkvarter. Bør Afrika få vaksine før norske barn? [TV]. NRK Politisk Kvarter TV og radio. Full text in Research Archive
• Kristian Bjørkdahl (2021). Koronakommisjonen vitner om politikkens økende nærsynthet. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng & Trine Nickelsen (2020). Konsekvenser av korona (Koronakrisen gir mer makt til de mektige). [Journal]. Apollon. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng (2020). Universitetsplassen: Når pandemien rammer verdens aller mest sårbare. [Radio]. Podcast https://www.uio.no/om/aktuelt/universitetsplassen/ar. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng, Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée & Eliassen Ingeborg (2020). Ble maktesløst vitne til død – selv om vaksinen fantes. [Journal]. NRK. Full text in Research Archive
• Asle O Rønning & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2020). Tidsfrist nærmer seg for global vaksineløsning. [Journal]. Bistandsaktuelt. Full text in Research Archive
• Kjersti Westeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2020). Regjeringen ber oss følge strengere smitteverntiltak: - Det oppstår forvirring blant det norske folk om hva tiltakene egentlig betyr. [Journal]. Nettavisen. Full text in Research Archive
• Bård Amundsen & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2020). Hvorfor dør flere av korona i USA enn Europa? [Journal]. Forskning.no. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2020). Sannheten, ifølge Pfizer. Full text in Research Archive
• Katerini Tagmatarchi Storeng & Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2020). Why does Pfizer deny the public investment in its Covid-19 vaccine? Full text in Research Archive
• Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée (2024). The rise of public-private partnerships as agents of global governance. The case of pandemic preparedness and response. Universitetet i Oslo. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The last quarter-century has seen a transformation of world politics. Greater participation by multinational corporations, civil society organizations, and philanthropic foundations has challenged the post-war international order of intergovernmental cooperation. “Multistakeholderism” has become the norm, and public-private partnerships (PPPs) have become a dominant mode of global governance, not least in addressing global health challenges. PPPs are often thought of as networks or arenas facilitating interactions between voluntary partners from the public and private sectors to advance narrow policy objectives. This PhD thesis, by contrast, argues that certain PPPs have developed into bureaucratic organizations that can be better described as agents of global governance. Drawing on in-depth research into the case of pandemic preparedness and response, the thesis analyzes how five established global health PPPs acquired the authority to lead the global response to the covid-19 pandemic. It traces how these PPPs came together in the Access to Covid-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A), an experimental cooperative framework conceptualized as a “super-PPP.” Thereby, they gained the authority to formulate policy proposals and norms around global vaccine equity, build policy coalitions with governments and philanthropies, fundraise extraordinary amounts, and implement the largest vaccine roll-out in history. This thesis demonstrates that these partnerships’ leadership role during covid-19 resulted from an authority leap facilitated by the crisis, but crucially, stems from a decade long build-up of administrative capacities. These organizational developments enabled the partnerships to increase their authority vis-à-vis their donors, boards, and other external actors. The thesis shows how PPP secretariats have worked to gradually expand PPP mandates from responding to specific diseases towards general pandemic preparedness and response. They also developed a degree of financial autonomy that reduces reliance on donors, and cooperated with other partnerships through joint projects, shared offices, and mutual representation in other multilateral forums. While the PPPs involved in ACT-A are highly institutionalized independent legal entities, this thesis also offers a contrasting analysis of a partnership with a different institutional form, the Emergency Medical Teams (EMT) initiative, which is embedded within the World Health Organization (WHO). The thesis traces how the EMT initiative developed within the WHO’s bureaucratic structure and gained authority by forming a symbiotic relationship with its host organization. This institutional arrangement has important implications for the partnership’s governance, notably in making it accountable to both its partners and the WHO. Finally, PPPs’ agency is, in theory, constrained by the voluntary nature of partnership. Yet, the thesis identifies’ the increasing ability of partnership secretariats to bypass control mechanisms in ways that may evade accountability, both towards taxpayers in donor countries and intended beneficiaries, most often in lower-income countries. Overall, the thesis shows the ubiquity, prominence, and diversity of global PPPs, underscoring that this model has become the dominant norm for what constitutes legitimate global governance.

View all works in NVA