A Single Global Tender For Vaccine Procurement

Context: Inherent limitations of liberalised vaccine policy calls for bold shifts in approach, including floating of a single global tender for vaccine procurement.

Cons of Liberalised and Accelerated Phase 3 Strategy of COVID-19 Vaccination: In view of the scramble among States at the international stage -

• Imprudent and Inequitable: While reducing Central government monopsony can theoretically increase production, it is unlikely to get us prepared for the 3^rd wave due to reduced raw material.
  • Thus supplies are only likely to achieve substantial levels by August 2021, and without an increase in supplies, expanding it to the 18-44 age group will only spread vaccine thinly, making it an imprudent and inequitable vaccination strategy.
• Inefficient: Leaving prices to an oligopolistic market favours unhealthy competition among States as they would have to procure at higher rates than a single national purchaser, increasing government expenditure.
• Lowers the image of India: Which, until late, boasted of extending humanitarian aid by exporting vaccines.

Way forward

• Boldly revisit vaccine policy:
  • Use limited vaccine supply for an adult high-risk and vulnerable group, and reconsider opening vaccination for 18-44 years age group after August, when the supplies are stable.
  • This shall be a State-specific decision led by subject experts without interference from political circle.
• Revisit the role of the different government:
  • Central government should bear the costs and provide vaccines to the State and coordinate with states to float a global tender (As benefits of a single purchaser can be seen in the Ayushman Bharat­ Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana).
  • States should specifically deal with the delivery of vaccines.
• Implement a rights-based approach: Upholding healthcare as a fundamental right under Article 21, which connotes accessibility, availability and affordability