What’s at Stake in WHO Pandemic Agreement Negotiations

The IGWG’s responsibilities include preparing the future Conference of the Parties, drafting the terms of reference for a Coordinating Financial Mechanism, and defining the structure and function of the proposed Global Supply Chain and Logistics (GSCL) network. The biggest task ahead, however, is completing the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) Annex (Article 12 of the Agreement).

Designated as the IGWG’s priority item, PABS is described as one of the most complex and contentious components of the Agreement. As one African Group statement put it, Article 12 is the “backbone” of the entire instrument.

The outcomes of these negotiations will be decisive in determining whether the Agreement’s equity commitments can be translated into practical outcomes or remain aspirational.

Key Issues on the Table

To meet the timeline for adoption of the Annex at the 79th World Health Assembly in May 2026, IGWG members must navigate several technical issues. The current Agreement leaves significant work ahead to turn key elements into workable provisions, including:

1. defining scope (clarifying what qualifies as a “pathogen with pandemic potential”);
2. obligations of industry (determining how binding and broad commitments from “participating manufacturers” should be);
3. benefit-sharing mechanisms (deciding what constitutes fair benefit-sharing, not only in terms of equitable product distribution, but also potentially capacity-building, technology transfer, or licensing, among others);
4. data and sample traceability (designing systems to trace not only physical samples but also digital sequence data)

These technical issues are not only complex but also politically and technically contentious.

A Test of Unity

One of the key challenges heading into the IGWG is political unity, or the lack of it. Taking traceability as an example, during the INB negotiations, most progressive countries supported including traceability as a core principle, while several high-income countries opposed it. More notably, some African delegates later aligned with an EU proposal that excluded traceability altogether, indicating cracks within previously unified blocs.

Such fragmentation could undermine the leverage that progressive countries, particularly those within the African Group and Equity Group, have built. A recent study shows that coordinated Global South positions during the INB process led to concrete progress on issues like technology transfer and the initial framing of PABS. These collective efforts also have not prevented countries from pursuing national priorities while upholding a shared commitment to equity and solidarity.

Coordinating under a Tight Timeline

To maximise influence, progressive countries will need to remain coordinated. Regional and South-South cooperation platforms should be activated to propose a unified negotiating text and reinforce shared red lines and priorities.

Reaching consensus on technical issues will be challenging, particularly given the IGWG’s tight timeline. Countries should therefore mobilise internal consultations and plan for mid-negotiation coordination and preparatory meetings, for example, on the sidelines of official events such as WHO regional committees.

What Comes Next

The immediate next step is for countries to submit their proposals for the PABS Annex by 10 August. An informal IGWG meeting is planned for 12 September, followed by a formal session from 15-19 September.

The months ahead will be pivotal. The IGWG’s work on the PABS Annex will test not only political will but also countries’ capacity to compromise on technically sound and practical provisions under a tight schedule. In this phase, the engagement of legal and policy experts will be critical to translating principles into operational commitments.