The COVID-19 pandemic uncovered vital weaknesses within the world authorized framework for pandemics. In response, in 2021, WHO member states launched negotiations to develop a brand new pandemic settlement geared toward addressing the gaps revealed by the pandemic. After three years of negotiations, on 20 Might 2025, the 78th World Well being Meeting (WHA) adopted the WHO Pandemic Settlement beneath Article 19 of the WHO Structure by the use of a decision. That is solely the second time for the reason that WHO’s founding in 1948 that the World Well being Meeting has adopted a global settlement—the primary being the Framework Conference on Tobacco Management. It marks a big institutional and authorized milestone, reflecting a significant shift in method by inserting fairness and solidarity on the forefront of pandemic prevention and response. Nonetheless, the settlement’s true influence will rely on a variety of short- and long-term elements, which we discover within the following publish.
Shift in Values
Worldwide public well being emergencies and pandemics are ruled by the Worldwide Well being Rules (IHR) (initially adopted in 1969 and most lately amended in 2024) and the brand new Pandemic Settlement. Whereas the IHR is a practical instrument and goals at stopping the worldwide unfold of illness, the pandemic settlement marks a shift: it places fairness and solidarity between international locations on the forefront. The COVID-19 pandemic uncovered vital discrepancies between developed and growing nations, notably in entry to vaccines, drugs, and diagnostics. Thus, the settlement embeds fairness and solidarity ideas (Article 3) into concrete, actionable provisions to take away nation inequalities in pandemic prevention, preparation, and response.
Scope
To this finish, the settlement consists of 35 articles, a lot of which regulate points that had been beforehand not ruled by worldwide legislation. Among the many key provisions are the One Well being method (Article 5), strengthening regulatory programs (Article 8), worldwide cooperation on analysis and improvement (Article 9), strengthening native manufacturing capability in growing international locations (Article 10), expertise switch (Article 11), Pathogen Entry and Profit Sharing (PABS) (Article 12), and securing pandemic-related items provide chains (Article 13).
Completely different priorities between developed and growing international locations had been a significant fault line within the negotiations. Creating international locations pushed for commitments to make sure equitable entry to vaccines and different pandemic-related well being merchandise, whereas wealthier states centered on measures that might stop outbreaks. Thus, growing international locations wished binding expertise switch obligations, a powerful PABS mechanism, and different provisions that might strengthen their R&D and manufacturing self-sufficiency. Developed international locations pushed to institutionalize the One Well being method, which acknowledges the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental well being and goals to forestall zoonotic spillovers.
In the long run, the settlement was considerably watered down and compromised on language: expertise switch could be “as mutually agreed”—successfully, voluntary. The events determined to barter PABS individually as a result of the controversy was so contentious (see under). And whereas the ultimate textual content is the primary worldwide authorized settlement to formally acknowledge the One Well being method, its necessities are restricted.
Authorized Power and Enforcement
The settlement has an formidable scope, however has restricted authorized drive. A lot of its provisions defer to nationwide circumstances, with commitments hedged by phrases like “based mostly on nationwide capacities,” “topic to out there assets,” or “throughout the technique of the Occasion involved.” These phrases successfully create loopholes, permitting states to decide out of implementation with out technically violating the settlement. To acquire a multilateral settlement, member states had to make use of this “delicate legislation” technique.
Furthermore, the settlement doesn’t embody compliance or enforcement measures. It introduces “delicate” monitoring mechanisms like state reporting necessities (Article 21), a Secretariat (Article 22), and a Convention of the Events (COP) (Article 19) (see under), however these establishments are expressly non-adversarial and non-punitive. The WHO and different states haven’t any authorized enforcement or intervention authority, sustaining nationwide sovereignty. This method displays a broader reluctance amongst states to allow worldwide intervention in home affairs. It underscores how protecting governments stay of their sovereignty.
Recognizing growing international locations’ capability challenges, Article 18 requires states to strengthen sustainable and predictable financing, and Article 18(3) creates a Coordinating Monetary Mechanism. Nonetheless, there is no such thing as a requirement to supply fastened contributions. As a substitute, the language makes use of delicate pledges like “mobilize,” “encourage,” and “promote.” Thus, monetary help is unpredictable and discretionary at this level. The phrases of reference and modalities of the Mechanism shall be proposed by the IGWG and shall be adopted by the COP inside one yr after the entry into drive of the settlement.
Governance
The settlement establishes a COP (Article 19) to observe implementation, a notable institutional innovation within the world well being context. The COP offers a platform that can maintain pandemic preparedness and response on the worldwide agenda. Its potential matches that of the UNFCCC COP, which has sustained political momentum on local weather change. The IGWG will additional decide particulars of the COP following settlement on the PABS annex, and the primary COP session shall be convened inside one yr after the entry into drive of the settlement (see under).
The Impact of the U.S. Not Being a Occasion
The U.S. determination to withdraw from the WHO, and by extension from the pandemic settlement, has raised issues in regards to the penalties for the settlement’s legitimacy and effectiveness. Given its political and financial energy, the US is taken into account important to multilateral agreements.
That stated, this isn’t unprecedented. The U.S. has typically refused to approve or ratify multilateral agreements. It by no means joined the Conference on the Rights of the Little one, the U.N. Conference on the Legislation of the Sea, or the Rome Statutes of the Worldwide Prison Court docket. It has additionally stayed out of the Conference on Organic Range and withdrew from the Paris Local weather Settlement. Regardless of these absences, such treaties have nonetheless gone forward with world buy-in and implementation. Certainly, it was adopted by the WHA on the 20th of Might (following approval by 124 member states in Committee A).
Whereas the absence of the U.S. might have an effect on different states’ home ratification processes, for the settlement to take impact, 60 international locations should ratify it, and since most of the settlement’s advantages favor growing international locations, this barrier is more likely to be met.
Authorized drive, nonetheless, is distinct from influence. And that is the place the absence of the U.S. poses actual challenges. The U.S. has most of the world’s largest pharmaceutical firms and analysis organizations. Thus, with out U.S. involvement, these establishments received’t be required, incentivized, or inspired to collaborate or take part. For instance:
Article 9 requires the inclusion of equitable entry situations in publicly funded analysis and improvement contracts. U.S.-funded establishments, central to world well being analysis, wouldn’t be required to conform.
Article 10 requires international locations to advertise or incentivize public or personal sector investments geared toward geographically diversifying manufacturing amenities in growing international locations—efforts that might not embody U.S. help.
Article 11 encourages the switch of expertise to growing international locations. U.S. companies could be beneath no encouragement to take part.
Article 14 requires together with equitable entry provisions in public procurement insurance policies, notably benefiting growing international locations—however these wouldn’t apply to the U.S.
One other essential subject is funding. As talked about above, the settlement consists of Article 18 to mobilize monetary assets, however with out U.S. contributions, its monetary basis could be weaker.
One essential nuance is the PABS (see under). If adopted, U.S.-based firms might want to enter into contracts with the WHO (Article 12(6)(a) in the event that they need to get entry to pathogen samples. Very like how U.S. firms navigate the Conference on Organic Range’s entry and benefit-sharing necessities beneath the Nagoya Protocol. Their involvement would, nonetheless, be market-driven due to their want to get entry to pathogen information.
PABS and Entry Into Power
The PABS system is meant to make sure that international locations sharing pathogens with pandemic potential—or their genetic sequence information—obtain a justifiable share of the advantages derived from them. Nonetheless, throughout negotiations, PABS emerged as one of the divisive points.
To keep away from derailing the settlement, negotiators compromised by together with simply guiding ideas in Article 12, deferring the small print to a separate PABS instrument to be established later and annexed to the settlement (Article 12(2)). Member states have resolved to determine an Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG), which shall meet by 15 July 2025 to proceed the negotiation on the PABS.
Nonetheless, the unresolved PABS instrument has the potential to stall—and even block—your complete settlement. The reason being that member states have agreed (Article 31(2)) that the settlement is not going to be open for signature till the PABS annex is adopted. In doing so, member states have taken a danger. Though the IGWG has to submit the PABS negotiations’ end result on the 79th WHA in 2026, it’ll possible take longer to barter an instrument. Complicated and contentious questions embody how a lot profit shall be shared, how pathogens are tracked, and the way the PABS mechanism will work together with the brand new Cali Fund beneath the Conference on Organic Range (CBD). Additional, Article 33 states that the settlement can solely enter into drive as soon as not less than 60 international locations ratify it. In lots of circumstances, it will contain prolonged home approval processes, additional slowing entry into drive and implementation.
This raises a strategic query: was it smart for international locations to require that the signature be contingent on resolving the politically charged PABS subject? Creating international locations stand to profit from many different provisions within the settlement, even with out a finalized PABS system. By tying the destiny of your complete settlement to the unsure end result of the PABS negotiations, negotiators might have jeopardized progress on broader pandemic preparedness and response.
Conclusion
From each authorized and coverage standpoints, the pandemic settlement’s main contribution isn’t in binding, enforceable authorized guidelines however in establishing a worldwide normative framework. It helps set up pandemic preparedness and response as a worldwide precedence. Notably, it operationalizes important ideas—particularly fairness and solidarity—and brings beneath worldwide legislation a variety of points that had beforehand not been regulated. It additionally creates institutional foundations just like the COP. Over time, this platform might help deeper cooperation and doubtlessly pave the best way for extra sturdy authorized and institutional preparations.
Nonetheless, as beforehand famous, tying the settlement’s signature to the unresolved PABS negotiations introduces vital delays. The extra proven fact that U.S. firms—main gamers within the pharmaceutical and biotech sectors—is not going to be required by the U.S. authorities to undertake sure actions undermines the settlement’s potential attain and effectiveness. These usually are not minor hurdles; they’re structural challenges that would outline the settlement’s real-world influence.
Nonetheless, this settlement reveals a broader fact in regards to the present state of multilateralism: what’s doable at present typically comes with weak authorized language, restricted enforcement, and no third-party oversight. Whereas which will disappoint some—and it definitely falls wanting the best of binding worldwide legislation—it’s nonetheless vital that international locations had been in a position to agree on core points and set up a typical platform. That achievement shouldn’t be dismissed.
Certainly, it appears member states felt a must reveal that multilateralism stays viable. Consequently, they selected to depart a number of vital parts for future improvement—not solely the PABS system, but in addition the Monetary Coordination Mechanism, the phrases of reference for the Convention of the Events (COP), and different parts (Article 9 of the decision).
That stated, the true check of this settlement’s worth will come right down to political will and sustained financing. Thus, whereas the settlement displays a shift in political mindset—inserting fairness and solidarity on the middle of pandemic response—it stays to be seen whether or not this framework will result in a measurably extra equitable world response in future crises.
