RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – Monica de Bolle, researcher at Johns Hopkins University and Peterson Institute, both in Washington (USA), believes that unequal vaccination will amplify the economic recovery challenges of emerging countries, with many of them isolated from the tourism industry, for instance.
The Brazilian economist, who specialized in genetic immunology at Harvard University and is part of the Covid Observatory, warns in an interview that the risk is global: by running out of vaccines, poorer countries may favor more mutations to emerge, threatening the whole planet. However, for Brazil, she expects an even worse scenario, with the expansion of the environmental debate combined with the health crisis.
Will the economy be impacted by the different vaccination rates among countries?
The different vaccination rates in the world will certainly produce a scenario of risk of recovery lags in some countries. All countries behind in vaccination are at risk of stagnation, or a recovery far short of what it could be with vaccination at the same pace as developed countries. Some are likely to suffer direct consequences, internally and also externally. Tourist activity will be impaired in these nations, affecting the economy.
Can this lead to more poverty and inequality?
The increase in inequality among countries is already occurring, due to the different vaccination rates. There is the risk of increasing relative poverty worldwide. But, in fact, this vaccine gap endangers health and the economy of the whole world.
How so?
The uncontrolled epidemic in some countries increases the likelihood of the emergence of new virus variants. This endangers the whole world. There is no point in Israel boasting that it vaccinated everyone and in Egypt the virus remains uncontrolled.
And how is Brazil?
Brazil is currently among the countries lagging behind in vaccination that will experience a slower recovery. This is due to the government’s incredible lack of foresight, which could have arranged for more vaccines.
Does the environmental issue complement health in how Brazil is perceived?
There is the perspective that we are going to emerge from an acute pandemic to a chronic pandemic. That is, there will be debates about updating vaccines, the flow of new strains. And there will be concern about the emergence of new viruses. And then the environmental issue comes into play. The more we penetrate natural habitats, where the natural repositories of these viruses are, the more humankind is exposed, in general, to contact with new viruses. Attention, in relation to Brazil, is going to be increasingly focused on deforestation in the Amazon. This is not only a climate issue, but also a pandemic issue. The Amazon is rife with viral repositories. Brazil will be perceived not only as a country that has failed to control its pandemic and has delayed vaccination, but as a country that is endangering the rest of humankind if it persists with its current environmental policies.
In Europe there is strong debate about introducing immunization passports. Could this impact the lagging countries?
It is inevitable. There is no doubt that international travel will be conditioned to immunization cards, as already occurs today with the yellow fever vaccine. And, with a vaccine shortage due to planning issues, Brazil’s isolation tends to be greater, including greater commercial isolation.
Is a more equal vaccination possible?
Yes, it is possible: I believe that around July and August we will have a better idea of how many vaccine doses will be in excess in wealthy countries. Then there will probably be a rearrangement of these vaccines, which could somewhat fill this gap in doses in many emerging countries.
This is the positive scenario. Are there chances that the vaccination rate will worsen?
Yes. Vaccines in developed countries use a piece of the virus spike protein, not the whole virus. And the mutations we have seen so far alter precisely this protein. If a mutated strain emerges that would require a vaccine update, we are talking about all vaccines in wealthy countries. The possible exception are the inactivated virus vaccines, which use the whole virus and may have a better response to mutations of the spike protein. These include the Coronavac and the Indian vaccines. If they do better, the whole world may, while updating its vaccines, become dependent on China and India, delaying all global vaccination and creating a new dispute over immunizers. But it’s hypothetical.
Has Trump worsened international coordination of the pandemic?
Without Donald Trump, international cooperation would have been better, not only because of his denialist stance, but because he pulled the US out of the World Health Organization (WHO), which lost funds. Now, if Trump had not been president of the US, would the world be cooperating beautifully? No. At such times countries are left with an every man for himself mentality, the vaccine becomes a matter of internal politics, there is no other way. Now China, India and Indonesia are increasing their vaccine donations. I have no doubt that these countries will gain geopolitical space.
Has the pandemic led to the worldwide debate that having its own pharmaceutical chain is something relevant and strategic?
Yes, this debate is on the agenda. Here in the USA, for instance, there is tremendous concern for the country to be able to produce everything related to vaccination and the pandemic, including masks, which today come from China. It is a huge chain. And the most basic items, such as syringes, test tubes, gloves, were all directed to imports from China and India. Masks are now regarded as a necessary item for national security.
About Monica de Bolle
Monica de Bolle describes herself as a macroeconomist and writer-at-large. She is currently a Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, and a Professor at SAIS | Johns Hopkins University. Previously, she was a Director at the Institute for Economic Policy Studies (IEPE | Casa das Garças), a think tank based in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. She also worked at the International Monetary Fund, and holds a Phd in Economics from the London School of Economics and Political Science. She has written many books on the Brazilian economy over the years, and has also published over 400 Op-eds in the Brazilian and international press.
Source: O Globo