asked 121k views
1 vote
In the COVID pandemic of 2020, the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies were quick to develop vaccines. Would a market composed of many small companies have been able to respond as fast?

2 Answers

4 votes
It is unlikely that a market composed of many small pharmaceutical companies would have been able to respond as quickly to develop vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

Large pharmaceutical companies have the financial resources, research and development capabilities, and manufacturing capacity to quickly respond to a global health crisis. They also have the expertise and experience in vaccine development, which would have been essential to the rapid development of a COVID-19 vaccine.

In contrast, smaller companies may not have had the same level of resources, expertise, or manufacturing capacity. It would have been difficult for them to quickly scale up their operations to meet the demands of a global pandemic.

Furthermore, the development of a COVID-19 vaccine required significant investments in research and development, clinical trials, and manufacturing. Large pharmaceutical companies were able to make these investments because they had the financial resources and expertise to do so.

Overall, while small companies can play an important role in the pharmaceutical industry, it is unlikely that a market composed of many small companies would have been able to respond as quickly to develop vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic.
answered
User Paolo Tedesco
by
9.0k points
3 votes

This is an interesting question with arguments on both sides.

On the one hand, large pharmaceutical companies do have some advantages in rapidly developing vaccines during a public health emergency:

Significant financial resources. Large pharma companies have much more funding and capital to invest in risky and expensive vaccine development efforts. This allows them to proceed at scale and speed.

Established infrastructure. They have existing manufacturing facilities, clinical trial expertise, and regulatory relationships that can be pivoted quickly to new vaccine efforts. Setting all this up from scratch would take far longer.

• Shared knowledge and experience. They have accumulated vast knowledge and lessons learned across many previous vaccine development and approval efforts that could be applied here.

On the other hand, a market with more smaller niche companies may also have some advantages:

More agility and flexibility. Smaller companies can make decisions and changes quickly, without lots of bureaucracy. They can be nimble and innovative.

Focus and passion. Some small companies focus specifically on vaccines, infectious diseases, or public health threats. They have deep expertise and passion for developing solutions in these areas.

Multiple shots on goal. With many companies working on the problem, there are more potential vaccine candidates, increasing the odds that some will succeed. If most fail, at least some may succeed.

Competition driving innovation. Competition between many companies may spur more innovative approaches to make progress faster. They would crowd-source solutions.

Overall, both sides have compelling reasons. The reality is probably nuanced, and depending on the specifics, either a system with a preponderance of giant pharmaceutical corporations or a preponderance of small enterprises could theoretically respond to a crisis like this slowly or quickly. The most resilient and capable of mobilizing a quick, creative reaction may eventually be a varied group of businesses with a variety of sizes. However, there are just too many unresolved questions to tell with certainty whether big or small businesses would be better able to provide vaccines swiftly in the event of a pandemic.

answered
User AKZap
by
8.9k points