AS SOME countries take tentative steps back towards normality, thoughts inevitably turn to the future. What lessons are there from missteps made this time that we can apply to preparing for the next pandemic? Because, even though its nature, timing and deadliness cannot be known, we can be confident that there will be another. The forces that led to this one, including ever-greater international trade and travel and encroachment on wild areas, may be taking a short break, but will be back.
In an ideal world, once the virus was properly under control, leaders would come together to take stock and produce a series of thoughtful steps to prepare for the next pandemic. Yet even in places that are easing restrictions, this current outbreak is far from over. In many parts of the world, it is only just getting going. That means the knock-on effects of the complacency, short-termism and nationalism that have defined much of the patchwork preparations and response so far are still playing out. None of this is conducive to future pandemic planning.
Advertisement
鈥淲e cannot afford to wait for the current pandemic to be over before we prepare for the next one鈥�
However, we cannot afford to wait for this one to be over before we prepare for the next. There is good news though: a plan already exists. You could be forgiven for not realising this, in light of some of the responses so far. Even though it isn鈥檛 perfect, it is a decent starting point for a more comprehensive plan.
For a start, international regulations agreed by nearly 200 countries set out exactly how to identify a potential pandemic, the time frame for raising the alarm and even best practice for collaborating across borders and at international entry points. But agreeing to plans is one thing, sticking to them and seeing them through quite another.
Perhaps it is a matter of reframing. 鈥淭he world needs to prepare for pandemics in the same serious way it prepares for war,鈥� . Most countries maintain extensive military defences 鈥� at great cost 鈥� in the hope of never having to use them.
That should apply here too. We have seen how a virus can kill people and destroy economies. Safeguarding against this threat can no longer be considered an unaffordable luxury.
