Recent Ebola and hantavirus outbreaks have renewed pressure on countries to complete the World Health Organization’s Pandemic Agreement, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on 2 November 2026. The unresolved negotiations focus on how pathogen samples and related medical products should be shared during future health emergencies.
The agreement was adopted in May 2025 as a framework for responding to future pandemics, but governments left a crucial operational issue unfinished. Negotiators in Geneva are now working to settle the rules for the agreement’s Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing system, known as PABS.
Why the pandemic agreement remains unfinished
The PABS system is intended to govern access to pathogens with pandemic potential and the distribution of products developed from them. These products can include vaccines, diagnostic tests and treatments.
The negotiations have exposed disagreements between wealthier countries and developing nations. At the centre of the dispute is how countries can share biological samples and scientific information quickly while ensuring that resulting medical products are available fairly and affordably.
The Pandemic Agreement was adopted after countries agreed on the need for stronger international cooperation following COVID-19. However, leaving the PABS mechanism unresolved means that an important part of the framework still requires detailed implementation arrangements.
WHO links current outbreaks to lessons from COVID-19
Tedros said the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and a hantavirus outbreak earlier in 2026 demonstrated why countries should not delay completing the agreement.
His central argument was that infectious disease threats can cross borders, regardless of where an outbreak begins. A pathogen initially identified in one country can become an international public-health concern through travel, trade or other forms of movement.
The WHO chief also pointed to the unequal access to COVID-19 vaccines. Although vaccines were developed rapidly, some countries secured large supplies while others faced long waits. That experience remains a major reason why developing countries are seeking stronger guarantees within the pandemic framework.
What the proposed system is intended to address
- Faster sharing of pathogen samples and relevant scientific data.
- Clearer arrangements for developing vaccines, tests and treatments.
- More equitable access to products created from shared pathogens.
- Improved cooperation between countries during future outbreaks.
European perspective on vaccine and medicine access
Hans Kluge, the WHO Regional Director for Europe, said timely access to vaccines and affordable medicines had repeatedly been raised by member states during his meetings across the organisation’s six regions. He argued that future arrangements should prevent the inequalities seen during the COVID-19 pandemic from being repeated.
The issue is relevant to European governments, health systems and pharmaceutical companies because a global pandemic framework could influence how countries exchange information, prepare supplies and cooperate on medical research. However, the negotiations are taking place through the WHO and are not an EU legislative process.
That distinction matters. The European Union can coordinate public-health policy and support international cooperation, but the Pandemic Agreement is an international instrument negotiated by WHO member states. Its completion would not automatically create a new EU law or directly change national healthcare rules.
What happens next in the negotiations?
Governments must still resolve the outstanding PABS arrangements before the Pandemic Agreement can be considered complete in practical terms. The central challenge is finding a formula that encourages rapid sharing of pathogens while giving countries confidence that the resulting vaccines, tests and treatments will be distributed fairly.
The negotiations also reflect a broader question about global health governance: how can countries protect scientific cooperation without allowing access to life-saving products to depend solely on purchasing power during a crisis?
Any final arrangement will need to maintain confidence among countries with very different research capacity, manufacturing resources and public-health needs. The current outbreaks have added urgency to that process, but the source material does not indicate that a final compromise has been reached.
Why the agreement matters for future outbreaks
A completed framework could provide clearer expectations before the next pandemic rather than leaving governments to negotiate access and distribution during an emergency. It could also support earlier sharing of information, helping health authorities assess risks and develop countermeasures more quickly.
For people in Europe and elsewhere, the practical impact would depend on the final text and how countries implement it. The agreement would not eliminate outbreaks, but it could improve coordination and reduce the risk that medical supplies are distributed unevenly when demand rises sharply.
Conclusion
The latest outbreaks have put the unfinished Pandemic Agreement back at the centre of global health discussions. WHO chief Tedros is urging governments to complete the PABS system so that pathogen sharing, vaccine development and access to treatments are handled more fairly. The key next step is a negotiated settlement between countries; until that happens, the agreement remains an incomplete framework rather than a fully operational pandemic response system.