MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412840461 · doi:10.1186/s12913-025-13211-9

Decolonizing global health: Africa’s pursuit of pharmaceutical sovereignty

2025· review· en· W4412840461 on OpenAlexaff
Moses Mulumba, Jessica Oga, Nana Koomson, Tasha-Aliya Kara, Adanze Nge Cynthia, Lisa Forman

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHealth informaticsNursing researchPublic healthHealth administrationSovereigntyHealthcare policyHealth policyInternational healthNursingPolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Africa's continued reliance on imported medicines, vaccines, and active pharmaceutical ingredients is the direct legacy of colonial extraction, intensified by the structural-adjustment era's dismantling of state-owned drug plants and cemented by intellectual-property regimes that keep critical know-how offshore. The COVID-19 vaccine scramble exposed the full cost of this vulnerability and has triggered a continent-wide push for pharmaceutical sovereignty-an explicit, decolonizing agenda to localize research, regulation, and production. This review distils the latest evidence on the barriers that still block that transition and maps the regulatory, financial, technological, and civic opportunities most likely to accelerate it. METHODOLOGY: A critical narrative literature review was conducted. Six databases (PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, Google Scholar, BMJ Global Health and the Institute for Economic Justice repository) were searched for English-language records published January 2000-May 2025 using the terms Africa AND (pharmaceutic OR vaccine OR API) AND (sovereign OR manufactur OR decoloni). Grey literature from AU agencies, Africa CDC, WHO and UNIDO was added. Forty-five documents met inclusion criteria and were included in the article. Reflexive thematic analysis identified recurrent barriers and enabling pathways; intercoder reliability was ensured through independent coding and consensus meetings. RESULTS: Four structurally reinforcing barriers dominate the evidence base: (i) TRIPS-based patent exclusivities that restrict technology transfer; (ii) fragmented and immature regulatory capacity (iii) chronic under-investment; and (iv) import-biased procurement. The countervailing opportunities center on (i) AMA-led regulatory harmonization, (ii) pooled-demand instruments (iii) technology-transfer partnerships and (iv) civic-sector mobilization. CONCLUSION: Africa now possesses the regulatory blueprint, pooled-demand incentives, and emerging technology platforms to localize production of medicines and vaccines. However, its realization is dependent on synchronizing these levers by easing IP constraints, completing AMA-led regulatory convergence, mobilizing concessional finance for API and bulk-drug capacity, and reforming procurement to reward local value. If pursued in concert, these steps can convert pharmaceutical sovereignty from a political slogan into a resilient, continent-wide industrial reality- anchoring Africa's wider agenda to decolonize global health.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0030.016
Scholarly communication0.0120.018
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.354
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicPharmaceutical Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207