Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract

This panel explores how the (re-)emergence of bacterial vaccine development has been accepted as a partial solution to the problem of antimicrobial resistance. It offers a comparative review of two key empirical case studies, tracing the political and institutional work that surrounds this field.

Paper long abstract

Against the backdrop of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) as a global health threat undermining existing antibiotic drugs, vaccine technology has (re-)emerged as an alternative partial solution. This paper scrutinizes the conditions, events, and developments that generated a renewed interest in bacterial vaccines as a response to AMR, and the emerging ecosystem that surrounds vaccine research and development. It argues that the recognition of AMR has led to a recalibration of epistemic repertoires that actors in the field have developed to communicate and justify the relevance and investability of the bacterial vaccines field.    

Despite known scientific difficulty in the development of bacterial vaccines, and many laboratory failures over the past 25-years, the WHO has increasingly called for more investment and research into bacterial vaccine development, which has led to a steep increase of candidates in the vaccine pipeline.

This paper draws on qualitative data derived from document analysis, participant observation at three biomedical conferences, and expert interviews.  It examines the trajectories of bacterial vaccine development since 2000, and the financial stressors, the compounding political influences, and the specific disease targeting that has led to laboratories highlighting one disease as their priority over another. Comparing acute bacterial vaccines for diseases on the WHO’s priority pathogen list and vaccines meant to address tuberculosis, this paper situates these examples within sharpening disease ecosystems by exploring the development of the corporate infrastructures and institutional cultures that lead to vaccine development, and by reflecting on the histories of these fields in relation to the broader AMR discussion.