>
Economic Policy
>
The Economics of Pandemic Preparedness

The Economics of Pandemic Preparedness

01/14/2026
Bruno Anderson
The Economics of Pandemic Preparedness

The global experience with COVID-19 exposed profound vulnerabilities and staggering losses. Preparing for future pandemics is not just a health imperative—it is a cornerstone of economic resilience and social stability. This article examines the costs of pandemics, current funding realities, investment needs, and the bold policy steps required to safeguard our collective future.

Economic Burden of Pandemics

Pandemics inflict immediate and long-lasting damage on economies worldwide. By 2025, the $16–$35 trillion global economic burden of COVID-19 is projected, driven by lost output, disrupted supply chains, and shattered livelihoods. From 2020–2023 alone, more than $10 trillion in actual losses were recorded, alongside over 7 million confirmed deaths and 70 million people pushed into extreme poverty.

Global GDP contracted by 3.3% in 2020, wiping out years of growth in a matter of months. The Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB) warns of over $50 trillion lost output from 2020–2030 if similar crises strike unprepared systems. Social fallout has been equally severe: roughly 114 million jobs vanished in 2020, public debt soared to nearly 100% of global GDP, and millions more faced food insecurity and mental health challenges.

Current Spending on Health and Preparedness

Before COVID-19, global health spending reached $9.2 trillion in 2019, heavily skewed toward wealthy nations. High-income countries accounted for $7.3 trillion, while low-income countries managed just $24.8 billion—a 293-fold disparity that left vulnerable populations underprotected.

Development assistance for health (DAH) aimed at pandemic preparedness in low- and middle-income countries totaled a mere $1.8 billion in 2020–2021, compared to $37.8 billion spent on emergency response. Independent reviews found preparedness funding at only 12.2% of recommended levels, while immediate response expenditures were 252.2% above guidance—a clear sign of reactive rather than proactive financing.

The Investment Case for Preparedness

Turning the tide requires bold, sustained investment. Leading panels, including the High-Level Independent Panel (HLIP), recommend an annual international financing need is $10–15 billion to close basic gaps, especially in low-resource settings. This funding would strengthen surveillance, bolster health systems, and secure supply chains for diagnostics, vaccines, and treatments.

At the same time, governments should allocate an extra 1% of GDP to health—an achievable domestic commitment that matches the scale of economic threats. Surge financing of $50–100 billion must also be available to ramp up response capabilities within weeks of an outbreak, limiting spread and economic disruption.

Spending Gaps and Financing Architecture

Today’s financing landscape is fragmented and incoherent financing architecture, overly dependent on ad hoc donations and crisis-driven surges. The newly established Pandemic Fund aims to raise $2 billion, yet falls far short of the $10–15 billion needed annually.

  • Reliance on short-term development assistance undermines stability.
  • Pooled investments and innovative mechanisms are urgently needed.

Creating a predictable, multilateral funding platform will ensure that preparedness is not subject to the whims of political cycles or media attention.

Core Preparedness Investment Priorities

Effective pandemic preparedness hinges on five critical pillars:

  • Global surveillance and early detection networks that share real-time data.
  • Research and development, including equitable access to diagnostics, vaccines, and therapeutics.
  • Manufacturing capacity and secure supply chains for medical countermeasures.
  • Strong immunization systems to deploy vaccines swiftly.
  • A skilled workforce and knowledge ecosystem maintained between crises.

All investments should promote equity and treat health as a global public good, accessible to every nation when emergencies arise.

The Price of Under-Preparedness

Neglecting preparedness carries a tremendous human and economic toll. COVID-19 alone accounted for over 20 million excess deaths by some estimates, with countless survivors facing chronic health challenges and Long COVID projected to reduce OECD GDP by $1 trillion annually—more than $7 trillion through 2030.

Job losses, educational disruptions, and social unrest amplified the crisis. More than 100 million positions were lost or transformed by accelerated automation and reshaped labor markets. The mental health crisis, coupled with strained social services, demonstrated how health security underpins all aspects of modern life.

Policy Recommendations and the Path Ahead

Health security is economic security. Governments and institutions must shift from panic-driven responses to sustainable, predictable funding models that prioritize long-term resilience. Key steps include:

  • Multilateral coordination to pool risks, resources, and research outcomes.
  • Transparent tracking of all pandemic-related spending for accountability.
  • Domestic policies that strengthen national preparedness and self-reliance, complemented by fair international support.

High-income nations should contribute proportionally to their capacity, while empowering low- and middle-income countries to build their own systems. Collaboration between governments, philanthropy, the private sector, and civil society will amplify impact and ensure no community is left behind.

Investing in preparedness is a high-return strategy: modest increases in funding can avert trillions in losses. The lessons of COVID-19 are clear—only by treating pandemic planning as an essential part of economic policy can we build a safer, more prosperous world.

Bruno Anderson

About the Author: Bruno Anderson

Bruno Anderson