问与答：多边主义在Covid-19期间“失败了”

The multilateral system has failed badly during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the incoming head of the International Science Council, a global body that counts the world’s science academies as its members.

前新西兰首席科学家彼得·格鲁克曼（Peter Gluckman）告诉SciDev.Netthat the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the enormous inequalities that have emerged in access to healthcare and vaccinations, shows the need for a global overhaul.

我们如何应对大流行期间出现的疫苗不平等？有任何纠正平衡的希望吗？

可悲的是，短期内。我认为多边主义在Covid-19中失败了，我认为它失败了……在政治和技术问题不一致的人的早期事件中。我认为，Covax系统（用于公平接种疫苗）的事实并不是特别好 - 我的意思是，整个过程并没有真正效果很好。

从大流行的早期到疫苗民族主义的问题，以及现在的疫苗分配，我们已经看到了不同表现的民族主义和地缘政治。政府始终处于紧张局势 - 他们必须首先满足自己的选举需求，因此，这不是一个容易的平衡……如果您没有强大的跨国系统。

The fact that neither the UN Security Council or the General Assembly have really had meaty discussions — I don’t think the Security Council has even met at all about COVID — suggests that we are not at the position of the kind of conversation that is needed.

I think when one looks at some of the developing countries … [they] were more willing to reach out for advice rapidly and hear from experts than some developed countries, so I think there is a lot to learn. I am just worried about whether the lessons will be learnt quick enough and well enough to make progress.

如果从大流行中学到了正确的课程，它们会是什么？

They would be [for countries] to have pre-prepared science advisory mechanisms, not just for emergencies. They need to have well-established knowledge generation mechanisms, which means universities and access to experts. They need knowledge synthesis processes which can inform advisory mechanisms.

他们需要对政策制定者的理解，以了解[存在某些形式的问题，需要更加认真地认真对待知识，如果不聆听证据，可能会出现的悲剧的现实需要更加认真地重视短期政治或其他考虑因素。

“我认为多边主义在Covid-19中失败了，我认为这是失败的……在政治和技术问题不一致的人的早期事件中。”

Peter Gluckman, president-elect, International Science Council

很久以来，在共同发生这种大流行的不可避免的情况下就已经建立了很早就建立的，这是一个人畜共患病。除了少数经历过SAR的人外，很少有国家确实考虑过并做好了充分的准备。

We now know that restriction of movement is an obvious part of managing a pandemic, and yet early on Europe did not want to close borders because it is did not want to break its freedom of movement mantra and, even because of the history of the international health regulations, the WHO was not recommending closing borders and I think, in retrospect, the countries that closed borders are the ones who by and large have done better.

看来，当谈到它时，谁无法在大流行中扮演所设想的核心角色……？

You can peel it apart in different ways, but the international health regulations were last written in 2005. They weren’t really fit for purpose for a modern pandemic.

现实是在中国早期发生的事情，报告很慢。谁以一种能激发世界的方式反应缓慢。Yes, it has had a lot of advice, but in fact when we did the early survey for INGSA [International Network for Government Science Advice, which Gluckman chaired until this year] of 120 countries, the WHO wasn’t the primary source of advice that many developing countries appeared to be responding to. They were taking it from some of the larger powers like China, the European countries and so forth.

因此，我认为谁有很多值得关注的人，但是……整个联合国制度是70年前在第二次世界大战后在一个截然不同的世界中设计的。多边系统的整个状态是有关的。我的意思是，除WHO，WMO [世界气象组织]等技术机构中，没有任何形式的科学过程，实际上是进入联合国制度的话语的。然而，现实情况是，无论是来自自然科学还是人文科学，强大的知识对于政府对地球的未来及其上的人们做出的每个决定至关重要。

This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.