Progress Deferred: Lessons from mRNA Vaccine Development

I’m excited to announce the release of Progress Deferred, my research report looking at the multi-decade development of mRNA vaccines, and the factors that limited progress along the way.

mRNA vaccines provide a striking example of a major breakthrough delayed less by fundamental constraints on discovery or development, and more by frictions in the innovation pipeline. The idea makes its first appearance in papers as early as 1988, and much of the fundamental groundwork needed to make the technology a reality was available for more than a decade before it played a starring role in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic.

This paper attempts to understand why progress was delayed, focusing on the influence of three factors:

• Perceived Viability of mRNA: The development of mRNA vaccines took place against the backdrop of a history of disappointing results in adjacent technologies. The poor reputation of DNA vaccines, which had captured imaginations in the 1990s fight against HIV but had largely not lived up to their promise, shaped perceptions about the viability of mRNA vaccines. mRNA was also widely perceived to be a fragile molecule, difficult to work with, and impractical for mass manufacturing. This perception worked to limit academic interest, funding, and corporate support for pursuing mRNA vaccines and therapeutics as a focus of research and development. 

• Vaccines as an Unprofitable Research Field: Pharmaceutical companies underwrite and set the agenda for researching the next generation of treatments. mRNA vaccines presented an unattractive business prospect, even if one considered them viable to create. Vaccines as a category tend to be less favored by pharmaceutical companies, since demand for them can be highly unpredictable and margins typically low. This worked to limit the level of industry effort dedicated to translating laboratory findings into applied practices for manufacturing and delivering mRNA vaccines at scale. 

• Specialization in Research vs Entrepreneurship: The researcher duo of Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman were the first to make some of the major discoveries needed to turn mRNA vaccines into a reality. While both were gifted researchers, both appear to have been less well-suited to the task of popularizing and commercializing their work. This too delayed the development of the technology by limiting awareness of critical knowledge in the broader research community and hindering efforts by Karikó and Weissman themselves to bring their breakthroughs to market.

These factors are not specific to the mRNA vaccine case: one reason for doing this retrospective is to think through how we might alleviate similar frictions in other areas of scientific research and development. The paper proposes some interventions grounded in the mRNA vaccine experience that have more general applicability to innovation policymaking.

I’m looking forward to hearing what you all think! Feel free to write with any questions, thoughts, critiques or otherwise in the comments below.

With this project out the door, I’m also glad to say that Macroscience will be returning to its regular posting cadence. There’s been a lot of ideas percolating as this paper has come together, and I’m excited to get back to it. Stay tuned.