This year, the procurement price for the national influenza vaccine under the National Immunization Program (NIP) has settled in the 8000 won range, intensifying the competitive landscape within the domestic vaccine industry. While industry players feel compelled to participate for the sake of public health and security, there are concerns that ongoing price reductions could impact the research and development (R&D) cycle.
According to the Public Procurement Service on July 18, six companies, including SK Bioscience, GC Green Cross, Korea Vaccine, Sanofi Pasteur Korea, Boryung Biopharma, and Ilyang Pharmaceutical, were awarded contracts for the procurement of influenza vaccines for the 2026-2027 season.
The bidding process was conducted as a 'competitive bidding for desired quantities,' where companies that offered the lowest prices below the expected price set by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (9690 won) were allocated their desired quantities. SK Bioscience secured the largest share of 2.7 million doses at 8851 won, followed by GC Green Cross (8920 won), Korea Vaccine (8952 won), Sanofi Pasteur Korea (8965 won), Boryung Biopharma (9005 won), and Ilyang Pharmaceutical (9199 won). Compared to last year's contract prices for the trivalent vaccine (9339-9660 won), this year's prices have decreased by about 5%.
The industry views the shift to a trivalent influenza vaccine as a factor contributing to the overall decline in market prices. However, since the NIP is a public health initiative, the focus is more on stable supply rather than profitability.
Given the short shelf life and significant inventory burden associated with vaccines, maintaining a stable public supply is crucial for sustaining production capabilities. Jeong Yoon-taek, director of the Pharmaceutical Industry Strategy Research Institute, noted that despite low profitability, companies find it difficult to abandon the NIP due to factors such as factory operations, fixed costs, inventory management, connections to the non-reimbursable market, and building trust with the government. He explained, "Even abroad, programs like the CDC's childhood vaccination program in the U.S. procure at low prices, highlighting the importance of large-scale supply."
Industry insiders also express concerns about the pressures of excessively low bid prices. One industry representative stated, "Companies with established facilities find it hard to exit this market, which operates under national plans. While we continue to participate for the sake of public health, there are certainly challenges from a business perspective."
There is a perspective that prolonged price competition could adversely affect the R&D cycle of private companies. Although current prices are not at a loss level, a realistic price framework is necessary to sustain the R&D cycle in the vaccine market. Another industry representative remarked, "In pharmaceuticals, development costs often exceed production costs, so a certain level of profit is essential for reinvesting in research."
There are also calls for a policy framework that can share the risks associated with adverse reactions during the vaccination process. Institutional support considering public interest and a control tower capable of coordinated responses are essential for ensuring long-term R&D investment.
Seong Baek-rin, head of the Vaccine Practical Technology Development Project, emphasized the need for a policy foundation to support the stable development and supply of domestic NIP vaccines. He stated, "Vaccines are a strategic area directly linked to national health security, so it is crucial that government policy support does not wane due to circumstances. Establishing a pre-purchase agreement system led by the government and providing incentives for domestically developed vaccines are vital."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.