Posted: OCTOBER 26, 2025
Why Pandemic Preparedness Needs Private Sector Investment
IFC’s Zeynep Kantur Ozenci explains how private capital, innovation, and new financing models are reshaping global health — and why building resilient systems before the next crisis depends on public-private partnership.
The global response to COVID-19 revealed not only the limits of public health systems but also the critical role of the private sector in filling those gaps. Hospitals, vaccine manufacturers, and supply chains all relied on private investment and innovation to scale quickly, but building those capabilities before a crisis still remains one of the toughest challenges.
To explore how private capital, innovation, and partnerships can strengthen health systems and pandemic preparedness, I spoke with Zeynep Kantur Ozenci, Global Head of Health at the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private sector arm of the World Bank Group. She leads IFC’s global health team, including their work across life sciences, medical technology, and healthcare services.
She graciously joined me for a conversation on how public and private investment can work together to make healthcare both more resilient and more equitable and what it takes to make health infrastructure “investable” in developing markets:
To explore how private capital, innovation, and partnerships can strengthen health systems and pandemic preparedness, I spoke with Zeynep Kantur Ozenci, Global Head of Health at the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private sector arm of the World Bank Group. She leads IFC’s global health team, including their work across life sciences, medical technology, and healthcare services.
She graciously joined me for a conversation on how public and private investment can work together to make healthcare both more resilient and more equitable and what it takes to make health infrastructure “investable” in developing markets:
Economic Origins | Deniz Yaveroglu
My Interview with Zeynep Kantur Ozenci
Global Head of Health at IFC
To begin, could you share your role as Global Head of Health at IFC and your work on the Global Health Platform?
What are your key priorities in your role?
What are your key priorities in your role?
“
Sure. I currently head IFC’s Global Health team, which houses our global sector expertise across the health value chain. This includes health services, life sciences, and medtech sectors—basically all the sectors under a health system. IFC’s role, as part of the World Bank Group, is to contribute to private sector development in these sectors, and my team carries the global health expertise and programs that support IFC’s work in this space.
The Global Health Platform was launched by IFC in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. It was a $4 billion platform to invest in and support the private sector with three main objectives: to increase the immediate supply of products and services in response to the pandemic; to develop capacities for products under development, such as vaccines and diagnostics; and to support pandemic preparedness and the private sector’s contribution.
The Global Health Platform was a three-year initiative concluded in 2023, but the work on pandemic preparedness continues in collaboration with the World Bank Group to strengthen health systems and prepare for future pandemics.
So, when you ask about our key priorities — our top priority is to increase private sector contribution to health objectives. That includes both access to healthcare during peacetime and pandemic preparedness. We also see the health sector as a key economic driver and a source of job creation, which we support through both public and private investment.
The Global Health Platform was launched by IFC in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. It was a $4 billion platform to invest in and support the private sector with three main objectives: to increase the immediate supply of products and services in response to the pandemic; to develop capacities for products under development, such as vaccines and diagnostics; and to support pandemic preparedness and the private sector’s contribution.
The Global Health Platform was a three-year initiative concluded in 2023, but the work on pandemic preparedness continues in collaboration with the World Bank Group to strengthen health systems and prepare for future pandemics.
So, when you ask about our key priorities — our top priority is to increase private sector contribution to health objectives. That includes both access to healthcare during peacetime and pandemic preparedness. We also see the health sector as a key economic driver and a source of job creation, which we support through both public and private investment.
I understand both public and private investments are necessary for public health.
How do you see the roles of public and private investment as different, and how do they best complement each other in building strong health systems, especially in developing markets?
How do you see the roles of public and private investment as different, and how do they best complement each other in building strong health systems, especially in developing markets?
“
The world is struggling with major gaps in healthcare today — about half the world’s population, roughly four billion people, lack access to healthcare. Most of these people live in low- and middle-income countries where the World Bank Group operates. Closing these gaps will require both public and private sector capacities, and for those parties to work together.
The global health landscape is also shifting, with less and less grant funding going into this space, which further widens this gap. So, as you said, both public and private investments are necessary to close these gaps. Governments are the custodians of health systems. They regulate and ensure safety nets so people can access healthcare. Meanwhile, in the provider space, both public and private players operate. In some countries they work in silos; in others, there’s better integration.
Where we see better integration and governments with clear strategies for engaging the private sector, we also see more complementary actions and investments from private players that help close public health gaps.
The global health landscape is also shifting, with less and less grant funding going into this space, which further widens this gap. So, as you said, both public and private investments are necessary to close these gaps. Governments are the custodians of health systems. They regulate and ensure safety nets so people can access healthcare. Meanwhile, in the provider space, both public and private players operate. In some countries they work in silos; in others, there’s better integration.
Where we see better integration and governments with clear strategies for engaging the private sector, we also see more complementary actions and investments from private players that help close public health gaps.
Many health projects may not naturally attract investors.
How do you turn something like a hospital or vaccine plant into a “investable” project that private capital wants to support?
How do you turn something like a hospital or vaccine plant into a “investable” project that private capital wants to support?
“
The private sector’s motivation is clear. It wants to invest in sectors where there is a predictable business or investment case. In many countries, and across almost all sectors, there are numerous uncertainties. The private sector is comfortable with the risks it can manage, but it will either price in or walk away from those it cannot.
When you look specifically at the health sector, the execution risk, such as building, staffing, and operating a hospital, are all risks the private sector can manage. However, what it cannot manage, and what makes projects less bankable or riskier, are factors like currency devaluation, regulatory uncertainty, or unpredictable demand.
For example, in the case of manufacturing health products or vaccines in developing countries, if the private sector lacks visibility on who it will sell to, at what price, and in what volumes, these become very difficult projects to consider bankable.
When you look specifically at the health sector, the execution risk, such as building, staffing, and operating a hospital, are all risks the private sector can manage. However, what it cannot manage, and what makes projects less bankable or riskier, are factors like currency devaluation, regulatory uncertainty, or unpredictable demand.
For example, in the case of manufacturing health products or vaccines in developing countries, if the private sector lacks visibility on who it will sell to, at what price, and in what volumes, these become very difficult projects to consider bankable.
What is the hardest part of getting investors comfortable with investing in health infrastructure?
“
Again, predictability of demand is one of the main challenges, depending on which part of the health sector a company operates in. As I mentioned earlier, there are major gaps in health services — huge unmet demand for both services and products — but that doesn’t necessarily translate into a business case for the private sector.
For example, in many countries, affordability is a key issue. Many of these countries lack public insurance mechanisms that pay for healthcare services, which means patients’ ability to pay becomes a critical barrier to creating bankable business models. The absence of public or social safety nets that ensure affordability is one of the biggest challenges for private sector participation in these markets.
A second key challenge is regulation. In many markets, strong regulatory agencies with the capacity to oversee healthcare providers simply do not exist. This can lead to issues around quality and ethics in healthcare — risks that credible private sector players prefer to avoid.
Therefore, putting in place effective funding mechanisms and strong regulatory systems is essential for building health systems that function clearly and predictably enough for the private sector to invest.
For example, in many countries, affordability is a key issue. Many of these countries lack public insurance mechanisms that pay for healthcare services, which means patients’ ability to pay becomes a critical barrier to creating bankable business models. The absence of public or social safety nets that ensure affordability is one of the biggest challenges for private sector participation in these markets.
A second key challenge is regulation. In many markets, strong regulatory agencies with the capacity to oversee healthcare providers simply do not exist. This can lead to issues around quality and ethics in healthcare — risks that credible private sector players prefer to avoid.
Therefore, putting in place effective funding mechanisms and strong regulatory systems is essential for building health systems that function clearly and predictably enough for the private sector to invest.
You led IFC’s key initiatives such as structuring hospital PPPs in Turkey.
What made it successful, and what lessons did you learn about making health infrastructure both meaningful and investable?
What made it successful, and what lessons did you learn about making health infrastructure both meaningful and investable?
“
One of the most important aspects of those hospital projects was their scale. As you’ll recall, these were massive programs — each hospital had around a thousand beds, with more than twenty projects across the country. It was quite a controversial program in terms of its sheer size. But at the same time, it was so large that none of the credible private sector players could ignore it. of these projects. At the same time, the private sector must be able to rely on these long-term concession contracts.
Etlik Integrated Health Campus, Ankara, Turkey
What made the program controversial was also what made it attractive to certain investors, such as GE or large construction companies, who took these projects seriously and assembled resources and project teams to pursue the contracts. At the same time, these hospitals were an integral part of Turkey’s broader health system development.
There was already an ongoing reform in Turkey’s health system — putting in place social safety nets, universal health coverage, a primary care model, and improved medical training. These are all critical ingredients of a well-functioning health system. The hospital projects were one piece of the puzzle, ensuring that the hospitals could serve the populations they were meant to serve. Otherwise, you risk creating massive buildings with no doctors or patients in them.
That was another success factor — being part of a system-wide reform. The projects were also structured to be bankable and investor-friendly, which was necessary since they were the first of their kind and required certain elements to attract credible players. But that came at a cost to the government. For example, the foreign exchange risk, which the private sector was not willing to take on, was managed contractually by the government. This meant a considerable foreign exchange burden for the public side.
So, there needs to be a balance between the costs and benefits of such large programs — ensuring that governments get value for money while maintaining the sustainability of these projects. At the same time, the private sector must be able to rely on these long-term concession contracts.
There was already an ongoing reform in Turkey’s health system — putting in place social safety nets, universal health coverage, a primary care model, and improved medical training. These are all critical ingredients of a well-functioning health system. The hospital projects were one piece of the puzzle, ensuring that the hospitals could serve the populations they were meant to serve. Otherwise, you risk creating massive buildings with no doctors or patients in them.
That was another success factor — being part of a system-wide reform. The projects were also structured to be bankable and investor-friendly, which was necessary since they were the first of their kind and required certain elements to attract credible players. But that came at a cost to the government. For example, the foreign exchange risk, which the private sector was not willing to take on, was managed contractually by the government. This meant a considerable foreign exchange burden for the public side.
So, there needs to be a balance between the costs and benefits of such large programs — ensuring that governments get value for money while maintaining the sustainability of these projects. At the same time, the private sector must be able to rely on these long-term concession contracts.
You’ve also led IFC’s pandemic readiness and health resilience initiatives – developing vaccine production capacity in Africa, for instance.
What did that experience teach you about building resilience before the next pandemic?
What did that experience teach you about building resilience before the next pandemic?
“
Many of the points I mentioned earlier apply here as well. One of the biggest lessons for our institution in pandemic preparedness is that you cannot work with the private and public sectors in silos — and that applies to us too. IFC is part of the World Bank Group, which also includes our sister organizations, IBRD and IDA. IBRD and IDA work on the public side, developing policies and providing public funding necessary for pandemic preparedness, while IFC focuses on mobilizing private sector solutions.
That was one of the key lessons we learned when we embarked on a project to build a multi-vaccine manufacturing plant in Senegal. IFC led the effort to develop a bankable, commercially viable project for Senegal to create a vaccine manufacturing platform, while at the same time working with the government to build the national regulator’s capacity to oversee and accredit vaccine production in the country.
Another major lesson was recognizing the number of risks that the private sector cannot manage on its own. There’s no strong track record of large-scale vaccine manufacturing in developing countries outside of India, China, and to some extend Indonesia, Brazil and Argentina. The vaccine manufacturing sector has become highly concentrated, with significant economies of scale and specialized technical expertise required.
To geographically diversify this manufacturing landscape and create capabilities in Africa, a regional approach was essential. National approaches, producing vaccines solely for one country, are not commercially viable. Building a regional ecosystem, including the development of necessary skills, was a critical requirement.
Working on or financing a project in isolation would not have gotten us where we needed to be. This is precisely what underpins the World Bank Group’s current approach: bringing together its public and private capabilities to create holistic strategies for pandemic preparedness.
That was one of the key lessons we learned when we embarked on a project to build a multi-vaccine manufacturing plant in Senegal. IFC led the effort to develop a bankable, commercially viable project for Senegal to create a vaccine manufacturing platform, while at the same time working with the government to build the national regulator’s capacity to oversee and accredit vaccine production in the country.
Another major lesson was recognizing the number of risks that the private sector cannot manage on its own. There’s no strong track record of large-scale vaccine manufacturing in developing countries outside of India, China, and to some extend Indonesia, Brazil and Argentina. The vaccine manufacturing sector has become highly concentrated, with significant economies of scale and specialized technical expertise required.
To geographically diversify this manufacturing landscape and create capabilities in Africa, a regional approach was essential. National approaches, producing vaccines solely for one country, are not commercially viable. Building a regional ecosystem, including the development of necessary skills, was a critical requirement.
Working on or financing a project in isolation would not have gotten us where we needed to be. This is precisely what underpins the World Bank Group’s current approach: bringing together its public and private capabilities to create holistic strategies for pandemic preparedness.
If a new pandemic suddenly breaks out tomorrow, what financing or infrastructure gaps worry you the most?
“
One of the biggest gaps we encountered during the COVID-19 pandemic was the lack of what we call surge financing capacity.
What do we mean by that? Essentially, you are asking companies and providers to scale up their capabilities and production capacity very quickly to meet pandemic-level demand, a demand that may not exist a year or two later. For the private sector, doing this alone is not possible.
Surge financing serves multiple purposes, and we lacked it during the last pandemic. First, it ensures that low- and middle-income countries have access to essential products and services. During a global crisis, many developed countries reserve the existing global capacities for their own use, leaving low-income countries at the end of the queue.
Second, surge financing helps de-risk the private sector as it rapidly increases production capacity despite unpredictable future demand. Third, it enables research and development for critical products at an accelerated pace without limiting these capacities to high-income countries only.
These types of surge, or crisis, financing mechanisms did not exist at the time. Now, many institutions, such as the World Bank Group and others, are working to create such surge financing capacities. The goal is to be able to scale up both supply and demand-side financing rapidly, ensuring that middle- and low-income countries can access products and services equitably during a pandemic.
What do we mean by that? Essentially, you are asking companies and providers to scale up their capabilities and production capacity very quickly to meet pandemic-level demand, a demand that may not exist a year or two later. For the private sector, doing this alone is not possible.
Surge financing serves multiple purposes, and we lacked it during the last pandemic. First, it ensures that low- and middle-income countries have access to essential products and services. During a global crisis, many developed countries reserve the existing global capacities for their own use, leaving low-income countries at the end of the queue.
Second, surge financing helps de-risk the private sector as it rapidly increases production capacity despite unpredictable future demand. Third, it enables research and development for critical products at an accelerated pace without limiting these capacities to high-income countries only.
These types of surge, or crisis, financing mechanisms did not exist at the time. Now, many institutions, such as the World Bank Group and others, are working to create such surge financing capacities. The goal is to be able to scale up both supply and demand-side financing rapidly, ensuring that middle- and low-income countries can access products and services equitably during a pandemic.
How do partnerships with the private sector help make these large-scale health projects possible? And why is mobilizing private capital important for pandemic readiness and long-term growth?
“
Just to give you a sense, I mentioned earlier the demand and supply gaps that already exist in healthcare. There’s an estimated annual funding gap of over $170 billion to close these access gaps — and that’s without factoring in a pandemic.
Currently, government fiscal budgets and a diminishing grant funding environment mean that most of this financing will need to come from the private sector. Without mobilizing private capital, we will not be able to make the investments necessary to close gaps in health services and products.
But mobilizing the private sector goes beyond just financing. In many cases, the private sector brings agility and innovative capacity to respond to rapidly changing environments. Many governments are now looking for ways to leverage private sector capabilities and innovations to close their gaps and strengthen their health systems.
For example, the use of AI for product development, demand prediction, or disease prevention — these types of technological innovations are primarily driven by the private sector. Mobilizing both capital and innovation across the health value chain is therefore incredibly important for pandemic preparedness, as well as for meeting health needs during peacetime.
Currently, government fiscal budgets and a diminishing grant funding environment mean that most of this financing will need to come from the private sector. Without mobilizing private capital, we will not be able to make the investments necessary to close gaps in health services and products.
But mobilizing the private sector goes beyond just financing. In many cases, the private sector brings agility and innovative capacity to respond to rapidly changing environments. Many governments are now looking for ways to leverage private sector capabilities and innovations to close their gaps and strengthen their health systems.
For example, the use of AI for product development, demand prediction, or disease prevention — these types of technological innovations are primarily driven by the private sector. Mobilizing both capital and innovation across the health value chain is therefore incredibly important for pandemic preparedness, as well as for meeting health needs during peacetime.
How does IFC evaluate and balance the social benefits and economic viability of private sector projects that it supports?
“
IFC has dual requirements: commercial viability and development impact. For every project we undertake, we must demonstrate both. IFC has a well-developed impact measurement framework called AIMM, which evaluates each project’s contribution to several goals. These include expanding access to healthcare, creating jobs, and building sustainable industries, all while maintaining the project’s commercial viability.
These two objectives, social impact and financial sustainability, actually go hand in hand. The belief that social impact and commercial viability are mutually exclusive is outdated. In today’s environment of shrinking grant funding and limited fiscal space, developing sustainable industries that can serve multiple populations across the health value chain is what ultimately drives the greatest long-term impact.
These two objectives, social impact and financial sustainability, actually go hand in hand. The belief that social impact and commercial viability are mutually exclusive is outdated. In today’s environment of shrinking grant funding and limited fiscal space, developing sustainable industries that can serve multiple populations across the health value chain is what ultimately drives the greatest long-term impact.
Looking forward, what new ideas in financing health care are you most excited about to make pandemic preparedness and health infrastructure sustainable?
“
We talked earlier about public-private partnerships in terms of projects or the provision of products and services. But there’s also a growing focus on public-private partnerships on the financing side. As I mentioned, mobilizing the private sector requires innovative financing mechanisms. These could include blended finance structures that help de-risk investments for the private sector in areas where they are not comfortable managing certain risks, or results-based financing designed to incentivize specific impact outcomes.
In the past, you would typically see projects that were either purely publicly funded or entirely financed by the private sector. Increasingly, however, we are seeing the two come together — using limited and diminishing public and grant resources to catalyze much larger volumes of private capital. This approach helps optimize resources and allows public and private actors to manage different types of risk based on their respective strengths.
This kind of innovation and partnership on the financing side is what excites me the most, and it’s exactly the direction IFC and the World Bank Group are working toward.
In the past, you would typically see projects that were either purely publicly funded or entirely financed by the private sector. Increasingly, however, we are seeing the two come together — using limited and diminishing public and grant resources to catalyze much larger volumes of private capital. This approach helps optimize resources and allows public and private actors to manage different types of risk based on their respective strengths.
This kind of innovation and partnership on the financing side is what excites me the most, and it’s exactly the direction IFC and the World Bank Group are working toward.
My conversation with Zeynep Kantur Ozenci underscored that pandemic preparedness is not only a public health issue but also an economic one. Building resilient systems requires both public commitment and private capital, each addressing different kinds of risk. As she explained, governments set the foundation, but it is often the private sector that brings the speed, scale, and innovation needed to make health systems sustainable.
The challenge, then, is designing the partnerships and financial models that make preparedness investable before the next crisis makes it unavoidable.
The challenge, then, is designing the partnerships and financial models that make preparedness investable before the next crisis makes it unavoidable.
Zeynep Kantur Ozenci is the Global Head of Health at the International Finance Corporation (IFC), part of the World Bank Group. She leads IFC’s global work across health services, medical technology, and life sciences, focusing on mobilizing private investment to strengthen health systems and pandemic preparedness.
Over her 25-year career spanning development and investment banking, she has led major initiatives such as Turkey’s hospital public-private partnership program and IFC’s Global Health Platform, launched in response to COVID-19. Before joining IFC, she worked in investment banking at HSBC and at the World Bank Group on financial sector and capital market development.
Over her 25-year career spanning development and investment banking, she has led major initiatives such as Turkey’s hospital public-private partnership program and IFC’s Global Health Platform, launched in response to COVID-19. Before joining IFC, she worked in investment banking at HSBC and at the World Bank Group on financial sector and capital market development.
Zeynep Kantur Ozenci
Global Head of Health at IFC