COVID-19 and Africa: Equations, Epistemologies, and Experiences
Early speculations on the global patterns of COVID-19 forecast that Africa would be deeply affected, with many global health leaders and organisations predicting high infection and death rates of the disease alongside medical, social, economic and political crises. Yet, most regions in Africa reported relatively low morbidity and mortality rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. Researchers have termed this phenomenon ‘the African COVID-19 paradox’ (e.g. Osayomi et al., 2021). Various explanations have been advanced, including climatic, demographic, environmental, religious, political, biomedical and cultural frameworks, alongside debates over the extent and reliability of Covid-19 testing, modelling, and data.
On 19 June 2024, a University of Oxford Medical Humanities interdisciplinary workshop discussed COVID-19 data and its debates as they relate to Africa. The workshop drew on Dr Tolulope Osayomi’s AfOx fellowship with Medical Humanities Oxford, which examines and carefully analyses various interpretations of ‘the African COVID-19 Paradox’ ; the workshop also discussed how this helps to interrogate what ‘Africa’ itself signifies within the field of global health, and ultimately points out the dynamism of the African agency in the co-production of global health. As one participant noted, what was remarkable is that this was one of the first events at Oxford to focus specifically on Africa and COVID-19, allowing attendees to share and link together data and research on various African regions and from disciplines often otherwise kept isolated.
Methodologically, the workshop was deeply interdisciplinary, drawing together mathematical modellers, medical geographers, anthropologists, health communication scholars, historians, and philosophers, among others. Tolu’ Osayomi’s presentation, “Poverty as a COVID-19 Vaccine: the Danger of a Single Ontology” drew on recent research and epistemologies of the global south to outline the need for multidisciplinary approaches in order to properly understand the contexts of COVID-19 in Africa in his opening presentation. He ended his presentation on the note that the recognition of the plurality of perspectives is to avoid “the danger of a single story” of pandemics in Africa, and more importantly help “to identify and develop what worked well for African countries”. This first session was then followed by data from mathematical modellers and epidemiologists on COVID rates and life expectancy in Uganda (Joseph Mugisha, Rob Newton, Janet Seeley); information control on health data in various African countries (George Ogola); and an analysis of WHO COVID-policy as it pertained to Africa (David Bell). Chaired by Toby Greene, the second session brought together an analysis of funding for Covid-19 research in Africa (Emilia Antonio); a thoughtful discussion on decolonization and the pandemic (Caesar Atuire); an overview of Covid-19 responses in Kenya (Philip Bejon); and concluded with an overview of the effect of Covid-19 policies on informal markets in Uganda and Nigeria (Kate Meagher).
The result was vibrant discussion and various debates, as well as an overarching consensus on how ‘Africa’ presented a case that challenged international frameworks for the patterns of and responses to Covid-19. At the same time, the workshop also demonstrated how different disciplines provided different and rich insights into the nature of a pandemic and the effects of public health policies. While accurate disease modelling is crucial, the many layers of a pandemic as well as the implications of measures taken to control it were only apparent when insights from media studies, politics, anthropology, and other fields were also taken into account. Most fundamentally, the workshop clarified how the nature and pattern of COVID-19 in Africa challenges the standard model of pandemic responses applied internationally, raising fundamental questions as to what, and who, should define the nature and practice of global health.
