Global health R&D strikes me as having very high expected value, but might be difficult for governments in low income countries to justify to voters when it could spent on urgent object level health interventions which produce benefits more quickly.
Does that mean donors should focus more on R&D (eg - give more funding to CEPI than to the Pandemic Fund)? Is this idea fleshed out in better detail somewhere in the global health world?
I think that the recent 80,000 Hours Podcast on high-impact climate philanthropy discusses this. See this section in the transcript, potentially.
And there's also this recent sequence (e.g. one post is about Estimating the cost-effectiveness of previous R&D projects).