CSCW is the premier international venue for research in the design and use of technologies that affect groups, organizations, communities, and networks. We invite authors to submit their best research on all topics relevant to collaborative and social computing. Accepted papers are published in two annual CSCW issues of the Proceedings of the ACM on Human Computer Interaction (PACM HCI).
Shop Costco.ca for electronics, computers, furniture, outdoor living, appliances, jewellery and more. Enjoy low warehouse prices on name-brands products delivered to your door. October 15, 2020: Paper submissions due 23:59 Anywhere on Earth (AoE) time.Accepted papers are invited to present at CSCW 2021. Submissions with Major Revision from the June 2020 cycle should be submitted in this cycle.
Submissions are accepted at four deadlines per year. The upcoming deadline is January 15, 2021, which will be followed by April 15 and Jul 15, 2021. Submissions accepted for publication in the October 2020, January 2021 and April 2021 cycles will be invited to present at CSCW 2021. Papers accepted from July 2021 onwards will be invited to present at CSCW 2022.
- CSCW 2021 will use the old interim ACM Small template. For details and links to template pages, see under “Formatting and Length.”
- Revision decisions have been updated. Submissions will now receive one of four decisions: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, and Reject. For details, see under “Revision Cycles and Decisions.”
- Starting with the October 2020 cycle, authors of rejected papers may revise and submit their revised papers from three cycles onwards, but not before. Authors of papers that receive a Major Revision decision will be asked to resubmit within the next two cycles, rather than in the next cycle. These decisions were made to avoid paper rejections due to lack of time for revisions and to discourage authors from submitting papers that are not ready. Authors of papers that were rejected in the June 2020 cycle can still submit revisions in the October 2020 cycle, as these papers are grandfathered in.
October 15, 2020: Paper submissions due 23:59 Anywhere on Earth (AoE) time. Accepted papers are invited to present at CSCW 2021. Submissions with Major Revision from the June 2020 cycle should be submitted in this cycle. Authors will be notified of decisions on December 22, 2020.
January 15, 2021: Paper submissions due 23:59 AoE. Accepted papers are invited to present at CSCW 2021. Submissions with Major Revision from the October cycle can be submitted in this cycle (or the April cycle). Submissions with Accept or Minor Revision from the October cycle need to be re-submitted in this cycle for final check and publication/presentation at CSCW 2021.
April 15, 2021: Paper submissions due 23:59 AoE. Accepted papers are invited to present at CSCW 2021. Submissions with Major Revision from the January cycle can be submitted in this cycle (or the July cycle). Submissions with Accept or Minor Revision from the January cycle need to be re-submitted in this cycle for final check and publication/presentation at CSCW 2021.
July 15, 2021: Paper submissions due 23:59 AoE. Accepted papers are invited to present at CSCW 2022. Submissions with Major Revision from the April cycle can be submitted in this cycle (or the Oct cycle). Submissions with Accept or Minor Revision from the April cycle need to be re-submitted in this cycle for final check and publication/presentation at CSCW 2021.
Oct 15, 2021: Paper submissions due 23:59 AoE. Accepted papers are invited to present at CSCW 2022. Submissions with Major Revision from the July cycle can be submitted in this cycle (or the Jan 2022 cycle). Submissions with Accept or Minor Revision from the July cycle need to be re-submitted in this cycle for final check and publication/presentation at CSCW 2022.
Paper reviews will be sent to authors within 10 weeks from the initial submission and major revision resubmission. Review turnaround for final checks and papers accepted with minor revisions will be shorter.
The submission site will open 2 weeks before each deadline. No deadline extensions will be granted.
We invite authors to submit papers that inform the design or deployment of collaborative or social systems; introduce novel systems, interaction techniques, or algorithms; or, study existing collaborative or social practices. The scope of CSCW 2021 includes social computing and social media, crowdsourcing, open and remote collaboration, technologically-enabled or enhanced communication, such as video-conferencing and other remote-presence technologies, CSCL, MOOCs and related educational technologies, multi-user input technologies, collocated work practices, work articulation and coordination, awareness, and information sharing. This scope spans socio-technical domains of work, home, education, healthcare, the arts, sociality, entertainment, and ethics. Papers can report on novel research results, designs, systems, or new ways of thinking about, studying, or supporting shared activities.
CSCW encourages papers that make a contribution to building CSCW systems, including (but not limited to) engineering and technical enablers for CSCW applications, methods and techniques for new CSCW services and applications, and evaluation of both early-stage and fully-built CSCW systems in lab or field settings.
To support diverse and high-quality contributions, CSCW uses a minimum of two-cycle review process with opportunity for major revisions reviewed by the same reviewers. Additionally, no arbitrary length limit is imposed on submissions. Accepted papers are published in the Proceedings of the ACM: Human Computer Interaction (PACM HCI) journal.
We invite contributions to CSCW across a variety of research techniques, methods, approaches, and domains, including:
Social and crowd computing. Studies, theories, designs, mechanisms, systems, and/or infrastructures addressing social media, social networking, wikis, blogs, online gaming, crowdsourcing, collective intelligence, virtual worlds or collaborative information behaviors.
System development. Hardware, architectures, infrastructures, interaction design, technical foundations, algorithms, and/or toolkits that enable the building of new social and collaborative systems and experiences.
Theory. Critical analysis or theory with clear relevance to the design or study of social and collaborative systems, within and beyond work settings.
Empirical investigations. Findings, guidelines, and/or studies of practices, communication, collaboration, or use, as related to collaborative technologies.
Data mining and modeling. Studies, analyses and infrastructures for making use of large- and small-scale data.
Methodologies and tools. Novel methods, or combinations of approaches and tools used in building collaborative systems or studying their use.
Domain-specific social and collaborative applications. Including applications to healthcare, transportation, gaming, ICT4D, sustainability, education, accessibility, global collaboration, or other domains.
Collaboration systems based on emerging technologies. Mobile and ubiquitous computing, game engines, virtual worlds, multi-touch, novel display technologies, vision and gesture recognition, big data, MOOCs, crowd labor markets, SNSs, or sensing systems.
Ethics and policy implications. Analysis of the implications of socio-technical systems and the algorithms that shape them.
Crossing boundaries. Studies, prototypes, or other investigations that explore interactions across disciplines, distance, languages, generations, and cultures, to help better understand how to transcend social, temporal, and/or spatial boundaries.
Send queries about paper submissions to [email protected]
CSCW 2021 is using the Precision Conference System (PCS) 2.0: https://new.precisionconference.com/
Authors submitting papers for peer-review to ACM publications must comply with the SIGCHI Submission and Review Policy including, but not limited to:
That the paper submitted is original, that the listed authors are the creators of the work, that each author is aware of the submission and that they are listed as an author, and that the paper is an honest representation of the underlying work.
That the work submitted is not currently under review at any other publication venue, and that it will not be submitted to another venue unless it has been rejected or withdrawn from this venue.
For information about re-publication in English of work previously published in another language, please refer to section 1.5.4 of the ACM SIGCHI policy.
Confidentiality of submitted material will be maintained. Upon acceptance, the titles, authorship, and abstracts of papers will be used in the Advance Program. Submissions should contain no information or material that is or will be proprietary and/or confidential at the time of publication, and should cite no publication that will be proprietary or confidential at that time. Final versions of accepted papers must be formatted according to detailed instructions provided by the publisher. Copyright release forms must be signed for inclusion in the PACM HCI and the ACM Digital Library.
Word authors: Because CSCW papers are published in PACM HCI that uses the Sheridan service, authors need to use the old interim ACM Small template, which is no longer publicized on ACM websites. Depending on your operating system, please use the following links to access the template:
- Windows PC Users: Use this Windows WORD Sample File.
- MAC Users: Use the “ACM Small” version from https://www.acm.org/publications/authors/deprecated-word-template.
- ALL Users: We recommend you download and install the ACM template fonts.
LaTeX authors need to use the template which is available at https://www.acm.org/publications/authors/submissions, and insert the
Note: In preparing revisions, authors should continue using the template they had used for their original submissions.
No minimum or maximum length is imposed on papers. Rather, reviewers will be instructed to weigh the contribution of a paper relative to its length. Typical papers are under 10,000 words.
Note: Valuable but concise contributions are welcome as short papers. Shorter, more focused papers will be reviewed with the expectation of a small, focused contribution. Papers whose length is incommensurate with their contribution will be rejected.
Papers are subject to anonymous reviewing. Submissions must have authors’ names and affiliations removed, and avoid obvious identifying statements. Any grant information that identifies the author(s) and their institution should be removed as well. Papers that violate this policy will be desk rejected. Please check in particular the front page, headers and footers, and the Acknowledgement section.
Citations to authors’ own relevant work should not be anonymous, but rather should be done without identifying the authors. For example, “Prior work by [authors]” instead of “In our prior work.”
CSCW does not have a policy against uploading preprints to SSRN or arXiv before they are submitted for review at the conference.
We also ask the reviewers to refrain from taking steps to learn about the author’s identity during the peer review process.
With the quarterly submission model, CSCW will be returning submissions to the primary contact author with one of the following decisions, along with the reviews, within 10 weeks from the initial submission; review turnaround for accepted papers and final checks will be shorter:
Accept: Submissions that receive this decision are ready or nearly ready for publication , though they may require a few small changes. The final version of the paper must be submitted in the next cycle (or earlier) for verification by the corresponding associate chair. The submission will appear in an upcoming issue of the PACM HCI.
Minor revision: Submissions that receive this decision will require some revisions before being accepted for publication. The revised submission must be submitted in the next cycle, along with a brief response to the reviewers’ comments. The revision will be verified by the corresponding associate chair and if approved, the submission will be promoted to an accepted paper.
Major revision: Submissions that receive this decision have real potential, but will require major portions rewritten or redone, and then re-reviewed. Authors should submit their revised manuscript within the next two cycles, along with a letter explaining how they addressed the reviewers’ comments and incorporated changes in the revision. For example, an October submission receiving a Major Revision decision must be resubmitted to either the January or the April cycle. To the extent possible, resubmissions will be assigned the same AC and reviewers for re-review.
Reject: Starting with the October 2020 cycle, authors of rejected papers may revise and submit their revised papers from three cycles onwards, but not before. For example, an October submission that is rejected can be resubmitted in July or later in the following year. Authors should describe the paper’s submission history and briefly outline the changes in a designated field in PCS when resubmitting. ACs and reviewers will have access to this description of the paper’s submission history, and may also request to review the detailed submission history. Papers resubmitted with no or marginal changes will be desk rejected without review.
Desk / Quick Reject: Authors should only submit completed work of publishable quality and within the scope of ACM CSCW. The ACs and Editors may Quick Reject any submission that they believe has little chance of being accepted if it goes through the peer review process. Incomplete or otherwise inappropriate submissions will be desk rejected without review.
We recognize that authors may sometimes feel a review is unfair, inappropriate, or problematic in other ways. CSCW has implemented the following process for authors who wish to appeal a decision:
- A committee member (1 AC / 2AC / Editor / Papers Chair) raises an issue about the decision or decision-making process, possibly in response to a communication from an author
- Authors directly contact the Papers Chairs to officially appeal a decision
- The appeal involves motivating the case with evidence
- Papers Chairs assess the situation and make an initial call to bring it up for discussion with the Editors
- The Editor assigned to the submission reviews the paper, the reviews, and the discussion in PCS to determine if the case is valid. The Editor may choose to involve the ACs at this stage
- Other Editors weigh in and review the case
- The Editors come to a collective decision and share their decision with the Papers Chairs
- The Papers Chairs discuss the Editors’ decision. If a change is agreed, Papers Chairs record the updated decision in PCS
- The Papers Chairs communicate the final decision to the authors
- If the authors are dissatisfied with the outcome of this process, the case will then be referred to the CSCW Steering Committee
When uploading the paper to the PCS reviewing system, authors will be able to indicate the primary research paradigm of their paper for appropriate reviewer assignment:
Technical/Systems, e.g., building novel systems, algorithms, implementing novel features in existing systems, etc.
Empirical-Qualitative, e.g., ethnography, workplace studies, qualitative user studies, etc.
Empirical-Quantitative, e.g., “big data,” quantitative user studies, statistical methods, etc.
Mixed Methods, e.g., combined qualitative and quantitative empirical research, design explorations combined with technical feature development.
Design, e.g., design implications, guidelines, methods, techniques, etc.
Theoretical, e.g., conceptual frameworks, theory underpinning CSCW studies/domains, theoretical analysis, and essays.
Authors are encouraged to submit supplementary material when possible and when aligned with their methods. Authors are encouraged to submit links to preregistrations on the Open Science Framework (OSF) when appropriate for their work. Authors are also encouraged to use open access repositories and make their data and other material FAIR when appropriate for their work. Authors are encouraged to describe efforts to make their work more reproducible. Reviewers are encouraged to support evolving approaches to supporting open and transparent research practices.
Authors should consider submitting a video that illustrates their work as part of the submission (no more than three minutes long). Videos are not required for paper submissions, but are strongly encouraged, particularly for papers contributing novel systems or interaction techniques.
Accepted papers are invited to present at the corresponding conference for that cycle, and authors can choose whether or not they wish to present. Because the situation may be changing and times are uncertain, authors are encouraged to discuss alternative options with the Papers Chairs. Presenting at the conference is strongly recommended but not required.
Sharon Ding (Fudan University)
Susan R. Fussell (Cornell University)
Andrés Monroy-Hernández (Snap Research)
Sean Munson (University of Washington)
Mor Naaman (Cornell University)
Irina Shklovski (University of Copenhagen)
Shaowen Bardzell (Penn State University)
Siân Lindley (Microsoft Research)
Aleksandra Sarcevic (Drexel University)
- Syed Ishtiaque Ahmed (University of Toronto, Canada)
- Michelle Annett (MishMashMakers, Canada)
- Noah Apthorpe (Colgate University, USA)
- Nalin Arachchilage (La Trobe University, Australia)
- Ignacio Avellino (University of Maryland Baltimore County, USA)
- Louise Barkhuus (IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark)
- Zinaida Benenson (University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany)
- Andrew Berry (Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, USA)
- Jacob Biehl (University of Pittsburgh, USA)
- Jeremy Blackburn (Binghamton University, USA)
- Clara Caldeira (Indiana University Bloomington, USA)
- Gul Calikli (University of Gothenburg, Sweden)
- Heloisa Candello (IBM Research, Brazil)
- Mark Cartwright (New Jersey Institute of Technology, USA)
- Stevie Chancellor (University of Minnesota, USA)
- Priyank Chandra (University of Toronto, Canada)
- Senthil Chandrasegaran (Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands)
- Eshwar Chandrasekharan (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, USA)
- Minsuk Chang (NAVER Clova AI Research, South Korea)
- Xiang (Anthony) Chen (UCLA, USA)
- Jinghui Cheng (University of Montreal – Polytechnique Montreal, Canada)
- Shiwei Cheng (Zhejiang University of Technology, China)
- Kenny Choo (Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore)
- Chia-Fang (Christina) Chung (Indiana University Bloomington, USA)
- Adrian Clear (Northumbria University, UK)
- Kevin Crowston (Syracuse University, USA)
- Luigi De Russis (Politecnico di Torino, Italy)
- Nicola Dell (Cornell Tech, USA)
- Sanorita Dey (University of Maryland Baltimore County, USA)
- Chris Elsden (University of Edinburgh, UK)
- Pardis Emami-Naeini (University of Washington, USA)
- Daniel Epstein (University of California Irvine, USA)
- Ali Farooq (University of Turku, Finland)
- Claudia Flores-Saviaga (West Virgina University, USA)
- Guo Freeman (Clemson University, USA)
- Alisa Frik (University of California Berkeley, USA)
- Ujwal Gadiraju (Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands)
- Krzysztof Gajos (Harvard University, USA)
- Dilrukshi Gamage, (University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka)
- Radhika Garg (Syracuse University, USA)
- Jens Gerken (Westphalian University of Applied Sciences, Germany)
- Arup Kumar Ghosh (Jacksonville State University, USA)
- Elena Glassman (Harvard University, USA)
- Mareike Glöss (Stockholm University, Sweden)
- Siobahn Day Grady (North Carolina Central University, USA)
- Colin Gray (Purdue University, USA)
- Carla Griggio (Aarhus University, Denmark)
- Nir Grinberg (Ben-Gurion University, Israel)
- Shion Guha (Marquette University, USA)
- Xinning Gui (Pennsylvania State University, USA)
- Ido Guy (eBay Research Israel, Israel)
- Kyungsik Han (Ajou University, South Korea)
- Karin Hansson (Stockholm University, Sweden)
- Denis Helic (Graz University of Technology, Austria)
- Benjamin Mako Hill (University of Washington, USA)
- Sungsoo (Ray) Hong (New York University, USA)
- Simo Hosio (University of Oulu, Finland)
- Roberto Hoyle (Oberlin College, USA)
- Yun Huang (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, USA)
- Julie Hui (University of Michigan, USA)
- Aaron Jiang (Facebook, USA)
- Ian Johnson (Newcastle University, UK)
- Hyunggu Jung (University of Seoul, South Korea)
- Raghav Pavan Karumur (Target Enterprise, Inc., USA)
- Brian Keegan (University of Colorado Boulder, USA)
- Wendy Kellogg (IBM Research (Emerita), USA)
- Ryan Kelly (University of Melbourne, Australia)
- Sunyoung Kim (Rutgers University, USA)
- David Kirk (Newcastle University, UK)
- Bart Knijnenburg (Clemson University, USA)
- JeongGil Ko (Yonsei University, South Korea)
- Marina Kogan (University of Utah, USA)
- P M Krafft (University of Oxford, UK)
- Ugur Kursuncu (University of South Carolina, USA)
- Nicolas LaLone (University of Nebraska Omaha, USA)
- Sang Won Lee (Virginia Tech, USA)
- Sung-Ju Lee (KAIST, South Korea)
- Zhicong Lu (City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong)
- Xiaojuan Ma (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong)
- Michael Madaio (Microsoft Research, USA)
- Walid Magdy (University of Edinburgh, UK)
- Nikolas Martelaro (Carnegie Mellon University, USA)
- Brian McInnis (University of California San Diego, USA)
- Andrew Miller (Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis, USA)
- Toni-Jan Keith Monserrat (University of the Philippines Los Baños, Philippines)
- Troels Mønsted (Roskilde University, Denmark)
- Maryam Mustafa (Lahore University of Management Sciences, Pakistan)
- Eni Mustafaraj (Wellesley College, USA)
- Matti Nelimarkka (University of Helsinki / Aalto University, Finland)
- Jasmin Niess (University of Bremen, Germany)
- Jussi Okkonen (Tampere University, Finland)
- Thomas Olsson (Tampere University, Finland)
- Fabio Palomba (University of Salerno, Italy)
- Vineet Pandey (Harvard University, USA)
- Nadia Pantidi (University College Cork, Ireland)
- Alexandra Papoutsaki (Pomona College, USA)
- Albert Park (University of North Carolina Charlotte, USA)
- Thammathip Piumsomboon (University of Canterbury, New Zealand)
- Nat Poor (Independent, USA)
- Marlen Promann (Purdue University, USA)
- Amon Rapp (University of Torino, Italy)
- Stuart Reeves (University of Nottingham, UK)
- Sean Rintel (Microsoft Research Cambridge, UK)
- Daniel Romero (University of Michigan, USA)
- Jeffrey Rzeszotarski (Cornell University, USA)
- Herman Saksono (Harvard University, USA)
- Nithya Sambasivan (Google, USA)
- Briane Paul Samson (De La Salle University, Philippines)
- Saiph Savage (West Virgina University / National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), USA/Mexico)
- Marén Schorch (University of Siegen, Germany)
- John Seberger (Indiana University Bloomington, USA)
- Alexander Serebrenik (Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands)
- Hong Shen (Carnegie Mellon University, USA)
- Jaime Snyder (University of Washington, USA)
- Robert Soden (University of Toronto, Canada)
- Jean Song (KAIST, South Korea)
- Jose Such (King’s College London, UK)
- Bongwon Suh (Seoul National University, South Korea)
- Reem Talhouk (Northumbria University, UK)
- Chenhao Tan (University of Colorado, USA)
- John Tang (Microsoft Research, USA)
- Andrea Thomer (University of Michigan, USA)
- Alexandra To (Northeastern University, USA)
- Peter Tolmie (University of Siegen, Germany)
- Xin Tong (Simon Fraser University, Canada)
- Austin Toombs (Purdue University, USA)
- Liam Turner (Cardiff University Wales, UK)
- Umair ul Hassan (National University of Ireland Galway, Ireland)
- Aditya Vashistha (Cornell University, USA)
- Nervo Verdezoto (Cardiff University, UK)
- Vasilis Vlachokyriakos (Newcastle University, UK)
- Dhaval Vyas (University of Queensland, Australia)
- Dakuo Wang (IBM Research, USA)
- Jiangtao Wang (Coventry University, UK)
- Ryan Sheng-Ming Wang (National Taipei University of Technology, Taiwan)
- Mark Warner (Northumbria University, UK)
- Ingmar Weber (Qatar Computing Research Institute, Qatar)
- Alexandra Weilenmann (University of Gothenburg, Sweden)
- Justin Weisz (IBM Research, USA)
- Mark Whiting (Stanford University, USA)
- Jason Wiese (University of Utah, USA)
- Alex Williams (University of Tennessee Knoxville, USA)
- Marisol Wong-Villacres (Georgia Institute of Technology, USA)
- Paweł W. Woźniak (Utrecht University, The Netherlands)
- Diyi Yang (Georgia Institute of Technology, USA)
- Yaxing Yao (Carnegie Mellon University, USA)
- Dongwook Yoon (University of British Columbia, Canada)
- Chuang-Wen You (National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan)
- Zhan Zhang (Pace University, USA)
- Yuhang Zhao (University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA)
- Haiyi Zhu (Carnegie Mellon University, USA)
- Michael Zimmer (Marquette University, USA)
- Arkaitz Zubiaga (Queen Mary University of London, UK)
- Douglas Zytko (Oakland University, USA)
Jörg Meuthen, the right-wing politician and leader of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, has launched into a scathing attack against the under-fire European Commission President. He has raged Brussels has 'failed across the board in getting the vaccine', accusing Ms von der Leyen of not acting quickly enough at a time when the UK - which left the EU a few weeks ago - is streaking ahead in terms of vaccination numbers and doses available to its population of more than 60million.
The MEP told German weekly newspaper Junge Freiheit: 'The EU failed across the board in getting the vaccine.
'While other countries such as Great Britain ordered larger amounts of vaccine months earlier, the EU under the leadership of Ursula von der Leyen has failed to take action in time and then got bogged down hopelessly in contractual clauses with the pharmaceutical companies.'
The EU is currently embroiled in a bitter war of words with vaccine manufacturer AstraZeneca over the delivery of its coronavirus jab.
The company was supposed to be delivering around 80million doses of its vaccine to the EU by the end of the month, but has warned it will miss this target due to major production issues.© GETTY eu vaccine ursula von der leyen© GETTY eu vaccine germany
But embarrassingly AstraZeneca has announced that Britain, which has basked in its new-found freedom after fully completing Brexit, will be supplied with the ordered amount of vaccine.
The firm's boss Pascal Soriot has defended the decision, claiming the UK had contractually ordered the vaccine three months earlier than the EU.
This latest disaster for the EU has left AfD leader Mr Muethen furious, raging that as defence minister, Ms von der Leyen has already shown she has become overwhelmed when it has come to procurement issues.
He has ordered the European Commission President to 'do the right thing' by taking 'responsibility for one's own failure and to step back'.
READ MORE: Brexiteer explodes at EU for 'making life difficult' for UK© GETTY eu vaccine shortage
The AfD leader said: 'Now she has failed again at the EU level in the essential procurement of the anti-corona vaccine.
'This time the citizens are paying the price, in two ways.
'The protection against the deadly coronavirus is delayed and at the same time, the lockdown with its devastating effects for tradespeople, the self-employed, restaurants but also families, school children and residents of old people's and nursing homes is extended.'
Microsoft Maren Alternative For Mac Osx
He added: 'But being responsible also means taking responsibility. And this is what Frau von der Leyen should do now.
Boris to cave to EU: No10 hints Britain could ship Covid jabs to bloc [COMMENT]
BBC bias row erupts as Katya Adler accused of taking EU's side [OPINION]
UK secures 60 MILLION more coronavirus vaccines [LATEST]© GETTY eu vaccine vdl latest© GETTY eu vaccine charles michel
'It has caused great damage, not only for Germany and its citizens but also for the entire EU.
'To admit this, to take responsibility for one's own failure and to step back would be the only right thing the EU Commission President can do now.'
Earlier today, the EU's fight to secure coronavirus vaccine supplies intensified when it warned drug companies such as AstraZeneca it will use all legal means or possibly block exports unless they agree to deliver the jabs originally promised.
The huge shortage of vaccine doses has seen vaccination centres in Germany, France and Spain postpone or delay patient appointments, with the EU publicly lashing out at AstraZeneca for failing to deliver, even asking if it could divert supplies from Britain.© EXPRESS eu vaccine covid world
A Brussels official told Reuters EU rules on monitoring and authorising exports of Covid vaccines in the bloc could see exports blocked if they broke existing contracts between the vaccine maker and Brussels.
European Council President Charles Michel wrote a letter to four EU leaders dated January 27 stating the bloc should explore legal means to ensure supplies of COVID-19 vaccines it contracted to buy if talks with companies over delayed deliveries continue to prove unsuccessful.
He said: 'If no satisfactory solution can be found, I believe we should explore all options and make use of all legal means and enforcement measures at our disposal under the Treaties.'
Additional reporting by Monica Pallenberg.