This article assesses the equity of COVID-19 vaccination programmes in three jurisdictions that have historically taken different approaches to the institutionalisation of equity considerations. The Sars-Cov-2 pandemic has thrown into sharp relief persistent societal inequalities and has added novel dimensions to these problems. Certain groups have proved particularly vulnerable, both in terms of infection risk and severity as well as the accompanying social fallout. Against this background the implementation of ‘objective’ vaccination programmes may seem like a great leveller, addressing the disparate risks that are tied to social determinants of health and the pandemic behemoth. However, implementing vaccination programmes in an equitable manner is itself essential for the realisation of such a vision. This article undertakes a comparative analysis of the English, Italian, and American jurisdictions and critically assesses two aspects of their vaccination frameworks: (i) the prioritisation of groups for vaccination and (ii) the nature of public compensation schemes for those who have suffered vaccine-related injuries. It examines whether and to what extent these measures address the inequalities raised by COVID-19 and the role of the law in this pursuit.

中文翻译：

---

接种疫苗作为均衡器？评估 COVID-19 疫苗优先排序和补偿

本文评估了三个司法管辖区的 COVID-19 疫苗接种计划的公平性，这三个司法管辖区在历史上采取了不同的方法来将公平考虑因素制度化。Sars-Cov-2 大流行使持续存在的社会不平等现象得到显着缓解，并为这些问题增加了新的维度。事实证明，某些群体在感染风险和严重程度以及随之而来的社会影响方面特别脆弱。在这种背景下，“客观”疫苗接种计划的实施似乎是一个很好的平衡器，解决了与健康社会决定因素和大流行病庞然大物相关的不同风险。然而，以公平的方式实施疫苗接种计划本身对于实现这一愿景至关重要。本文对英国、意大利和美国的司法管辖区进行了比较分析，并批判性地评估了它们疫苗接种框架的两个方面：(i) 疫苗接种群体的优先次序和 (ii) 针对疫苗接种者的公共补偿计划的性质-相关伤害。它审查了这些措施是否以及在多大程度上解决了 COVID-19 引起的不平等现象以及法律在这方面的作用。