IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v382y2025ics0277953625006045.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Did COVID-19 vaccine enforcement work? Evidence from northwestern and northern Uganda

Author

Listed:
  • Parker, Melissa
  • Okello, Bob
  • Kermundu, Peter
  • Ozunga, Bono E.
  • Baluku, Moses
  • Akello, Grace
  • MacGregor, Hayley
  • Leach, Melissa
  • Allen, Tim

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccination programmes were shaped by diverse approaches to enforcement. Yet, little is known about how public authority influenced modes of enforcement on the ground or their ramifications for governance and public health more broadly. This article focuses on the Ugandan mandatory COVID-19 vaccination programme in two contrasting geographical and socio-political spaces: rural Dei and peri-urban Gulu. Ethnographic and survey research demonstrated that enforcement occurred in different ways and by diverse public authorities, with ostensibly contrasting results. In Dei, self-reported vaccine uptake and coverage was 77 % and 73 % respectively; while in Gulu, it was 46 % and 23 %, and below the national target of 70 %.

Suggested Citation

  • Parker, Melissa & Okello, Bob & Kermundu, Peter & Ozunga, Bono E. & Baluku, Moses & Akello, Grace & MacGregor, Hayley & Leach, Melissa & Allen, Tim, 2025. "Did COVID-19 vaccine enforcement work? Evidence from northwestern and northern Uganda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 382(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:382:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625006045
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625006045
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118273?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:382:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625006045. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.