Search

Si l’on s’en tient aux chiffres de la vaccination contre la COVID-19 dans les pays du G7, la campagne apparaît comme un véritable succès tant au niveau global qu’au niveau national. En effet, à ce jour, 79,4 % de la population totale des pays du G7 a reçu une première dose, 72,9 % une seconde, et 45,4 % une dose de rappel (données du 28 avril 2022) 1 En France, c’est 80,6 % de la population totale qui a reçu une première dose, 78,2 % qui a reçu deux doses, et 55,4 % qui a reçu un rappel (données du 28 avril 2022).2 Au Royaume-Uni, 79,3 % de la population totale a reçu une première dose, 74,1 % une seconde, et 58,5 % un rappel.1 Enfin, en Italie, 85,2 % de la population totale a reçu une première dose, 80,4 % a reçu deux doses et 66,5 % a reçu leurs rappels (données du 28 avril 2022). Ces taux de vaccination élevés masquent pourtant des disparités importantes à l’intérieur de chaque pays. Ainsi, à Marseille, deuxième ville de France, moins de 50 % des habitants des quartiers nord de la ville étaient vaccinés à la fin de l’année 2021, alors que plus de 70 % des habitants des quartiers sud l’étaient au même moment.3 Dans le quartier populaire de Ealing, situé au nord-ouest de Londres, 70 % de la population admissible avait reçu une première dose, soit près de 10 % de moins que la moyenne nationale. 4 (Données du 4 avril 2022). Des disparités similaires ont été observées dans d’autres métropoles urbaines des pays du G7. Ce document examine ces disparités au prisme de la notion d’« (in)égalité vaccinale ». En s’appuyant sur des recherches qualitatives menées pendant la campagne de vaccination de la COVID-19 dans les quartiers nord de Marseille, le quartier de Ealing à Londres (Nord-ouest) et dans la région de l'Émilie-Romagne et à Rome, en Italie, il montre comment les autorités locales peuvent agir pour atténuer ces inégalités. Mieux comprendre les inégalités en matière de vaccins fut primordial lors de la pandémie de la COVID-19 en ce sens que les populations sous-vaccinées étaient la plupart du temps des minorités ethniques ou culturelles, vivant dans des zones défavorisées, ou sans-papiers, donc plus susceptibles de contracter la COVID-19, et d’en subir les conséquences les plus dramatiques. 5 6 7 8 Ainsi, à Ealing, quatre mois après la campagne de vaccination, seulement 57,6% des personnes dans le décile de pauvreté le plus bas avaient reçu une dose, contre 81% des personnes dans le décile le plus aisé. 9 En outre, 89,2 % des résidents britanniques blancs de Ealing étaient vaccinés, contre 64 % des Pakistanais et 49,3 % des habitants issus des Caraïbes.9 À Rome, comme c’est le cas dans d’autres métropoles urbaines des pays du G7, nos données révèlent des disparités particulières importantes entre le recours aux vaccins des populations sans papiers et celui des citoyens établis. Les facteurs d’inégalité vaccinale dans ces environnements urbains sont complexes et liés à l’interaction de nombreux phénomènes tels que les inégalités économiques, le racisme structurel, l'inégalité d'accès aux soins de santé, la méfiance envers les professionnels de santé, les représentants de l'État, et plus encore. Les collectivités locales tout comme les professionnels de la santé, les groupes communautaires et les résidents jouent un rôle clé dans la manière dont s’exprime l’(in)égalité vaccinale. Pour autant, peu de leçons ont été systématiquement tirées des efforts menés en matière d’ «engagement vaccinal » au niveau local. Dans ce document, nous proposons d’expliquer comment l’expérience des inégalités structurelles se recoupe avec celle des habitants, et comment ces expériences ont été prises en compte ou au contraire ignorées dans la promotion et l’administration des vaccins contre la COVID-19 par les collectivités locales. Nous adressons également un ensemble de recommandations qui s’appliquent aux programmes de « vaccination de rattrapage » contre la COVID-19 (visant à atteindre les personnes qui n’ont pas encore reçu leur schéma vaccinal complet), mais elles concernent également les programmes de vaccination d'urgence à venir. Ce document repose sur des recherches menées entre octobre et décembre 2021 à Marseille et sur des échanges réguliers avec les autorités du Borough de Ealing initiés dès mai 2021. Il identifie comment les gouvernements locaux, les acteurs de la santé, les groupes communautaires et les résidents jouent un rôle clé dans la production d’(in)égalités vaccinales. Ce document a été élaboré pour la SSHAP par Santiago Ripoll (IDS), Tavitha Hrynick (IDS), Ashley Ouvrier (LaSSA), Megan Schmidt-Sane (IDS), Federico Federici (UCL) et Elizabeth Storer (LSE). Il a été revu par Eloisa Franchi (Université de Pavie) et Ellen Schwartz (Conseil de santé publique de Hackney). La recherche a été financée par la British Academy COVID-19 Recovery : Fonds G7 (COVG7210038). Les recherches ont été menées à l’Institut d’études du développement (IDS), à l’Université de Sussex et au Laboratoire des sciences sociales appliquées (LaSSA). La SSHAP en assume la responsabilité.

SSHAP convened and hosted a virtual roundtable discussion with partners engaged at the regional level response of the health and food insecurity crisis in the Greater Horn of Africa region. The objective was to discuss the critical needs for the response to the Horn of Africa crisis. The priorities under consideration were organised under the themes of health, community engagement and data management. Broader matters of strengthening coordination of the response were also discussed. This report offers a summary of the main discussion points and a list of resources shared during the discussion, it was compiled by Tabitha Hrynick (IDS) and Olivia Tulloch (Anthrologica). The views expressed here are a summary of those presented and do not necessarily represent a consensus of the individual participant agencies. This brief is the responsibility of SSHAP. There will be future roundtables focused either at the national level for affected countries or thematically focused.

This brief explains youth perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination and outlines key considerations for engaging with and building trust among young people living in Ealing, London. Within the category of ‘young people,’ there are differences in vaccination based on age and ethnicity. This brief is based on research, including a review of the literature and in-depth interviews and focus groups with 62 youth across Ealing to contextualise youth perspectives of COVID-19 vaccination and highlight themes of trust/distrust. We contribute ethnographic and participatory evidence to quantitative evaluations of vaccine roll-out. Key considerations for addressing youth distrust regarding the COVID-19 vaccine are presented, followed by additional regional context. This work builds on a previous SSHAP brief on vaccine equity in Ealing. This brief was produced by SSHAP in collaboration with partners in Ealing. It was authored by Megan Schmidt-Sane (IDS), Tabitha Hrynick (IDS), Jillian Schulte (Case Western Reserve University), Charlie Forgacz-Cooper (Youth Advisory Board), and Santiago Ripoll (IDS), in collaboration with Steve Curtis (Ealing Council), Hena Gooroochurn (Ealing Council), Bollo Brook Youth Centre, and Janpal Basran (Southall Community Alliance), and reviews by Helen Castledine (Ealing Public Health), Elizabeth Storer (LSE) and Annie Wilkinson (IDS). The research was funded through the British Academy COVID-19 Recovery: USA and UK fund (CRUSA210022). Research was based at the Institute of Development Studies. This brief is the responsibility of SSHAP.

This brief explains youth perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination and outlines key considerations for engaging with and building trust among young people living in Ealing, London. Within the category of ‘young people,’ there are differences in vaccination based on age and ethnicity. This brief is based on research, including a review of the literature and in-depth interviews and focus groups with 62 youth across Ealing to contextualise youth perspectives of COVID-19 vaccination and highlight themes of trust/distrust. We contribute ethnographic and participatory evidence to quantitative evaluations of vaccine roll-out. Key considerations for addressing youth distrust regarding the COVID-19 vaccine are presented, followed by additional regional context. This work builds on a previous SSHAP brief on vaccine equity in Ealing. This brief was produced by SSHAP in collaboration with partners in Ealing. It was authored by Megan Schmidt-Sane (IDS), Tabitha Hrynick (IDS), Jillian Schulte (Case Western Reserve University), Charlie Forgacz-Cooper (Youth Advisory Board), and Santiago Ripoll (IDS), in collaboration with Steve Curtis (Ealing Council), Hena Gooroochurn (Ealing Council), Bollo Brook Youth Centre, and Janpal Basran (Southall Community Alliance), and reviews by Helen Castledine (Ealing Public Health), Elizabeth Storer (LSE) and Annie Wilkinson (IDS). The research was funded through the British Academy COVID-19 Recovery: USA and UK fund (CRUSA210022). Research was based at the Institute of Development Studies. This brief is the responsibility of SSHAP.

Despite progress in COVID-19 vaccination rates overall in Cleveland, vaccine inequity persists as young people from minoritised communities are often less likely to be vaccinated. Despite being over-represented in COVID-19 case counts and fatalities, Black residents were under-represented in COVID-19 vaccination during the first year and half of the pandemic. In Ohio, while roughly 60% of Cuyahoga County residents are fully vaccinated, just 45% of Cleveland residents are fully vaccinated. Lower-income, majority Black, east side neighbourhoods have markedly lower vaccination rates compared to higher-income, mostly white neighbourhoods. Young people ages 16-40 became eligible for the COVID-19 vaccine on March 29th, 2021, and individuals aged 12 and above were able to get vaccinated from May 2021 onward. However, large disparities exist based age, race, and zip code. This brief illustrates underlying reasons shaping COVID-19 vaccine attitudes among minority (especially Black and Latinx) youth (ages 12-18) and offers key considerations for how young people can be better engaged within Cleveland, Ohio. This brief is based on research, including in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with 61 young people across 16 neighbourhoods through a Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) approach in Cleveland to contextualise youth perspectives of COVID-19 vaccination and highlight areas of hesitancy and confidence. In this brief, we share findings from the study and key considerations for addressing youth ‘vaccine hesitancy’ around the COVID-19 vaccine are presented. This brief was authored by Jillian Schulte (Case Western Reserve University), Megan Schmidt-Sane (IDS), Elizabeth Benninger (Cleveland State University), Tabitha Hrynick (IDS), and Santiago Ripoll (IDS), and includes contributions from Elizabeth Davies (Cleveland State University), Diane Mastnardo, Brenda Pryor (MyCom), Brinda Athreya (Case Western Reserve University), Ivis Maldonado (MyCom) and reviews from Elizabeth Storer (LSE) and Annie Wilkinson (IDS). The research was funded through the British Academy COVID-19 Recovery: USA and UK fund (CRUSA210022). Research was based at the Institute of Development Studies. This brief is the responsibility of SSHAP.

At national and aggregate levels, COVID-19 vaccination across G7 countries appears successful. To date, 79.4% of the total population of G7 countries have received a first dose, 72.9% a second, and 45.4% a booster shot (28th April 2022 data). In France, 80.6% of the total population has had a first dose, 78.2 % have had two doses, and 55.4% have had their booster jabs (28th of April 2022 data). In the UK, 79.3% of the total population has received one dose, 74.1% a second one, and 58.5% have received a booster. In Italy, 85.2% of the total population has had a first dose, 80.4% have had two doses, and 66.5% have had their booster jabs (28th of April 2022 data). These figures indicate enthusiasm across G7 countries for COVID-19 vaccines. Yet high overall vaccination rates at the national level, disguise significant in-country disparities. For example, by the end of 2021, less than 50% of residents of the Northern Districts of Marseille were vaccinated, compared with over 70% in wealthier neighbourhoods. In the Ealing borough of Northwest London, 70% of the eligible population has had a first dose – which is almost 10% percent below the national average (4th of April 2022 data). Disparities are also seen in other urban metropolises across the G7. This brief investigates these disparities through the lens of “vaccine (in)equity”, focusing on the role of local actors. It builds on ethnographic and qualitative research carried out in the Northern Districts of Marseille and ongoing research engagement around vaccine equity in Ealing (Northwest London), as well as qualitative research carried out in Italy among networks of healthcare providers, intercultural mediators, and civil society organizations that collaborated during the COVID-19 campaign in the Emilia Romagna region and in Rome. This brief is based on research conducted between October and December 2021 in Marseille and ongoing engagement in Ealing which started in May 2021. It identified how local governments, health actors, community groups and residents play key roles in shaping vaccine (in)equity. This brief was developed for SSHAP by Santiago Ripoll (IDS), Tabitha Hrynick (IDS), Ashley Ouvrier (LaSSA), Megan Schmidt-Sane (IDS), Federico Federici (UCL) and Elizabeth Storer (LSE). It was reviewed by Eloisa Franchi (Università degli Studi di Pavia) and Ellen Schwartz (Hackney Council Public Health). The research was funded through the British Academy COVID-19 Recovery: G7 Fund (COVG7210038). Research was based at the Institute of Development Studies (IDS), University of Susssex, and the Laboratoire de Sciences Sociales Appliquées (LaSSA). The brief is the responsibility of SSHAP.

في ضوء استمرار استشراء جائحة فيروس كورونا المستجد، ثمة حاجة إلى تقديم الدعم القوي للمجتمعات الأكثر تأثرا بالأزمات وتعزيز المرونة المجتمعية. نهج "المرونة المجتمعية" يعني الشراكة مع المجتمعات المحلية وتعزيز قدراتها بهدف التخفيف من تداعيات الجائحة، ومن ضمنها التداعيات الاجتماعية والاقتصادية. 1–3 لذا لا مجال للعودة إلى الوضع الذي كان سائداً قبل الجائحة، بل لا بد من إحداث تغيير جذري يتطرق لأوجه عدم المساواة ويعمل على تحسين الظروف الاجتماعية والاقتصادية. وفي حين أن النهج القائم على تعزيز قدرة المجتمع على الصمود لا يزال جديد نسبيًا فيما يتعلق بالتأهب لمواجهة الأوبئة والتصدي لها، فإنه يضع إطاراً للتعامل مع الصدمات الوبائية بطريقة شاملة ومن خلال إتباع نهج يشمل نظاما كاملا. 4–6 وبينما تركز الاستجابة للوباء والتصدي له على التخفيف من أوجه الضّعف، يمكن اللجوء إلى النهج القائم على تعزيز الصمود لبناء القدرات الحالية بهدف إدارة الآثار الصحية والاجتماعية والنفسية والاقتصادية الناتجة عن الوباء. وهذا يعزز من إضفاء الطابع المحلي على هذا النهج ومن قدرته على التكيف والاستدامة على المدى الطويل، ما يمثل المبادئ الأساسية للاستجابة للوباء وفقا للعلوم الاجتماعية. 7–9 يناقش هذا الموجز الاعتبارات المتعلقة بكيفية تقديم العاملين في القطاع الصحي والإنساني الدعم للمجتمعات من أجل الاستجابة والتعافي من فيروس كورونا المستجد باستخدام نهج المرونة المجتمعية. تم تطوير هذا الموجز لـصالح منصة العلوم الاجتماعية في العمل الإنساني من قبل معهد دراسات التنمية (تحت إشراف ميغان شميدت- ساين وتابيثا هرينيك بالتعاون مع أنثرولوجيكا (إيفا نايدربيرغر) وهو يقع ضمن مسؤولية منصة العلوم الاجتماعية في العمل الإنساني.

أظهرت جائحة فيروس كورونا المستجد عدم المساواة وأوجه الضعف المترسخَين منذ فترة طويلة في المجتمع، حيث أن الفئات المجتمعية الأكثر حرمانًا وتهميشًا تتكبّد أثقل الأعباء الصحية والاجتماعية والاقتصادية1. لذا، والى جانب توثيق أوجه الضعف، هناك حاجة للتخفيف عن هذه الفئات المهمشة ودعم قدرتها على الصمود. يمكن أن تعزز " المرونة المجتمعية " قدرة المجتمع على التكيف مع الضغوط الناتجة عن الصدمات المختلفة. يبحث هذا الموجز كيفية تطبيق مفاهيم المرونة المجتمعية على الأوبئة ويستعرض المصادر الرمادية (المنشورات غير الرسمية) والأكاديمية حول المقاربات المختلفة للصمود المجتمعي. ويشمل ذلك 1) المصطلحات، 2) الدروس المستفادة من الممارسة، 3) سياق المرونة المجتمعية، 4) نهج النظم، 5) القدرات البشرية والاجتماعية الأساسية. يتم التطرق أيضًا إلى العدالة الاجتماعية وعدم المساواة والإنصاف والعدالة كمواضيع تحتاج إلى مزيد من التطوير للوصول إلى الصمود، باعتبارها ترتبط مباشرة بالتأهب للأوبئة والاستجابة لها. تم إعداد هذا الموجز لـصالح منصة العلوم الاجتماعية في العمل الإنساني \ معهد دراسات التنمية (تحت اشراف كل من ميغان شميدت-ساين وتابيثا هرينيك) بالتعاون مع أنثرولوجيكا (إيفا نايدربيرغر). هذا الموجز يقع ضمن مسؤولية منصة العلوم الاجتماعية في العمل الإنساني