Faced with the challenges of motivating people to vaccinate, many countries have introduced policy-level interventions to encourage vaccination against COVID-19. For example, mandates were widely imposed requiring individuals to vaccinate to work and attend school, and vaccination passports required individuals to show proof of vaccination to travel and access public spaces and events. Furthermore, some countries also began offering financial incentives for getting vaccinated. One major criticism of these policies was the possibility that they would produce reactance and thus undermine voluntary vaccination. This article therefore reviews relevant empirical evidence to examine whether this is indeed the case. Specifically, we devote separate sections to reviewing and discussing the impacts of three major policies that were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic: vaccination mandates, vaccination passports, and the provision of financial incentives. A careful analysis of the evidence provides little support that these policies backfire but instead can effectively promote vaccination at the population level. The policies are not without limitations, however, such as their inability to mobilize those that are strongly hesitant to vaccines. Finally, we discuss how policy-level interventions should be designed and implemented to address future epidemics and pandemics.

中文翻译：

---

COVID-19 疫苗接种政策会适得其反吗？授权、疫苗接种护照和经济激励对 COVID-19 疫苗接种的影响。


面对激励人们接种疫苗的挑战，许多国家推出了政策层面的干预措施，鼓励接种 COVID-19 疫苗。例如，广泛强制要求个人接种疫苗才能工作和上学，疫苗接种护照要求个人出示疫苗接种证明才能旅行以及进入公共场所和活动。此外，一些国家还开始为接种疫苗提供经济激励。对这些政策的一个主要批评是它们可能会产生反应，从而破坏自愿疫苗接种。因此，本文回顾了相关的经验证据，以检验情况是否确实如此。具体来说，我们专门用单独的章节回顾和讨论了在 COVID-19 大流行期间实施的三项主要政策的影响：疫苗接种强制规定、疫苗接种护照和提供经济激励。对证据的仔细分析几乎无法证明这些政策会适得其反，但却可以有效地促进人口层面的疫苗接种。然而，这些政策并非没有局限性，例如它们无法动员那些对疫苗强烈犹豫的人。最后，我们讨论应如何设计和实施政策层面的干预措施来应对未来的流行病和大流行。