1660 Jo Shaw the review has often been quite broad and encompasses so many different domains of “pandemic life,” it is interesting to see how many of these impacts do in fact operate at the intersection of citizenship and constitutional law and thus play out in the form of changes in relation to constitutional citizenship. Accordingly, the article takes an important step towards the use of constitutional citizenship as a framing device for understanding citizenship as full membership. It also moves the debate further onto normative terrain by considering the extent to which articulating a substantive concept of constitutional citizenship through a focus on the principles of equality, human dignity and freedom provides a constitutional and legal reference point. An important leitmotiv used throughout the article has been the idea of the “linear” and probably inevitable impacts of the pandemic on citizenship. That is one area, perhaps, where the “benchmarking” approach to the evaluation of policy may be of some assistance,168 although the complexity of thinking about COVID-19 through the prism of citizenship reinforces the risks of thinking about the pandemic as “just” a policy problem to be “solved.” In fact, the pandemic has revealed itself to be full of paradoxes.169 The article has also taken on the task of exploring how and why, in some domains, these impacts are further shaped by factors such as vulnerability and inequality of outcomes. It is clear that the synergistic or intersectional thinking encouraged by the characterization of the pandemic as a syndemic, which links together health, socio-economic issues, and political questions, is useful for highlighting how much more vulnerable to many of the negative impacts of the pandemic in the sphere of citizenship are those who are also more vulnerable both to catching and suffering more seriously from the virus and to experiencing negatively the externalities of the measures taken to restrict social contact by shutting down economies. The linear impacts of the virus on citizenship are substantially conditioned by issues of equality and inequality while at the same time suggesting some of the contours of how to “build back better” by thinking harder about solidarities.170 168 See, e.g, Sheila Jasanoff & Stephen Hilgartner, A Stress Test for Politics: Insights from the Comparative Covid Response Project (CompCoRe) 2020, VERFBLOG (May 11, 2021), https://verfassungsblog.de/a-stress-test-for-politics-insights-from-thecomparative-covid-response-project-compcore-2020/. 169 Peter G. Danchin, The Pandemic Paradox in International Law, 114 AM. J. INT’L L. 598 (2020). 170 See e.g., Kristin van Barneveld, Michael Quinlan, Peter Kriesler, Anne Junor, Fran Baum, Anis Chowdhury, PN Junakar, Stephen Clibborn, Frances Flanagan, Chris Wright, Sharon Friel, Joseph Halevi & Al Rainnie, The COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons on Building More Equal and Sustainable Societies, 31 ECON. & LAB. RELS. REV. 133 (2020); Katharine G. Young, The Idea of a Human Rights-Based Economic Recovery after COVID-19, 6(4) INT’L J. PUB. L. & POL’Y 390 (2020). Cite this article: Shaw J (2021). Citizenship and COVID-19: Syndemic Effects. German Law Journal 22, 1635–1660. https:// doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.77 https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.77 Published online by Cambridge University Press