Precaution and proportionality in pandemic politics: democracy, state capacity, and COVID-19-related school closures around the world

IF 1.9 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Public Policy Pub Date : 2022-05-27 DOI:10.1017/S0143814X22000101
Axel Cronert
{"title":"Precaution and proportionality in pandemic politics: democracy, state capacity, and COVID-19-related school closures around the world","authors":"Axel Cronert","doi":"10.1017/S0143814X22000101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a globally spread—but differently timed—implementation of school closures and other disruptive containment measures as governments worldwide intervened to curb transmission of disease. This study argues that the timing of such disruptive interventions reflects how governments balance the principles of precaution and proportionality in their pandemic decision-making. A theory is proposed of how their trade-off is impacted by two interacting institutional factors: electoral democratic institutions, which incentivise political leaders to increasingly favour precaution, and high state administrative capacity, which instead makes a proportional strategy involving later containment measures more administratively and politically feasible. Global patterns consistent with this theory are documented among 170 countries in early 2020, using Cox models of school closures and other non-pharmaceutical interventions. Corroborating the theorised mechanisms, additional results indicate that electoral competition prompts democratic leaders’ faster response, and that this mechanism is weaker where professional state agencies have more influence over policymaking.","PeriodicalId":47578,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X22000101","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a globally spread—but differently timed—implementation of school closures and other disruptive containment measures as governments worldwide intervened to curb transmission of disease. This study argues that the timing of such disruptive interventions reflects how governments balance the principles of precaution and proportionality in their pandemic decision-making. A theory is proposed of how their trade-off is impacted by two interacting institutional factors: electoral democratic institutions, which incentivise political leaders to increasingly favour precaution, and high state administrative capacity, which instead makes a proportional strategy involving later containment measures more administratively and politically feasible. Global patterns consistent with this theory are documented among 170 countries in early 2020, using Cox models of school closures and other non-pharmaceutical interventions. Corroborating the theorised mechanisms, additional results indicate that electoral competition prompts democratic leaders’ faster response, and that this mechanism is weaker where professional state agencies have more influence over policymaking.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大流行政治中的预防和相称性:世界各地的民主、国家能力和与新冠肺炎相关的学校关闭
随着各国政府采取干预措施遏制疾病传播,2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行引发了全球范围内(但时间不同)的停课和其他破坏性遏制措施的实施。这项研究认为,这种破坏性干预措施的时机反映了政府在流行病决策中如何平衡预防原则和比例原则。一种理论提出了他们的权衡如何受到两个相互作用的制度因素的影响:选举民主制度,激励政治领导人越来越倾向于预防,以及高国家行政能力,这使得涉及后来遏制措施的比例战略在行政和政治上更加可行。利用学校关闭和其他非药物干预措施的Cox模型,在2020年初在170个国家中记录了与这一理论一致的全球模式。进一步的结果证实了理论机制,表明选举竞争促使民主领导人做出更快的反应,而在专业国家机构对政策制定有更大影响力的情况下,这种机制较弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Policy applies social science theories and concepts to significant political, economic and social issues and to the ways in which public policies are made. Its articles deal with topics of concern to public policy scholars in America, Europe, Japan and other advanced industrial nations. The journal often publishes articles that cut across disciplines, such as environmental issues, international political economy, regulatory policy and European Union processes. Its peer reviewers come from up to a dozen social science disciplines and countries across three continents, thus ensuring both analytic rigour and accuracy in reference to national and policy context.
期刊最新文献
Does exposure to democracy decrease health inequality? Toward a theory of minority-party influence in the U.S. Congress: whip counts, amendment votes, and minority leverage in the house PUP volume 43 issue 3 Cover and Front matter PUP volume 43 issue 3 Cover and Back matter Policy entrepreneurs and problem definition: the case of European student mobility
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1