分裂的我们幸存了吗?新冠肺炎疫情期间意大利和西班牙的多层次治理

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Publius-The Journal of Federalism Pub Date : 2023-02-11 DOI:10.1093/publius/pjad002
M. Angelici, P. Berta, Joan Costa‐Font, G. Turati
{"title":"分裂的我们幸存了吗?新冠肺炎疫情期间意大利和西班牙的多层次治理","authors":"M. Angelici, P. Berta, Joan Costa‐Font, G. Turati","doi":"10.1093/publius/pjad002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n We compare the intergovernmental health system responses to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy and Spain, two countries where healthcare is managed at the regional level and the impact of the first wave was highly localized. However, whereas in Italy the regional government allowed for a passively accepted central level of coordination without restricting autonomy (“descentralised coordinantion”), in Spain, the healthcare system was de facto centralized under a “single command” (“hierarchical centralization”). We argue that the latter strategy crowded out incentives for information sharing, experimentation and regional participation in decision-making. This article documents evidence of important differences in health outcomes (infected cases and deaths) and outputs (regular and emergency hospital admissions) between the two countries, both at the national and regional levels. We then discuss several potential mechanisms to account for these differences. We find that given the strong localized impact of the pandemic, allowing more autonomy in Italy (compared to centralized governance in Spain) can explain some cross-country differences in outcomes and outputs.","PeriodicalId":47224,"journal":{"name":"Publius-The Journal of Federalism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Divided We Survive? Multilevel Governance during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy and Spain\",\"authors\":\"M. Angelici, P. Berta, Joan Costa‐Font, G. Turati\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/publius/pjad002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n We compare the intergovernmental health system responses to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy and Spain, two countries where healthcare is managed at the regional level and the impact of the first wave was highly localized. However, whereas in Italy the regional government allowed for a passively accepted central level of coordination without restricting autonomy (“descentralised coordinantion”), in Spain, the healthcare system was de facto centralized under a “single command” (“hierarchical centralization”). We argue that the latter strategy crowded out incentives for information sharing, experimentation and regional participation in decision-making. This article documents evidence of important differences in health outcomes (infected cases and deaths) and outputs (regular and emergency hospital admissions) between the two countries, both at the national and regional levels. We then discuss several potential mechanisms to account for these differences. We find that given the strong localized impact of the pandemic, allowing more autonomy in Italy (compared to centralized governance in Spain) can explain some cross-country differences in outcomes and outputs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Publius-The Journal of Federalism\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Publius-The Journal of Federalism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjad002\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Publius-The Journal of Federalism","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjad002","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: 0

摘要

我们比较了意大利和西班牙政府间卫生系统对第一波新冠肺炎疫情的反应,这两个国家的医疗保健在区域层面进行管理,第一波疫情的影响高度本地化。然而,在意大利,地区政府允许在不限制自主权的情况下被动接受中央层面的协调(“去中心化协调”),而在西班牙,医疗保健系统实际上是在“单一指挥”(“层级集中”)下集中的。我们认为,后一种战略挤掉了信息共享、试验和区域参与决策的动机。这篇文章记录了两国在国家和地区层面的健康结果(感染病例和死亡)和产出(常规和紧急入院)方面存在重要差异的证据。然后,我们讨论了解释这些差异的几种潜在机制。我们发现,鉴于疫情的强烈局部影响,允许意大利拥有更多的自治权(与西班牙的中央集权治理相比)可以解释结果和产出的一些跨国差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Divided We Survive? Multilevel Governance during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy and Spain
We compare the intergovernmental health system responses to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy and Spain, two countries where healthcare is managed at the regional level and the impact of the first wave was highly localized. However, whereas in Italy the regional government allowed for a passively accepted central level of coordination without restricting autonomy (“descentralised coordinantion”), in Spain, the healthcare system was de facto centralized under a “single command” (“hierarchical centralization”). We argue that the latter strategy crowded out incentives for information sharing, experimentation and regional participation in decision-making. This article documents evidence of important differences in health outcomes (infected cases and deaths) and outputs (regular and emergency hospital admissions) between the two countries, both at the national and regional levels. We then discuss several potential mechanisms to account for these differences. We find that given the strong localized impact of the pandemic, allowing more autonomy in Italy (compared to centralized governance in Spain) can explain some cross-country differences in outcomes and outputs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Publius: The Journal of Federalism is the world"s leading journal devoted to federalism. It is required reading for scholars of many disciplines who want the latest developments, trends, and empirical and theoretical work on federalism and intergovernmental relations. Publius is an international journal and is interested in publishing work on federalist systems throughout the world. Its goal is to publish the latest research from around the world on federalism theory and practice; the dynamics of federal systems; intergovernmental relations and administration; regional, state and provincial governance; and comparative federalism.
期刊最新文献
The Municipal Fiscal Crisis: A Framework for Understanding and Fixing Government Budgeting, by Mark Moses Small Isn’t Beautiful: The Case Against Localism, by Trevor Latimer Measuring Policy Diffusion in Federal Systems: The Case of Legalizing Cannabis in Canada under Time Constraints Putting Federalism in its Place: The Territorial Politics of Social Policy Revisited, by Scott L. Greer, Daniel Béland, André Lecours, and Kenneth A. Dubin Seeing Red and Blue: Assessing How Americans Understand Geographic Polarization, Secession, and the Value of Federalism
×
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