The world is facing the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), which began in China. By August 18, 2020, the United States, Brazil, and India were the most affected countries. Health infrastructure and socioeconomic vulnerabilities may be affecting the response capacities of these countries. We compared official indicators to identify which vulnerabilities better determined the exposure risk to COVID-19 in both the most and least affected countries. To achieve this purpose, we collected indicators from the Infectious Disease Vulnerability Index (IDVI), the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank, and the Brazilian Geography and Statistics Institute (IBGE). All indicators were normalized to facilitate comparisons. Speed, incidence, and population were used to identify the groups of countries with the highest and lowest risks of infection. Countries’ response capacities were determined based on socioeconomic, political, and health infrastructure conditions. Vulnerabilities were identified based on the indicator sensitivity. The highest-risk group included the U.S., Brazil, and India, whereas the lowest-risk group (with the largest population by continent) consisted of China, New Zealand, and Germany. The high-sensitivity cluster had 18 indicators (50% extra IDVI), such as merchandise trade, immunization, public services, maternal mortality, life expectancy at birth, hospital beds, GINI index, adolescent fertility, governance, political stability, transparency/corruption, industry, and water supply. The greatest vulnerability of the highest-risk group was related first to economic factors (merchandise trade), followed by public health (immunization), highlighting global dependence on Chinese trade, such as protective materials, equipment, and diagnostic tests. However, domestic political factors had more indicators, beginning with high sensitivity and followed by healthcare and economic conditions, which signified a lesser capacity to guide, coordinate, and supply the population with protective measures, such as social distancing.

Administração pública -Brasil. 2. Brasil -Política e governo. 3. Planejamento político. 4. Política pública -Brasil. I. Silvestre, Luciana Pavowski Franco. II. Série. CDD 320.60981 Elaborado por Maurício Amormino Júnior -CRB6/2422 O conteúdo dos artigos e seus dados em sua forma, correção e confiabilidade são de responsabilidade exclusiva dos autores. 2018 Permitido o download da obra e o compartilhamento desde que sejam atribuídos créditos aos autores, mas sem a possibilidade de alterá-la de nenhuma forma ou utilizá-la para fins comerciais. www.atenaeditora.com.br APRESENTAÇÃO O e-book "Políticas Públicas no Brasil: Exploração e Diagnóstico" apresenta 131 artigos organizados em sete volumes com temáticas relacionadas às políticas de saúde, educação, assistência social, trabalho, democracia e políticas sociais, planejamento e gestão pública, bem como, contribuições do serviço social para a formação profissional e atuação nas referidas políticas.A seleção dos artigos apresentados possibilitam aos leitores o acesso à pesquisas realizadas nas diversas regiões do país, apontando para os avanços e desafios postos no atual contexto social brasileiro, e permitindo ainda a identificação das relações e complementariedades existentes entre a atuação nos diferentes campos das políticas públicas.Destaca-se a relevância da realização de pesquisas, que tenham como objeto de estudo as políticas públicas, bem como, a disseminação e leitura destas, visando um registro científico do que vem sendo construído coletivamente na sociedade brasileira e que deve ser preservado e fortalecido considerando-se as demandas de proteção social e de qualificação da atuação estatal em conjunto com a sociedade civil em prol da justiça social.

The world is facing the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), which began in China. By August 18, 2020, the United States, Brazil, and India were the most affected countries. Health infrastructure and socioeconomic vulnerabilities may be affecting the response capacities of these countries. We compared official indicators to identify which vulnerabilities better determined the exposure risk to COVID-19 in both the most and least affected countries. To achieve this purpose, we collected indicators from the Infectious Disease Vulnerability Index (IDVI), the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank, and the Brazilian Geography and Statistics Institute (IBGE). All indicators were normalized to facilitate comparisons. Speed, incidence, and population were used to identify the groups of countries with the highest and lowest risks of infection. Countries' response capacities were determined based on socioeconomic, political, and health infrastructure conditions. Vulnerabilities were identified based on the indicator sensitivity. The highest-risk group included the U.S., Brazil, and India, whereas the lowest-risk group (with the largest population by continent) consisted of China, New Zealand, and Germany. The high-sensitivity cluster had 18 indicators (50% extra IDVI), such as merchandise trade, immunization, public services, maternal mortality, life expectancy at birth, hospital beds, GINI index, adolescent fertility, governance, political stability, transparency/corruption, industry, and water supply. The greatest vulnerability of the highest-risk group was related first to economic factors (merchandise trade), followed by public health (immunization), highlighting global dependence on Chinese trade, such as protective materials, equipment, and diagnostic tests. However, domestic political factors had more indicators, beginning with high sensitivity and followed by healthcare and economic conditions, which signified a lesser capacity to guide, coordinate, and supply the population with protective measures, such as social distancing.

No abstract