Assessing Emergency Information Sharing between the Government and the Public during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Open Government Perspective

Park, Chul; Richards, Robert C.; Reedy, Justin

doi:10.1080/15309576.2022.2048400

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 71–74 This was not the case in all initiatives: An evaluation of the Oregon Citizens’ Assembly on COVID-19 Recovery found that citizens were overall satisfied with pandemic information provided by the state government, but they reported that they did not have sufficient opportunities to share their input with the government. 76 In addition, the absence of decision-makers in public participation processes was seen as an obstacle to put in action suggestions from the community. 75 77 Evaluations of two of the initiatives 53 54 found important constraints on the impacts of the initiatives.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public participation in decisions about measures to manage the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

Munthe-Kaas,

Oxman,

von Lieres

et al. 2024

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, governments and health authorities faced tough decisions about infection prevention and control measures such as social distancing, face masks and travel. Judgements underlying those decisions require democratic input, as well as expert input. The aim of this review is to inform decisions about how best to achieve public participation in decisions about public health and social interventions in the context of a pandemic or other public health emergencies.ObjectivesTo systematically review examples of public participation in decisions by governments and health authorities about how to control the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignWe searched Participedia and relevant databases in August 2022. Two authors reviewed titles and abstracts and one author screened publications promoted to full text. One author extracted data from included reports using a standard data-extraction form. A second author checked 10% of the extraction forms. We conducted a structured synthesis using framework analysis.ResultsWe included 24 reports (18 from Participedia). Most took place in high-income countries (n=23), involved ‘consulting’ the public (n=17) and involved public meetings (usually online). Two initiatives reported explicit support for critical thinking. 11 initiatives were formally evaluated (only three reported impacts). Many initiatives did not contribute to a decision, and 17 initiatives did not include any explicit decision-making criteria.ConclusionsDecisions about how to manage the COVID-19 pandemic affected nearly everyone. While public participation in those decisions had the potential to improve the quality of the judgements and decisions that were made, build trust, improve adherence and help ensure transparency and accountability, few examples of such initiatives have been reported and most of those have not been formally evaluated. Identified initiatives did point out potential good practices related to online engagement, crowdsourcing and addressing potential power imbalance. Future research should address improved reporting of initiatives, explicit decision-making criteria, support for critical thinking, engagement of marginalised groups and decision-makers and communication with the public.PROSPERO registration number358991.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public participation in decisions about measures to manage the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

Munthe-Kaas,

Oxman,

von Lieres

et al. 2024

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Brown (2017) argued that a good basis for contestability was not enough to ensure proper democratic participation: in her view, acknowledging the different effects of power within society demands "more multi perspectival accounting and accountability systems". This is supported by Park et al (2022) who suggested that in Oregon, during the pandemic, citizens were generally satisfied with the data that they were supplied, but less satisfied about their power to influence government. Scholars have gathered examples of successful movements to counter account: such as that regarding the Great Exhibition of the North (Ferry and Slack, 2022).…”

Section: The Role Of Calculative Practices In Supporting Libertymentioning

confidence: 87%

Accountability, emergency and liberty during COVID-19 in the UK 2020–22

Ferry

Midgley

Green

2023

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe study explains why Parliamentarians in the United Kingdom (UK) focused on accountability through data during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as on how data could be used to improve the government’s response to the pandemic.Design/methodology/approachUnderstanding the implications of accountability for COVID-19 is crucial to understanding how governments should respond to future pandemics. This article provides an account of what a select committee in the UK thought were the essential elements of these accountability relationships. To do so, the authors use a neo-Roman concept of liberty to show how Parliamentary oversight of the pandemic for accountability was crucial to maintaining the liberty of citizens during the crisis and to identify what lessons need to be learnt for future crises.FindingsThe study shows that Parliamentarians were concerned that the UK government was not meeting its obligations to report openly about the COVID-19 pandemic to them. It shows that the government did make progress in reporting during the pandemic but further advancements need to be made in future for restrictions to be compatible with the protection of liberty.Research limitations/implicationsThe study extends the concept of neo-Roman liberty showing how it is relevant in an emergency situation and provides an account of why accountability is necessary for the preservation of liberty when the government uses emergency powers.Practical implicationsGovernments and Parliaments need to think about how they preserve liberty during crises through enhanced accountability mechanisms and the publication of data.Originality/valueThe study extends previous work on liberty and calculation, providing a theorisation of the role of numbers in the protection of liberty.

show abstract

“…Emergency information can be divided into data information about emergencies, emergency response measures taken by the government and relevant departments, emergency protection measures taken by the public, and public service information related to emergencies ( 20 ). The emergency information release runs through the whole life cycle of emergency management ( 21 ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring time evolution characteristics of the collaborative mode in emergency information release of public health emergencies: A network analysis of response to COVID-19 from the central government of China

Liu

Song

et al. 2022

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emergency information release during public health emergencies is a governance measure to slow down the spread of the epidemic and guide the public in scientific protection. Because of the uncertainty and life-cycle characteristics of public health emergencies, emergency information release represents the process of time dynamics. At present, it is an inevitable trend to establish a collaborative mechanism for emergency information release of public health emergencies to improve the release efficiency and respond to public demand. To determine time evolution characteristics of organizational collaboration in emergency information release, this study took the response to COVID-19 from the central government of China as an example and conducted research based on social network analysis. Based on information from COVID-19-related press conferences held by China's central government, the emergency information release collaborative networks (EIRCNs), and Emergency Organizations-Emergency Information Release Matters (EOs-EIRMs) 2-mode network were constructed. With the time evolution, the tightness, convergence, stability, and connectivity of EIRCNs in public health emergencies presented the process of lowering and then raising. At different stages, the core emergency organization (EO) nodes in EIRCNs continued to maintain a certain degree of activity. Their dynamic processes showed the characteristics of diversification rather than homogeneity. The time evolution of emergency information release matters (EIRMs) reflected the dynamic adjustment of the government's prevention and control measures and responded to the diversification of the public's understanding and protection needs during different stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study further examined the driving factors and implementation mechanism of the time evolution characteristics of the collaborative mode of emergency information release. The implementation of EIRMs at different stages had different resource requirements, which were usually achieved by introducing new EOs (Adding resource increment) or increasing the collaborative frequencies among EOs (Activating resource stock). In addition, further research prospects and feasibility interpretation were proposed.

show abstract

Assessing Emergency Information Sharing between the Government and the Public during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Open Government Perspective

Cited by 10 publications

References 49 publications

Public participation in decisions about measures to manage the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

Public participation in decisions about measures to manage the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

Accountability, emergency and liberty during COVID-19 in the UK 2020–22

Exploring time evolution characteristics of the collaborative mode in emergency information release of public health emergencies: A network analysis of response to COVID-19 from the central government of China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About