Australian Quarantine Policy: From Centralization to Coordination with Mid‐Pandemic COVID‐19 Shifts

Abstract

Combining a historical institutionalism approach with institutional isomorphism and punctuated equilibrium, this article analyzes quarantine policy change across 120 years of Australian quarantine history. By anchoring its analysis within specific time periods (the years before the Spanish flu, seven decades of inaction, and multiple post‐1997 pandemic updates and responses), the authors highlight when and why policies did or did not change and how the constant push‐and‐pull between state and Commonwealth institutional ownership altered policy possibilities. The heart of the analysis showcases how Australia's successful COVID‐19 response is a unique output of prior quarantine policies, institutional evolution, and mid‐pandemic alterations of key national pandemic response plans.

Coproducing Responses to COVID‐19 with Community‐Based Organizations: Lessons from Zhejiang Province, China

“…Community‐based organizations are likely to play different roles at various stages of public service provision (Cheng 2019). Finally, as the responses to COVID‐19 are shaped by their historical and institutional contexts (Moloney and Moloney 2020), future research should examine how mandated versus voluntary coproduction and state‐lead versus community‐led coproduction work in different countries and cultural contexts (Souza and Neto 2018). Local experimentations stimulated by the COVID‐19 crisis provide an ideal context to study these complex interactions for coproduction research.…”

Collective action during the Covid-19 pandemic: The case of Germany’s fragmented authority

“…Our analysis also shows that Germany oscillated between decentralized and centralized solutions, which, however, did not alter the overall fragmented design of the public health system. Australia is a similar case in point, having delegated many responsibilities to its states and territories in the aftermath of past health disasters; a move strongly supported and coordinated by the Commonwealth (Moloney & Moloney, 2020).…”

Global Reflection, Conceptual Exploration, and Evidentiary Assimilation: COVID‐19 Viewpoint Symposium Introduction

“…Using Australia as their case study, Moloney and Moloney (2020) use a historical approach to understand the current pandemic response. They also show how federalism between the state and commonwealth governments affected the response in Australia, and the key to success was an ability to change response mechanisms on the fly.…”

“…They also show how federalism between the state and commonwealth governments affected the response in Australia, and the key to success was an ability to change response mechanisms on the fly. Relying on experts, Australia took action and changed those actions when required to have what many consider a positive pandemic response (Moloney and Moloney 2020).…”