Epidemic disease and the state: Is there a tradeoff between public health and liberty?

Koyama, Mark

doi:10.1007/s11127-021-00944-4

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 89 publications

(51 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Along these lines, Martínez-Córdoba et al ( 2021 ) highlighted that a greater compliance with the rule of law significantly enhance efficiency. After all, as Koyama ( 2021 ) suggests, it is a short-term trade-off between public health and freedom; if this trade-off is attempted to be implemented in the long run, it will not work. Apart from these various determinants, some studies (Akroyd et al, 2020 ; Wang, 2021 ) also found that the level or urgency in providing responses is key to prepare for post-pandemic recovery, as well as to cope with the negative impacts emerging from the initial response phase and to elaborate long-term reforms.…”

Section: Is There An East–west Divide In Europe In Terms Of Governmen...mentioning

confidence: 99%

European Governments’ Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic during the First Wave: Resetting Governance Systems to Cope More Effectively with Future Shocks

Ţigănaşu

Simionov

Lupu

2022

Appl. Spatial Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence of the current global crisis induced by the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic brings about an urgent need to rethink and reshape recovery strategies adapted to this specific challenging context. Neglecting this reconfiguration could lead to system lockdown, affecting all sectors, both on medium and long term. The coronavirus has penetrated various countries with different degrees of intensity, thus being spatially diversified; even within the same country, with the same lockdown measures, an enormous variety in cases is encountered. Subsequently, even if crises may manifest heterogeneously and the long-term impact of implementing recovery policies cannot be accurately known ex ante by governments, institutions could adapt themselves to changing circumstances and respond promptly and appropriately to emerging shocks only if their functioning framework had been well set up by the outbreak of the crisis. Considering these aspects, the main questions that this paper aims to answer are: How effective have governmental measures in European countries been in combating the COVID-19 crisis?; Could the solutions offered by the European states’ governments have an influence on diminishing the intensity of negative effects of a possible more serious return of this health crisis? What more could national authorities and international actors do to control the epidemiological evolution of SARS-CoV-2? Is a generic European Union policy helpful or should there be a case for local policy? Based on these issues, a comprehensive picture of the differences between the East and the West of Europe in terms of some medical, socio-economic, institutional and cultural factors will be outlined, in order to emphasize which of the two groups better-handled the COVID-19 situation in the first wave, covering the lockdown period (March 1, 2020 – June 1, 2020) and the relaxation period (June 1, 2020 – September 1, 2020); at the same time, some policy recommendations on how governments should more effectively manage future similar crises to generate a higher resilience of the systems will be provided.

show abstract

Section: Is There An East–west Divide In Europe In Terms Of Governmen...mentioning

confidence: 99%

European Governments’ Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic during the First Wave: Resetting Governance Systems to Cope More Effectively with Future Shocks

Ţigănaşu

Simionov

Lupu

2022

Appl. Spatial Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Addressing the problems presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers in liberal political economy have challenged the supposed trade-off between protection against infectious disease and economic freedom (Furton, 2023 ; Geloso et al, 2021 ; Geloso & Murtazashvili, 2021 ; Koyama, 2023 ), shown that political incentives encourage officials to adopt stricter measures than is economically efficient (Allen, 2022 ; Boettke & Powell, 2021 ; Hebert & Curry, 2022 ; Leeson & Thompson, 2023 ; Murtazashvili and Zhou this volume ; cf. Garzarelli et al, 2022 ), including measures that persist after the danger has passed (Goodman et al, 2021 ), proposed that spontaneous endogenous citizen responses to novel infections are more effective than typically predicted (Allen et al, 2022 ; Leeson & Rouanet, 2021 ), and highlighted how decisions in the private sector can internalise many of the relevant externalities associated with the infection (Albrecht & Rajagopalan, 2023 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel externalities

Cowen

Schliesser

2023

Public Choice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Novel externalities are social activities for which the emerging cost (or benefit) of the spillover is unknown and must be discovered. Negative novel externalities have regained international salience following the COVID-19 pandemic. Such cases frequently are invoked as evidence of the limits of liberal political economy for dealing with public emergencies. Through a re-reading of classical political economy with the modern state’s confrontation with infectious disease in mind, we defend the comparative efficacy of liberal democracy against authoritarian alternatives for coping with these social problems. Effective responses to novel externalities require producing and updating trustworthy public information and an independent scientific community to validate and interpret it. Those epistemic capacities are prevalent in liberal democratic regimes with multiple sources of political power, an independent civil society, and practices of academic freedom. Our analysis highlights the theoretical value of polycentrism and self-governance beyond their more familiar role, of increasing accountability and competition in the provision of local public goods, towards facilitating effective national policy.

show abstract

“…Indeed, the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the global vulnerability of constitutional and inclusive institutions through violations of apparently established institutional norms ( Edgell et al, 2021 ). A sensitive issue involves conflicts between the values of constitutional democracies and the security measures implemented against COVID-19, which is referred to as the security–liberty trade-off ( Koyama, 2021 ; Pennington, 2021 ; Pereira & Stornelli, 2022 ; van Vark, 2021 ), a classical issue dating back to Hayek (2007) ( Hayek, 2007 , p. 155). The issue of whether to allow the tracking of SMS/phone communication to detect infection routes is particularly serious and has created divides both between and within advanced democracies ( Beduschi, 2021 ; Fahey & Hino, 2020 ; Ghose et al, 2022 ; Kawata & Nakabayashi, 2022 ; Tran & Nguyen, 2021 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The citizen preferences–positive externality trade-off: A survey study of COVID-19 vaccine deployment in Japan

Iida¹,

Kawata²,

Nakabayashi³

2022

SSM - Population Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epidemic disease and the state: Is there a tradeoff between public health and liberty?

Cited by 14 publications

References 89 publications

European Governments’ Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic during the First Wave: Resetting Governance Systems to Cope More Effectively with Future Shocks

European Governments’ Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic during the First Wave: Resetting Governance Systems to Cope More Effectively with Future Shocks

Novel externalities

The citizen preferences–positive externality trade-off: A survey study of COVID-19 vaccine deployment in Japan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About