Global contagion and local response: the influence of centre–state relations and political culture in pandemic governance

Abstract

Covid-19 has severely impacted lives and livelihoods in India. Faced with threatened livelihoods due to lockdowns in major cities, millions of poor informal sector workers have returned to their rural roots, provoking a complex intergovernmental problem that necessitates collective action but is plagued with a high degree of uncertainty. This article explores two interrelated issues. First, we examine the role of the central government in the Covid-19 crisis and the implications for centre-state relations. Second, we review the governance responses of two states, Kerala and Gujarat. We unpack how variations in political values and norms within which the key political actors of the two governing regimes are rooted had informed their policy priorities. We show how local political culture significantly affected critical decisions (e.g. emergency relief for the poor) and administrative implementation mechanisms (whether centralised or decentralised). We draw lessons on the influence of political culture in shaping pandemic governance response in a federal polity.

The Politics of the COVID-19 Pandemic in India

“…Still, issues arose over the states' demand for more financial support for relief operations and freedom to streamline lockdown regulations to suit the local context, rather than imposing nationwide guidelines. But those who objected to the Centre were all opposition-ruled states, especially on issues such as special trains, for transporting returning internal migrants, and the criteria for the classification of containment zones (Chatterji et al 2021). If during the first wave the Center had used its powers in a centralized way to impose lockdown, during the second wave, it abdicated its responsibility, leaving the states to fend for themselves with respect to lockdowns and vaccinations before the Supreme Court intervened.…”

“…The opposition highlighted several scams that took place during the height of the COVID-19 containment period, with bureaucrats close to the Chief Minister himself being involved. But in states such as Gujarat, the decision-making power rested primarily with the bureaucracy-municipal commissioners, district collectors, and health officers-making pandemic management a largely top-down initiative (Chatterji et al 2021;Chathukulam and Tharamangalam 2020).…”

Managing the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Fragmented Local Government Setting: a Study from Ogan Ilir Regency, Indonesia

“…The COVID-19 pandemic is a new form of challenge for public organizations that has never happened in previous periods (Chatterji, Roy, & Chatterjee, 2021;Grint, 2020;Tung, 2021). Leaders of public organizations are still looking for various written instructions from various reports and opinions from academics (Behrens & Naylor, 2020;Jeong & Kim, 2021;Wilson, 2020).…”

“…Some governments even stipulate disaster and emergency management which is usually used in times of war to protect the population by adopting a strict command and control approach. (Chatterji et al, 2021;Correia, Mendes, Pereira, & Subtil, 2020;Huang, 2020). Disaster and emergency management at the national level in the current era finds more complicated problems because they are in a fragmented organizational situation and have a strict hierarchy.…”

“…On the one hand, in the disaster literature, the centralized situation in decision making is recognized as useful in several studies and produces a common response in crisis situations. (Chatterji et al, 2021;Fraser & Aldrich, 2021;Wang, Dong, Zhang, & Luo, 2021). Meanwhile on the other hand, this is a dangerous decision because it relies too much on certain actors.…”