Pandemic Politics: Timing State-Level Social Distancing Responses to COVID-19

Adolph, Christopher; Amano, Kenya; Bang-Jensen, Bree; Fullman, Nancy; Wilkerson, John

doi:10.1215/03616878-8802162

Cited by 279 publications

(155 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

147

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, those with high government effectiveness were slower to implement such policies [36] as were the more right-leaning governments [37]. Further, more democratic countries have tended to be more sensitive to the domestic policy decisions of other countries [38].…”

Section: Politicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When analyzing the timing of international travel restrictions, we take into account how such decisions can be affected by the policies of neighbors [37,38]. Thus, to control for policy diffusion, we constructed a variable to re ect international travel policy adoption of neighboring countries by averaging the strictness of each country's neighbors weighted by the share of international tourism.…”

Section: Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We de ne the time-at-risk for all countries as the start of the sample period (i.e., 01 January 2020) [10] and estimate the following strati ed (semi-parametric) Cox proportional hazards model [37][38]51]:…”

Section: Empirical Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How Does Globalization Affect COVID-19 Responses?

Bickley

Chan

Skali

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the vast differences in approaches to the control and containment of coronavirus across the world and has demonstrated the varied success of such approaches in minimizing the transmission of coronavirus. While previous studies have demonstrated high predictive power of incorporating air travel data and governmental policy responses in global disease transmission modelling, factors influencing the decision to implement travel and border restriction policies have attracted relatively less attention. This paper examines the role of globalization on the pace of adoption of international travel-related non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) during the coronavirus pandemic. This study aims to offer advice on how to improve the global planning, preparation, and coordination of actions and policy responses during future infectious disease outbreaks with empirical evidence.Results: The results of our survival analysis suggest that more globalized countries, accounting for the country-specific timing of the virus outbreak and other factors, are quicker to adopt international travel restrictions policies. However, countries with high government effectiveness were more cautious in the implementation of travel restrictions if they are more globalized, particularly if through formal political and trade policy integration. This finding is supported by a placebo analysis on domestic NPIs, where such a relationship is absent. Additionally, we find that globalized countries with high state capacity are more likely to have higher numbers of confirmed cases by the time a first restriction policy measure was taken. Conclusions: The findings highlight the dynamic relationship between globalization and protectionism when governments respond to significant global events such as a public health crisis. We suggest that the observed caution of policy implementation by countries with high government efficiency and globalization is a by-product of commitment to existing trade agreements, a greater desire to ‘learn from others’ and also perhaps of ‘confidence’ in a government’s ability to deal with a pandemic through its health system and state capacity. Our results suggest further research is warranted to explore whether global infectious disease forecasting could be improved by including the globalization index and in particular, the de jure trade and political (sub)dimensions and de facto interpersonal and cultural (sub)dimensions of globalization. By acting as proxies for a countries’ likelihood and speed of implementation for international travel restriction policies, such measures may predict the likely time delays in disease emergence and transmission across national borders.

show abstract

Section: Politicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Does Globalization Affect COVID-19 Responses?

Bickley

Chan

Skali

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As Jonathan Oberlander succinctly put it, "as with prior infectious diseases such as AIDS, TB, and Ebola […] its course will be determined largely by political and social structures" (Oberlander, 2020). However, emerging research indicates that governmental responses, particularly at the federal level, but also in many states, leave much to be desired from a public health perspective (Adolph, Amano, Bang-Jensen, Fullman, & Wilkerson, 2020;Huberfeld, Gordon, & Jones, 2020;Kavanagh & Singh, 2020). These problems are perhaps best exemplified in the consistent inability to provide adequate testing capacity (Linder, 2020), the persistent lack of personal protective equipment for medical providers (Jacobs, Richtel, & Baker, 2020), the failure to implement effective and coordinated risk communication strategies (Gollust, Nagler, & Fowler, 2020a;Kim & Kreps, 2020), or, most obviously, the general inability to rein in the spread of the disease and ensuing deaths (Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These problems are perhaps best exemplified in the consistent inability to provide adequate testing capacity (Linder, 2020), the persistent lack of personal protective equipment for medical providers (Jacobs, Richtel, & Baker, 2020), the failure to implement effective and coordinated risk communication strategies (Gollust, Nagler, & Fowler, 2020a;Kim & Kreps, 2020), or, most obviously, the general inability to rein in the spread of the disease and ensuing deaths (Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering, 2020). Moreover, unlike its peer countries, the policy response of the U.S. federal government and the actions of state and local policymakers appear to be overwhelmingly shaped by partisan considerations and less by expert advice or scientific evidence (Adolph et al, 2020;Gollust et al, 2020a;Kim & Kreps, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Poor to Worse: Health Policy and Politics Scholars’ Assessment of the U.S. COVID‐19 Response and Its Implications

Haeder

Gollust

2020

World Med & Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By any standard, the U.S. response to the coronavirus pandemic has been abysmal, with countless unnecessary deaths and suffering. Although the human impact is most important, the pandemic has also had enormous consequences on the U.S. political system. Health policy and politics scholars, particularly from political science orientations, are ideally equipped to evaluate the pandemic response from a political perspective. In this study, we report on the results of a two-wave survey of academic health policy researchers in April/May (N = 239) and September (N = 158) 2020. Respondents noted an outsized influence of public health, medicine, and economics, while noting limited public engagement of social scientists like sociologists and political scientists. The perceived expert influence declined over the two waves, while assessment of electoral consequences to favor Democrats grew. Respondents also offered a sober perspective on federal and state responses to the pandemic, forecasting lasting implications for health policy and political dynamics for years to come. Given their expertise, health policy and politics scholars appear uniquely qualified to enter the public and policy discourse going forward.

show abstract

Contextual factors and the COVID‐19 outbreak rate across U.S. counties in its initial phase

Messner

Payson

2021

Health Science Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study examines the association of contextual factors with the COVID‐19 outbreak rate across U.S. counties in its initial phase. Methods Contextual factors are simultaneously tested at the county‐ and state‐level with a multilevel linear model using full maximum likelihood. Results The variation between states is substantial and significant (ICC = 0.532, u0 = 8.20E−04, P < .001). At the state level, the cultural value of collectivism and the contextual factor of government spending are positively associated with the outbreak rate. At the county level, the racial and ethnic composition contributes to outbreak differences, disproportionally affecting black/African, native, Asian, and Hispanic Americans as well as native Hawaiians. Counties with a higher median age and a higher household income have a stronger outbreak. Better education and personal health are generally associated with a lower outbreak. Obesity and smoking are negatively related to the outbreak, in agreement with the value expectancy concepts of the health belief model. Air pollution is another significant contributor to the outbreak. Conclusions Because of a high variation in contextual factors, policy makers need to target pandemic responses to the smallest subdivision possible, so that countermeasures can be implemented effectively.

show abstract

Pandemic Politics: Timing State-Level Social Distancing Responses to COVID-19

Cited by 279 publications

References 24 publications

How Does Globalization Affect COVID-19 Responses?

How Does Globalization Affect COVID-19 Responses?

From Poor to Worse: Health Policy and Politics Scholars’ Assessment of the U.S. COVID‐19 Response and Its Implications

Contextual factors and the COVID‐19 outbreak rate across U.S. counties in its initial phase

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About