Public policy responses to COVID‐19 in Europe

Colfer, Barry

doi:10.1002/epa2.1097

Cited by 21 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Modeling studies can thus inform adapted, targeted interventions to prevent further viral spread or respond to pandemic exacerbations. Several studies explored experts’ role in policy making, and it has been suggested that “the extent to which public policy responses to COVID-19 were based on health, political, or economic imperatives, and the extent to which politicians or unelected experts were to the fore in framing political messaging, varied considerably across Europe and had a major bearing on the nature and timing of decisions” [ 1 , 63 , 64 ]. It was noted early into the pandemic that the actual or perceived political dependence of scientific advisory groups which many countries established was a concern.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Documentation and analysis of health policy responses to COVID-19 on national and international levels is an active research processes across the globe. Comparative analyses, despite challenges associated with performance of such comparative studies can help optimize COVID-19 response strategies and prepare for future health crises [ 1 – 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Approach to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Georgia—A Health Policy Analysis

Nadareishvili

Zhulina²,

Tskitishvili

et al. 2022

Int J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This study aimed to analyze key COVID-19 pandemic-related policies and national strategic responses in light of Georgia’s political, socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds.Methods: We applied a policy triangle framework for policy analysis, performed document and media content analysis, and described pandemic trends statistically.Results: Early introduction of stringent restrictive measures largely prevented a first wave in March–May 2020. This was communicated as a success story, prompting a public success perception. With unpopular restrictions lifted and hesitancy to embrace evidence-informed policymaking ahead of nationwide parliamentary elections, SARS-CoV-2 infection spread rapidly and was met with an insufficiently coordinated effort. Facing health system capacity saturation an almost complete lockdown was re-introduced in late 2020. Factors as delayed immunization campaign, insufficient coordination and, again, little evidence-informed policymaking eventually led to another devastating COVID-19 wave in summer of 2021.Conclusion: Georgia’s pandemic health policy response was adversely impacted by a volatile political environment. National pandemic preparedness and response might benefit from an independent body with appointment procedures and operations shielded from political influences to effectively inform and communicate evidence-based pandemic policy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Approach to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Georgia—A Health Policy Analysis

Nadareishvili

Zhulina²,

Tskitishvili

et al. 2022

Int J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In turn, differences resonated with the economic performance across the EU27 in 2020 and onward as highlighted by early analyses of the pandemic (Ceron et al, 2020;Colfer, 2020;de Jong and Ho, 2021). Along with differences in severity of the outbreak by cases and deaths and to some extent different levels of preparedness across Member Stateswhich may be partially to blame on the legacy of the economic crisissomewhat parallel divergences emerged in containment measures.…”

Section: Many 'Europes': Outbreak Containment and Fiscal Responsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-COVID Prospects for the EMU: The Pandemic Core-Periphery Divide, Palliative Measures and the Stakes of the Conference on the Future of Europe

Ceron

2021

HAPScPBS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The policy brief draws from previous and ongoing research on the heterogeneities of the impact of the -in principle -symmetric shock of the pandemic within the EU. Considering the pre-existing gaps within the core and periphery, further worsened by the Covid-19 outbreak, the analysis presents the economic and social prospects in 2020 and in the years to come across the Member States. In doing so the work identifies the key challenges in line with the legacy of the Eurozone crisis and well-established limits of EMU governance assessing palliative emergency instruments such as Next Generation EU against the benchmark of the scale of the core-periphery divide. In doing so the contribution puts forward policy recommendation for ambitious reform of economic governance of the Eurozone, against the backdrop of an unprecedented window of opportunity for transnational solidarity opened by the pandemic crisis in parallel with the onset of the Conference of the Future of Europe.

show abstract

“…It can also be assumed that the acceptance of the academia toward implementation of new-normal policy are image of their confidence that implementation of new-habbit in tourism, such as cleanliness, the wearing of face mask, maintaining phisical distancing, avoiding crowds, keeping one's immune in good condition and other ways (Guridno & Guridno, 2020;Colfer, 2020;Basher & Haque, 2020), as suggested by WHO and other health organization are effective in minimizing the possibility of getting infected by the virus.…”

Section: Conclusion and Recommendationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Influencing Acceptance of Tourism Academia Towards Implementation of New- Normal Policy in Tourism Industry; Evidence from Bali

Suasapha¹,

Mahadewi

et al. 2021

ajht

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article aims to understand factors that influence the acceptance of tourism academia toward the implementation of a new-normal policy for the tourism industry in Bali. Data were collected from an online survey. The population from which the sample was derived was the tourism lecturers of Bali Tourism Polytechnic. The sample size was 88, representing a population of 151 lecturers. It corresponds to the statistical power of 0,90. Statistical descriptive analysis and multiple linear regression analysis were performed to analysis the data. The result of the research shows that acceptance of tourism academia toward implementation of the new-normal policy was simultaneously influenced by their perception of the impact caused by the pandemic to the industry as well as their perception about the dangerous disease itself, even though partially, the impact of the pandemic seems to be the stronger influencing factor compared to their perception about the dangerous disease. The article concludes that tourism academia accepted the opening of the tourism industry while stressing that the opening should be accompanied by strict implementation of the new-normal protocol, to prevent the second wave of the pandemic COVID-19 as well as to prevent future irreversible damages to the tourism industry in term of its safety and security image.

show abstract

Public policy responses to COVID‐19 in Europe

Cited by 21 publications

References 35 publications

The Approach to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Georgia—A Health Policy Analysis

The Approach to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Georgia—A Health Policy Analysis

Post-COVID Prospects for the EMU: The Pandemic Core-Periphery Divide, Palliative Measures and the Stakes of the Conference on the Future of Europe

Factors Influencing Acceptance of Tourism Academia Towards Implementation of New- Normal Policy in Tourism Industry; Evidence from Bali

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About