COVID-19 has created a ramifying public health, economic, and political crisis throughout many countries in the world. While globally the pandemic is at different stages and far from under control in some countries, now is the time for public health researchers and political scientists to start understanding how and why governments responded the way they have, explore how effective these responses appear to be, and what lessons we can draw about effective public health policymaking in preparation of the next wave of COVID-19 or the next infectious disease pandemic. We argue that there will be no way to understand the different responses to COVID-19 and their effects without understanding policy and politics. We propose four key focuses to understand the reasons for COVID-19 responses: social policies to crisis management as well as recovery, regime type (democracy or autocracy), formal political institutions (federalism, presidentialism), and state capacity (control over health care systems and public administration). A research agenda to address the COVID-19 pandemic that takes politics as a serious focus can enable the development of more realistic, sustainable interventions in policies and shape our broader understanding of the politics of public health.
Strategic purchasing of health care services is widely recommended as a policy instrument. We conducted a review of literature of material drawn from the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Health Systems in Transition series, other European Observatory databases, and selected country-specific literature to augment the comparative analysis by providing the most recent healthcare trends in ten selected countries. There is little evidence of purchasing being strategic according to any of the established definitions. There is little or no literature suggesting that existing purchasing mechanisms in Europe deliver improved population health, citizen empowerment, stronger governance and stewardship, or develop purchaser organization and capacity. Strategic purchasing has not generally been implemented. Policymakers considering adopting strategic purchasing policies should be aware of this systemic implementation problem. Policymakers in systems with strategic purchasing built into policy should not assume that a purchasing system is strategic or that it is delivering any expected objectives. However, there are individual components of strategic purchasing that are worth pursuing and can provide benefits to health systems.
If public health is the field that diagnoses and strives to cure social ills, then understanding political causes and cures for health problems should be an intrinsic part of the field. In this article, we argue that there is no support for the simple and common, implicit model of politics in which scientific evidence plus political will produces healthy policies. Efforts to improve the translation of evidence into policy such as knowledge transfer work only under certain circumstances. These circumstances are frequently political, and to be understood through systematic inquiry into basic features of the political economy such as institutions, partisanship and the organization of labour markets.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.