Centralized,Leadership, Ministerial Dominance, and Improvised Instruments: The Governance of COVID in Finland

Abstract

Analyzing the governance of the COVID crisis in Finland, this article shows that in terms of organization and communication the strategy combined elements of centralized leadership, ministerial dominance, and scientific expertise. The government adopted an uncertainty avoidance approach in mid-March 2020, declaring the state of emergency and imposing strict anti-pandemic measures. The first wave of the pandemic was characterized by a sense of national urgency both in terms of policy and public opinion, which appreciated the active leadership of the government. Subsequently the government shifted to a more decentralized pandemic governance under normal legislation, with targeted regional solutions favored more instead of nation-wide measures. This produced occasional tensions between regional authorities and the government. The Prime Minister’s Office was in charge, but the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health retained most of the actual decision-making and horizontal coordination as well as governmental communication created challenges. The Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare was highly visible throughout the crisis, but occasionally the views of the health authorities and the executive differed.

Interpreting the state–citizen nexus in contemporary Nordic legal and social citizenship: the case of divergence in restriction on freedom of movement as a mitigation policy in the COVID-19 pandemic

“…However, other branches of government contributed substantially by monitoring the intensive work that 30 roadblocks and checkpoints implied. In other words, the police were mainly responsible for enforcing the temporary regulation but were supported by 750 conscripts and 40 professional soldiers from four different brigades of the Defence Forces, together forming an Executive Assistance Detachment (Niemikari & Raunio, 2022, p. 5). While the use of the Finnish Defence Forces might seem radical, it is not uncommon that the Defence Forces support other authorities during difficult situations by providing assistance to ensure the safety of society during emergency conditions.…”

Koronapandemian hallinta Suomessa 2020–2022: Hallintapyrkimykset, hallintatavat ja hallintotapojen käyttö

“…Tämä havainto on linjassa sen kanssa, että Suomessa harjoitetussa COVID-19 -pandemian hallinnassa on korostunut valtion keskushallinnon rooli. Hallinta on voittopuolisesti toteutunut linjalla eduskunta -sille poliittisesti vastuunalainen hallitus -valtioneuvoston ministeriöt -tietyt ministeriöiden hallinnonaloihin sijoitetut virastot ja laitokset sekä lisäksi monialaiset aluehallintovirastot (Niemikari & Raunio 2022;Neuvonen 2020;Tiihonen 2021). Toisaalta malli on näin ollut edustuksellisen ja parlamentaarisen enemmistödemokratian eikä intressiryhmädemokratian periaatteiden mukainen.…”

“…Koronapandemian hallinta on ollut Suomessa korostetun keskusjohtoista erityisesti valtioneuvoston, pääministerin sekä sosiaali-ja terveysministeriön alaisuudessa (esim. Niemikari & Raunio 2022;Neuvonen 2020;Tiihonen 2021). Keskeisimpiä työkaluja ovat olleet suositukset ja rajoitukset kasvomaskisuosituksista liikkumisrajoituksiin ja hybridistrategian mukaisiin tautitilanteeseen mukautuviin rajoituksiin.…”

Instituutioihin kohdistuvan luottamuksen ja koronapandemiaan liittyvien rajoitustoimenpiteiden dynamiikat Suomessa

“…Yleisesti ottaen, valtionjohdon ja instituutioiden suoriutuminen kriiseistä vaikuttaa poliittiseen luottamukseen (Nicholls & Picou 2013;Eurofound 2018;Roth ym. 2013).…”

“…Yksilöiden omakohtaiset kokemukset vaikuttavat näiden luottamukseen valtionjohtoa kohtaan (Amat ym. 2020;Nicholls & Picou 2013).…”