Institutional Origins of Protective COVID-19 Public Health Policy Responses: Informational and Authority Redundancies and Policy Stringency

Shvetsova, Olga; Zhirnov, Andrei; VanDusky-Allen, Julie; Adeel, Abdul Basit; Catalano, Michael; Catalano, Olivia; Giannelli, Frank; Muftuoglu, Ezgi; Riggs, Tara; Sezgin, Mehmet Halit; Tahir, Naveed; Zhao, Tianyi

doi:10.1561/113.00000023

Cited by 21 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, Total PPI aggregates the highest values from each of the 15 categories when comparing the federal and state-originating policies. 5,6 Though normal policymaking includes multiple political and societal actors, this attribution of policy stringency to governors is justified because >88% of all COVID-19 policies in the U.S. states came directly through executive actions rather than from the legislature, bureaucracy, or judiciary.…”

Section: Study Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The present study uses the Public Health Protective Policy Index (PPI) 5,6 to connect the aggregate strength (stringency) of state-originating public health policies to both the party affiliation of its governor and to the state-level outcomes. Understanding the relationship between politics and public health measures can better prepare American communities for what to expect from their governments in future crises and encourage the medical community to advocate for greater delegation of public health policymaking to health professionals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Governor's Party, Policies, and COVID-19 Outcomes: Further Evidence of an Effect

Shvetsova

Zhirnov

Giannelli

et al. 2022

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction This study connects the aggregate strength of public health policies taken in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the U.S. states to the governors’ party affiliations and to state-level outcomes. Understanding the relationship between politics and public health measures can better prepare American communities for what to expect from their governments in a future crisis and encourage advocacy for delegating public health decisions to medical professionals. Methods The Public Health Protective Policy Index (PPI) captures the strength of policy response to COVID-19 at the state level. The authors estimated a Bayesian model that links the rate of disease spread to PPI. The model also accounted for the possible state-specific undercounting of cases and controls for state population density, poverty, number of physicians, cardiovascular disease, asthma, smoking, obesity, age, racial composition, and urbanization. A Bayesian linear model with natural splines of time was employed to link the dynamics of PPI to governors’ party affiliations. Results A 10–percentage point decrease in PPI was associated with an 8% increase in the expected number of new cases. Between late March and November 2020 and at the state-specific peaks of the pandemic, the PPI in the states with Democratic governors was about 10 percentage points higher than in the states with Republican governors. Conclusions Public health measures were stricter in the Democrat-led states, and stricter public health measures were associated with a slower growth of COVID-19 cases. The apparent politicization of public health measures suggests that public health decision making by health professionals rather than political incumbents could be beneficial.

show abstract

Section: Study Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governor's Party, Policies, and COVID-19 Outcomes: Further Evidence of an Effect

Shvetsova

Zhirnov

Giannelli

et al. 2022

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regarding COVID-19, most commonly studied are government mitigation policies (e.g. Cronert 2020, Frey et al 2020, Petersen 2020, Shvetsova et al 2020, Trein 2020.…”

Section: Existing Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Democratic Regimes and Epidemic Deaths

McMann¹,

Tisch²

2021

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) is a new approach to conceptualization and measurement of democracy. The headquarters -the V-Dem Institute -is based at the University of Gothenburg with 23 staff. The project includes a worldwide team with 5 Principal Investigators, 19 Project Managers, 33 Regional Managers, 134 Country Coordinators, Research Assistants, and 3,500 Country Experts. The V-Dem project is one of the largest ever social science research-oriented data collection programs.

show abstract

“…Although it is not a cost-effective solution, it enables extensive uncertainties to be tackled by multiplying the quantity of tools and thus reinforcing each other (Weick and Sutcliffe, 2001). Studies on the adoption of health policies regarding COVID-19 show that redundancy has characterized the public health response to the COVID-19 crisis in democracies and decentralized states more than in centralized states and in autocracies with positive results particularly during the first wave (Shvetsova et al, 2020).…”

Section: Creeping Crisis Emergency Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is regional emergency management key to containing COVID-19? A comparison between the regional Italian models of Emilia-Romagna and Veneto

Troisi

Alfano

2021

IJPSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper analyses emergency management in two regions of Italy – Emilia-Romagna and Veneto – in order (1) to understand whether they impact on the spread of local coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contagion and (2) evaluate which strategy works best.Design/methodology/approachA three-step method was developed consisting of (1) a regional incidence curve analysis; (2) a descriptive statistical analysis of the respective operational measures related to the COVID-19 curve stages; and (3) a dynamic Structural Equation Model.FindingsThe results show the effects of the models during the various stages of the local contagion, focussing both on the two individual regions and a comparison of the way they responded.Practical implicationsThree theoretical implications are highlighted: (1) Better results are not necessarily the outcome of increased expenditure; (2) The overall rigidity they both show does not work; (3) The decision to centralize was, to some extent, effective for both regions.Originality/valueThe article empirically tests the effectiveness of emergency management in tackling a single event. Instead of the widely-used normative approach, the authors adopted a descriptive one, which is not frequently discussed in the emergency management literature.

show abstract

Institutional Origins of Protective COVID-19 Public Health Policy Responses: Informational and Authority Redundancies and Policy Stringency

Cited by 21 publications

References 5 publications

Governor's Party, Policies, and COVID-19 Outcomes: Further Evidence of an Effect

Governor's Party, Policies, and COVID-19 Outcomes: Further Evidence of an Effect

Democratic Regimes and Epidemic Deaths

Is regional emergency management key to containing COVID-19? A comparison between the regional Italian models of Emilia-Romagna and Veneto

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About