Motivations and Limits for COVID-19 Policy Compliance in Germany and Switzerland

Abstract

Background: In contrast to neighboring countries, German and Swiss authorities refrained from general curfews during the first pandemic wave in spring 2020, calling for solidarity and personal responsibility instead. Using a qualitative methodology, this study aims to explore why people in Germany and Switzerland were motivated to comply with policy measures during the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and what factors hindered or limited their motivation. While quantitative surveys can measure the level of compliance, or broadly ask what motives people had for compliance, we here strive to explain why and how these motives lead to compliance. Methods: This publication has been made possible by the joint work of the members of the "Solidarity in times of pandemics" (SolPan) research commons. Seventy-seven semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with members of the general public in Germany (n = 46) and the German-speaking part of Switzerland (n = 31) in April 2020. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed following a grounded theory approach. Results: Three themes were identified that summarize factors contributing to compliant or noncompliant behavior. (1) Social cohesion was, on the one hand, an important motivator for compliance, but at the same time related to conflicting needs, illustrating the limits of compliance. (2) Consequences were considered on both the individual level (eg, consequences of individual infection) and societal level (eg, the societal and economic consequences of restrictions). (3) While for some participants following the rules was perceived as a matter of principle, others stressed the importance of making their own risk assessment, which was often associated with with a need for evidence on the effectiveness and reasons behind measures. Conclusion: A variety of motives contribute to COVID-19 related compliance. Authorities should seek to address these multi-faceted aspects to support motivation for compliance in a large proportion of the population.

Cope or Perish? Managing Tipping Points in Developing Coping Strategies for Emergency Response during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Europe

“…By comparison, Germany and Austria adopted a mitigation strategy by moderate social restrictions. In both countries, moderate social restrictions imposed by the government initially appeared to be more effective as the population abided by these restrictions, but even that could not prevent a full lockdown eventually [129,130]. Unlike Austria, Germany's medical capacity, including ICU and testing capacity, was sufficient, but it still boosted its capacity to anticipate a steep rise in IC admissions.…”

Comparing coronavirus (COVID-19) and climate change perceptions: Implications for support for individual and collective-level policies

“…As a result, there was a strong emphasis on individual responsibility, where the blame for the spread of the virus laid upon individuals who failed to comply with social distancing ( Karyotis et al, 2021 ). Research from other European countries shows that people felt a sense of personal responsibility towards mitigating coronavirus and that this was emphasised by policy makers ( Farrell et al, 2021 ; Zimmermann et al, 2021 ). However, levels of perceived personal responsibility to contain coronavirus differed throughout countries in the Americas, Europe and Asia, with research finding that participants in the Americas agreed with people taking personal responsibility but that this was lower in the South of Europe ( Pizarro et al, 2020 ).…”

New life after near death: Surviving critical COVID-19 infection

“…Elsewhere, compliance with restrictions imposed to reduce the spread of COVID-19 infections has been shown to be complex, with a need for presentation of evidence on the effectiveness and reasons behind measures. [19] …”

“…Elsewhere, compliance with restrictions imposed to reduce the spread of COVID-19 infections has been shown to be complex, with a need for presentation of evidence on the effectiveness and reasons behind measures. [19] Gratifyingly, upon discharge from hospital, the vast majority of participants understood their vulnerability to severe COVID disease, and many felt motivated to discuss their experiences with the family and community. In addition, many participants felt inspired to address unhealthy lifestyle factors and improve control of their chronic illnesses, suggesting psychological growth.…”