Population preferences for inclusive COVID-19 policy responses.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Blayac T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7831888 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Population preferences for inclusive COVID-19 policy responses.
Blayac Thierry T Dubois Dimitri D Duchêne Sebastien S Nguyen-Van Phu P Ventelou Bruno B Willinger Marc M
The Lancet. Public health 20201207 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:Mass media routinely present data on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diffusion with graphs that use either a log scale or a linear scale. We show that the choice of the scale adopted on these graphs has important consequences on how people understand and react to the information conveyed. In particular, we find that when we show the number of COVID-19 related deaths on a logarithmic scale, people have a less accurate understanding of how the pandemic has developed, make less accurate predictions on its evolution, and have different policy preferences than when they are exposed to a linear scale. Consequently, merely changing the scale the data is presented on can alter public policy preferences and the level of worry about the pandemic, despite the fact that people are routinely exposed to COVID-19 related information. Providing the public with information in ways they understand better can help improving the response to COVID-19, thus, mass media and policymakers communicating to the general public should always describe the evolution of the pandemic using a graph on a linear scale, at least as a default option. Our results suggest that framing matters when communicating to the public.
| S-EPMC7461444 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Do negative economic shocks change fiscal policy preferences? We examine this question via the large COVID-19 shock, as the virus and ensuing lockdowns caused one of the largest acute economic contractions in recent history. While previous evidence that recessions meaningfully change fiscal preferences is limited, we hypothesize that the health pandemic should have had distinct effects. We argue that this is due to the large breadth, uncertainty, and socio-tropic basis of the economic contraction, and that worse economic evaluations and reduced economic optimism should correspond with greater support for fiscal interventions to address the crisis. To test these hypotheses, we use new panel evidence from Spain, a hard-hit country, surveying individuals prior to the pandemic and the same individuals during the pandemic. We find that individuals became more economically pessimistic across many measures. However, there is little evidence that this translates into support for more expansive fiscal policies. Second, we find through a framing experiment that this could be because individuals believe that the government’s fiscal policies would disproportionately benefit lower-income individuals. The findings indicate the theoretical importance of recessions for changing individual and socio-tropic economic expectations, but do not support the claim that large economic shocks can significantly change fiscal preferences.
| S-EPMC10050997 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic entails a medium- and long-run risk of heightened political conflict. In this short essay we distinguish four major consequences of COVID-19 that may fuel social tensions and political violence, namely i) spiking poverty, ii) education under stress, iii) potential for repression, and iv) reduced inter-dependence. After discussing them in turn, we will formulate policy recommendations on how to attenuate these risks.
| S-EPMC8887915 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has become one of the most serious health crises in human history, spreading rapidly across the globe from January 2020 to the present. With prompt and drastic measures, Vietnam is one of the few countries that has largely succeeded in controlling the outbreak. This result is derived from a harmonious combination of many factors, with the policy system playing a key role. This study assessed the policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Vietnam from the early days of the outbreak in January 2020 to 24 July 2020 (with a total of 413 cases confirmed and 99 days of no new cases infected from the local community) by synthesizing and evaluating 959 relevant policy documents in different classifications. The findings show that the Vietnamese policy system responded promptly, proactively, and effectively at multiple authority levels (33 different agencies from the national to provincial governments), using a range of policy tools and measures. Parallel to the daily occurrence of 2.24 new cases, 5.13 new policy documents were issued on average per day over the study period. The pandemic policy response over the first six months in Vietnam were divided into four periods, I (23 January-5 March), II (6-19 March), III (20 March-21 April), and IV (22 April-24 July). This paper synthesizes eight solution groups for these four anti-pandemic phases, including outbreak announcements and steering documents, medical measures, blockade of the schools, emergency responses, border and entry control measures, social isolation and nationwide social isolation measures, financial supports, and other measures. By emphasizing diversification of the policy responses, from the agencies to the tools and measures, the case study reviews and shares lessons from the successful COVID-19 prevention and control in Vietnam that could be useful for other nations.
| S-EPMC7828055 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic pushed millions of Americans into food insecurity. Food policy councils (FPCs) across the country played a vital role in organizing coordinated food responses across multiple sectors. We used a social network analysis (SNA) approach to investigate: (1) the network of partnering organizations and agencies within FPCs; (2) how the characteristics of FPCs' network partnerships (i.e., degree, coreness, and density) related to programmatic, policy, and advocacy actions in response to the pandemic; and (3) how FPCs' use of a racial or social equity framework shifted their network partnerships and responses. Local government agencies and food supply chain actors were core in FPCs' network partnerships, while public utilities, correctional facilities, social justice groups, and others were non-core partners. Network density was more likely to be associated with any action by FPCs, and it was especially pronounced for advocacy actions taken by FPCs; trends were similar among FPCs that reported using a racial or social equity framework. The findings begin to uncover core actors in FPCs' partnerships and opportunities to establish new partnerships, particularly with social justice groups. The results also suggest that network density (interconnectedness) may be more important than other network characteristics when responding to food-related needs.
| S-EPMC11013245 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesIn response to COVID-19's first wave, provincial governments rapidly implemented several public health directives, including isolation measures and care facility visitor restrictions, which profoundly affected healthcare delivery at the end of life and dying experiences and perceptions. The objective of this study was to identify implications of early policy changes for dying at home.MethodsAnalysis of interviews with 29 key informants with expertise in the policy and practice context of dying at home and care for those dying at home was conducted as part of a larger mixed-methods study on dying at home in Canada.ResultsInitial pandemic policy responses, especially visitor restrictions and limitations to home care services, shaped dying at home in relation to three themes: (1) increasing preferences and demand for, yet constrained system ability to support dying at home; (2) reinforcing and illuminating systemic reliance on and need for family/friend caregivers and community organizations, while constraining their abilities to help people die at home; and (3) illuminating challenges in developing and implementing policy changes during a pandemic, including equity-related implications.ConclusionThis study contributes to broader understanding of the multifaceted impacts of COVID-19 policy responses in various areas within Canadian healthcare systems. Implications for healthcare delivery and policy development include (1) recognizing the role of family/friend caregivers and community organizations in end-of-life care, (2) recognizing health inequities at the end of life, and (3) considering possible changes in future end-of-life preferences and public attitudes about dying at home and responsibility for end-of-life care.
| S-EPMC10691158 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A large literature contends that conservatives differ from liberals in their dispositional sensitivity to threat and needs for social order and security. Thus, a puzzle emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic when American conservatives, despite their purported threat sensitivity, responded to the pandemic in ways that evinced little concern toward the risks posed by COVID-19. Threat tolerant liberals present an equally interesting case, having fervently masked, isolated, and advocated for stringent public health restrictions when facing down COVID-19. Why did so many Americans adopt health behaviors and policy preferences at odds with their dispositional orientations toward threat and needs for security during the COVID-19 pandemic? In this paper, I analyze three national surveys to evaluate how psychological dispositions affected Americans' responses to COVID-19. I find that authoritarianism, a common measure of dispositional threat sensitivity and needs for security, conditionally affected Americans' responses to the pandemic. Directly, authoritarianism was associated with greater concern over COVID-19 and, in turn, increased willingness to engage in protective health behaviors, support restrictive public health measures, and support economic interventions amidst the pandemic-induced downturn. Indirectly, however, authoritarianism promoted identification with and cue-taking from right-wing elites who frequently downplayed the severity of COVID-19; attention to such rhetoric reduced politically engaged authoritarians' concern over COVID-19 and, in turn, their willingness to adopt protective health behaviors and support public health restrictions or economic interventionism. Attention to political discourse thus appears to have countervailed Americans' dispositional orientations toward threat and security during the COVID-19 pandemic.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11109-022-09828-9.
| S-EPMC9568978 | biostudies-literature
Project description:When the novel coronavirus entered the US, most US states implemented lockdown measures. In April-May 2020, state governments started political discussions about whether it would be worth the risk to reduce protective measures. In a highly politicized environment, risk perceptions and preferences for risk mitigation may vary by political inclinations. In April-May 2020, we surveyed a nationally representative sample of 5517 members of the University of Southern California's Understanding America Study. Of those, 37% identified as Democrats, 32% as Republican, and 31% as Third Party/Independent. Overall, Democrats perceived more risk associated with COVID-19 than Republicans, including for getting infected, being hospitalized and dying if infected, as well as running out of money as a result of the pandemic. Democrats were also more likely than Republicans to express concerns that states would lift economic restrictions too quickly, and to report mask use and social distancing. Generally, participants who identified as Third Party/Independent fell in between. Democrats were more likely to report watching MSNBC or CNN (vs. not), while Republicans were more likely to report watching Fox News (vs. not), and Third Party/Independents tended to watch neither. However, political inclinations predicted reported policy preferences, mask use, and social distancing, in analyses that accounted for differences in use of media sources, risk perceptions, and demographic background. In these analyses, participants' reported media use added to the partisan divide in preferences for the timing of lifting economic restrictions and reported protective behaviors. Implications for risk communication are discussed.Supplementary informationThe online version of this article (10.1007/s11166-020-09336-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
| S-EPMC7672261 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: This paper quantitatively explores determinants of governments' non-pharmaceutical policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our focus is on the extent to which geographic mobility affected the stringency of governmental policy responses. Methods: Using cross-country, daily frequency data on geographic mobility and COVID-19 policy stringency during 2020, we investigate some of the determinants of policy responses to COVID-19. In order to causally identify the effect of geographic mobility on policy stringency, we pursue an instrumental variable strategy that exploits climate data to identify arguably exogenous variation in geographic mobility. Results: We find that societies that are more geographically mobile have governmental policy responses that are less stringent. Examining disaggregated mobility data, we show that the negative relation between geographic mobility and policy stringency is the stronger for commercially-oriented movements than for geographic movements that relate to civil society. Conclusion: The results suggest that policy-makers are more willing to trade-off public health for economic concerns relative to other civil concerns.
| S-EPMC9389530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Against the unprecedented outbreaks of the COVID-19 variants, countries have introduced restrictive measures with discretion, ranging from lifting the closure thoroughly to implementing stringent policies, but all together guarding the global public health. Under the changing circumstances, we firstly apply the panel data vector autoregression (PVAR) model, using a sample of 176 countries/territories from 15 June 2021 to 15 April 2022, to estimate the potential associations among the policy responses, the progression of COVID-19 in deaths and vaccination, and medical resources possessed. Furthermore, we use the random effect method and the fixed effect speculation, to examine the determinants of policy variances across regions and over time. Our work has four main findings. Firstly, it showed the existence of a bidirectional relationship between the policy stringency and variables of interest including new daily deaths, the fully vaccinated percentage and health capacity. Secondly, conditional on the availability of vaccines, the sensitivity of policy responses to the death numbers tends to decline. Thirdly, the role of health capacity matters in coexisting with the virus mutation. Fourthly, regarding the variance in policy responses over time, the impact of new deaths tends to be seasonal. As to geographical differences in policy responses, we present the analysis for Asia, Europe, and Africa, and they show different levels of dependencies on the determinants. These findings suggest that bidirectional correlations exist in the complex context of wrestling with the COVID-19, as government interventions exert influence on the virus spread, the policy responses also progress alongside multiple factors evolving in the pandemic. This study will help policymakers, practitioners, and academia to formulate a comprehensive understanding of the interactions between policy responses and the contextualized implementation factors.
| S-EPMC10001811 | biostudies-literature