Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2020.1787628
DC FieldValue
dc.titleMobilizing Policy (In)Capacity to Fight COVID-19: Understanding Variations in State Responses
dc.contributor.authorCapano, G.
dc.contributor.authorHowlett, M.
dc.contributor.authorJarvis, D.S.L.
dc.contributor.authorRamesh, M.
dc.contributor.authorGoyal, N.
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-19T04:29:36Z
dc.date.available2021-08-19T04:29:36Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationCapano, G., Howlett, M., Jarvis, D.S.L., Ramesh, M., Goyal, N. (2020). Mobilizing Policy (In)Capacity to Fight COVID-19: Understanding Variations in State Responses. Policy and Society : 24-Jan. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2020.1787628
dc.identifier.issn1449-4035
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/197910
dc.description.abstractThe objective of this collection of essays is to gain insights into the different national-level state responses to COVID-19 around the world and the conditions that shaped them. The pandemic offers a natural experiment wherein the policy problem governments faced was the same but the responses they made were different, creating opportunities for comparison of both the kinds of policy tools being used and the factors that accounted for their choice. Accordingly, after surveying on-line databases of policy tools used in the pandemic and subjecting these to topic modelling to reveal the characteristics of a ‘standard’ national pandemic response, we discuss the similarities and differences found in specific responses. This is done with reference to the nature and level of policy capacity of respective governments, highlighting the critical roles played by (in)adequate preparation and lesson-drawing from past experiences with similar outbreaks or crises. Taken together the articles show how the national responses to the COVID-19 pandemic were shaped by the opportunity and capacity each government had to learn from previous pandemics and their capacity to operationalize and build political support for the standard portfolio of policy measures deployed to deal with the crisis. However, they also show how other factors such as the nature of national leadership, the organization of government and civil society, and blindspots towards the vulnerabilities of certain population segments also helped to shape policy responses to the pandemic. © 2020, © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
dc.publisherTaylor and Francis Ltd.
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.sourceScopus OA2020
dc.subjectCOVID-19
dc.subjectcrisis management
dc.subjectpandemics
dc.subjectpolicy capacity
dc.subjectpolicy mixes
dc.subjectpolicy styles
dc.subjectpolicy tools
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentDEAN'S OFFICE (YALE-NUS COLLEGE)
dc.contributor.departmentLEE KUAN YEW SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
dc.description.doi10.1080/14494035.2020.1787628
dc.description.sourcetitlePolicy and Society
dc.description.page24-Jan
dc.published.statePublished
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1080_14494035_2020_1787628.pdf4.75 MBAdobe PDF

OPEN

NoneView/Download

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

128
checked on Jan 22, 2022

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

78
checked on Oct 5, 2021

Page view(s)

44
checked on Jan 20, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons