Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Faculty of Law, Centre for Government and Law, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.
Front Public Health. 2021 Aug 20;9:698995. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.698995. eCollection 2021.
The first wave of the coronavirus SARS-COV-2 pandemic has revealed a fragmented governance within the European Union (EU) to tackle public health emergencies. This qualitative study aims: 1) to understand the current EU position within the field of public health emergencies taking the case of the COVID-19 as an example by comparing and contrasting experiences from EU institutions and experts from various EU Member States at the beginning of the pandemic; and, 2) to identify and to formulate future EU pandemic strategies and actions based on experts' opinions. Eighteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with public health experts from various European Member States and European Commission officials from May 2020 until August 2020. The transcripts were analyzed by Thematic Content Analysis (TCA), mainly a manifest content analysis. This study demonstrated that the limited EU mandate in health hinders proper actions to prevent and tackle infectious disease outbreaks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The results showed that this limitation significantly impacted the ECDC, as the Member States' competence did not allow the agency to have more capacity. The European Commission has fulfilled its role of coordinating and supporting the Member States by facilitating networks and information exchange. However, EU intra- and inter-communication need further improvement. Although diverse EU instruments and mechanisms were found valid, their implementation needed to be faster and more efficient. The results pointed out that underlying political challenges in EU decision-making regarding health emergencies hinder the aligned response. It was stated that the Member States were not prepared, and due to the restriction of their mandate, EU institutions could not enforce binding guidelines. Additionally, the study explored future EU pandemic strategies and actions. Both, EU institutions and national experts suggested similar and clear recommendations regarding the ECDC, the investment, and future harmonized preparedness tools. The complex politics of public health at the EU level have led to the fragmentation of its governance for effective pandemic responses. This ongoing pandemic has shed light on the fragility of the political and structural systems in Europe in public health emergencies. Health should be of high importance in the political agenda, and robust health reforms at the local, regional, national, and EU levels are highly recommended.
新型冠状病毒(SARS-CoV-2)引发的首轮疫情凸显了欧盟(EU)在应对公共卫生紧急事件方面治理结构的分散。本研究采用定性方法,以 COVID-19 疫情为例,旨在:1)通过对比欧盟机构和来自不同欧盟成员国的专家在疫情初期的经验,了解欧盟在公共卫生应急领域的当前地位;2)根据专家意见,确定并制定未来的欧盟大流行战略和行动。本研究于 2020 年 5 月至 8 月,对来自不同欧盟成员国的公共卫生专家和欧盟委员会官员进行了 18 次半结构化访谈。采用主题内容分析法(TCA)对转录文本进行分析,主要采用明显内容分析法。研究结果表明,欧盟在卫生方面的授权有限,阻碍了采取适当行动预防和应对传染病疫情爆发,如 COVID-19 大流行。结果表明,这一限制严重影响了欧洲疾病预防控制中心(ECDC),因为成员国的职权范围不允许该机构拥有更大的能力。欧盟委员会通过促进网络和信息交流,发挥了协调和支持成员国的作用。然而,欧盟内部和成员国之间的沟通仍需进一步改善。尽管发现了多样化的欧盟工具和机制是有效的,但需要加快和提高其实施效率。研究结果指出,欧盟在卫生应急决策方面的政治挑战阻碍了一致的应对措施。研究表明,成员国准备不足,由于职权限制,欧盟机构无法执行具有约束力的指导方针。此外,研究还探讨了未来的欧盟大流行战略和行动。欧盟机构和国家专家都对 ECDC、投资和未来协调一致的防范工具提出了类似的明确建议。欧盟层面公共卫生治理的分散是由复杂的公共卫生政治所导致的,这使得其无法有效应对大流行。这场持续的大流行突显了欧洲公共卫生应急事件中政治和结构体系的脆弱性。卫生应在政治议程中占据重要地位,强烈建议在地方、区域、国家和欧盟各级进行强有力的卫生改革。