Phillips Toby, Zhang Yuxi, Petherick Anna
Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Interface Focus. 2021 Oct 12;11(6):20210041. doi: 10.1098/rsfs.2021.0041. eCollection 2021 Dec 6.
During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were the main pillar of defence to protect human society against the virus. While a variety of modelling studies try to quantify the effects of NPIs, this paper investigates when and how national and subnational governments have taken actions. We observe longitudinal changes in the global pattern of policymaking to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, with a particular focus on stay-at-home orders. Drawing on data from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, we show several important trends. First, while national governments exhibited a strong alignment in policy settings initially in March and April 2020, their cross-country policy heterogeneity has grown since May 2020, although countries within global regions continue to display similarities in their approaches. Second, most governments that have implemented multiple stay-at-home orders over the course of the pandemic have become less sensitive to case levels (insofar as they implement subsequent restrictions at progressively higher case levels), apart from a small number of contrast cases which have mostly eliminated domestic community transmission. Third, pandemic policies are increasingly specific to subnational levels, and there is often significant heterogeneity with regard to policy approaches even within the same country.
在新冠疫情的第一年,非药物干预措施(NPIs)是保护人类社会免受病毒侵害的主要防御支柱。虽然各种模型研究试图量化非药物干预措施的效果,但本文研究国家和次国家政府何时以及如何采取行动。我们观察了全球抗击新冠疫情政策制定模式的纵向变化,特别关注居家令。利用牛津新冠疫情政府应对追踪器的数据,我们展示了几个重要趋势。首先,虽然各国政府在2020年3月和4月初期的政策设置上表现出高度一致,但自2020年5月以来,它们的跨国政策异质性有所增加,尽管全球各地区内的国家在应对方式上仍表现出相似性。其次,在疫情期间实施了多次居家令的大多数政府对病例水平的敏感度降低(即它们在病例数逐渐增加的情况下实施后续限制措施),但有少数形成对比的案例,这些案例大多消除了国内社区传播。第三,疫情政策越来越针对次国家层面,即使在同一个国家内,政策方法也往往存在显著异质性。