Plümper Thomas, Neumayer Eric
Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria.
Department of Geography & Environment, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), London, UK.
Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 2022 Oct 15;81:103206. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103206. Epub 2022 Aug 8.
Do partisan preferences, the electoral system, checks on government, political fragmentation, civil liberties and trust contribute to explaining the stringency of containment policies in European countries? Empirical studies suggest that political science theories have helped very little in understanding European democracies' political response to the pandemic's first wave. We argue in this article that the negligible effect of politics, broadly defined, is confined to the first wave and that during subsequent waves over the autumn 2020 to spring 2021 season some of the above political factors contribute to our understanding of variation in countries' response. Employing a sample of 26 European democracies analyzing daily data on the stringency of adopted containment policies we provide evidence that politics does not matter during the first wave but is substantively important during later waves.
党派偏好、选举制度、对政府的制衡、政治碎片化、公民自由和信任是否有助于解释欧洲国家遏制政策的严格程度?实证研究表明,政治科学理论在理解欧洲民主国家对疫情第一波的政治反应方面帮助甚微。我们在本文中认为,广义上的政治的微不足道的影响仅限于第一波,而在2020年秋季至2021年春季的后续波次中,上述一些政治因素有助于我们理解各国应对措施的差异。通过对26个欧洲民主国家进行抽样,分析所采用的遏制政策严格程度的每日数据,我们提供的证据表明,政治在第一波期间无关紧要,但在后续波次中具有实质性重要性。