Nelson Michael A
Department of Economics, University of Akron, Akron, OH 44325-1908, USA.
World Dev. 2021 Oct;146:105550. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105550. Epub 2021 May 16.
Factors that drove the early timing and strictness of government responses to COVID-19 for over 150 countries are examined using the daily data provided by the University of Oxford. Results show that authoritarian regimes tended to have an initial policy response somewhat weaker relative to democratic regimes at the early stages of the pandemic but pursed more aggressive containment policies over the latter part of the six-month period analyzed. Unitary regimes tended to have stronger policy measures in place early on relative to federalist states but relaxed these restrictions sooner. Countries with greater freedom (political rights and civil liberties) and those that spend less on public health also exhibited slower early policy responses, but caught up within three to four months after the pandemic reached their country. There is no evidence that women leaders, viewed as a whole, put in place more aggressive polices to combat the virus relative to their male counterparts. Nor is there any evidence that either island nations or countries that experienced the start of the pandemic later in the global wave pursued different policies that other nations. Policy implications are discussed as the how nations should prepare for future pandemics.
利用牛津大学提供的每日数据，对150多个国家政府针对新冠疫情采取早期行动及严格应对措施的驱动因素进行了研究。结果显示，在疫情初期，威权政权的初始政策反应相对于民主政权往往略显疲软，但在分析的六个月后期实施了更为激进的遏制政策。单一制政权相对于联邦制国家，往往在早期就实施了更强有力的政策措施，但更早放松了这些限制。自由度更高（政治权利和公民自由）以及公共卫生支出较少的国家，早期政策反应也较为迟缓，但在疫情蔓延至本国后的三到四个月内迎头赶上。没有证据表明，总体而言，女性领导人相对于男性领导人采取了更激进的政策来抗击疫情。也没有任何证据表明，岛国或在全球疫情浪潮中较晚经历疫情爆发的国家采取了与其他国家不同的政策。文中讨论了各国应如何为未来大流行做准备的政策影响。
