ABSTRACT
Because many viral respiratory diseases show seasonal cycles, weather conditions could affect the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although many studies pursued this possible link early in the pandemic, their results were inconsistent. Here, we assembled 158 quantitative empirical studies examining the link between weather and COVID-19. A metaregression analysis was performed on their 4793 correlation coefficients to explain these inconsistent results. We found four principal findings. First, 80 of the 158 studies did not state the time lag between infection and reporting, rendering these studies ineffective in determining the weather-COVID-19 relationship. Second, the research outcomes depended on the statistical analysis methods employed in each study. Specifically, studies using correlation tests produced outcomes that were functions of the geographical locations of the data from the original studies, whereas studies using linear regression produced outcomes that were functions of the analyzed weather variables. Third, Asian countries had more positive associations for air temperature than other regions, possibly because the air temperature was undergoing its seasonal increase from winter to spring during the rapid outbreak of COVID-19 in these countries. Fourth, higher solar energy was associated with reduced COVID-19 spread, regardless of statistical analysis method and geographical location. These results help to interpret the inconsistent results and motivate recommendations for best practices in future research. These recommendations include calculating the effects of a time lag between the weather and COVID-19, using regression analysis models, considering nonlinear effects, increasing the time period considered in the analysis to encompass more variety of weather conditions and to increase sample size, and eliminating multicollinearity between weather variables.
ABSTRACT
Donald Trump's presidency produced a few legislative victories. Instead, as with his predecessors, the Trump presidency had to rely more on executive orders and other actions to move its agenda. But even this unilateral approach produced fewer results than his supporters hoped for or his detractors feared. This article will examine public policymaking and administration under the Trump Administration. It will argue that while the 2016 electoral victories for Republicans gave Donald Trump an enormous opportunity to move his political agenda, several factors prevented that from occurring. These factors include indecision on the part of the Trump presidency whether to move a policy agenda or cripple the administrative state;denial of personal responsibility for policies or actions, a failure to understand the constitutional underpinnings of American politics and policymaking, especially when it comes to administrative agency action;intra-party disputes;party polarization;ethical, legal, and impeachment issues;governmental inexperience;and an overall inability to appreciate the differences between the American presidency and business leadership. Overall, the article describes the political context of the Trump presidency and to explain how it, the structure of American government, and the overall indifference or failure of the Trump administration to understand how the government works rendered this presidency far less effective than it could have been. The lesson of the Trump presidency for the USA and other states is despite rhetoric and claims that outsiders or nontraditional leaders can affect governmental and policy change, they are often ineffectual or dangerous. © 2022 David Schultz, published by Sciendo 2022.