Aggressive COVID‐19 lockdown policies: What factors significantly drove them across nations?

This paper examines the determinants of COVID-19 lockdown severity across nations. How significant were health, economic, political, institutional, and social factors in determining the severity of government responses to the pandemic? Using data on 162 nations from March 2020 to July 2022, results show that it was mainly controlling the spread of the pandemic that led nations to more serve measures against the pandemic. These efforts were tempered in nations that had larger governments and in those with better enforcement and the ones with more elderly. On the other hand, economic prosperity, political structures, macro-level uncertainties, trade openness, and corruption did not appreciably matter.

The timing and aggressiveness of early government response to COVID-19: Political systems, societal culture, and more.

Factors that drove the early timing and strictness of government responses to COVID-19 for over 150 countries are examined using the daily Coronavirus Government Response Tracker 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.

COVID-19 vaccine rollout-scale and speed carry different implications for corruption.

The sanctioning of different coronavirus vaccines (with some approved by regulators for public delivery, and others in the pipeline) has met with relief by many sections of the public and the government. However, partly due to the damages associated with the pandemic and the ensuing euphoria over vaccines' arrival, some of the challenges are mostly being ignored or are not recognized. This paper identifies some pitfalls and drawbacks in vaccine delivery. We argue that the somewhat unique tension between the speed of vaccine delivery and its scale can create opportunities for corrupt behavior that are often at odds with effective means to check abuse. While data on instances of abuse will emerge over time, it is useful to point out different avenues of abuse so that some preventive government actions can be undertaken. Specifically, we argue that the potential for out of turn delivery of vaccines and the stockpiling by unauthorized agents creates incentives for corruption, with the public or bureaucrats initiating corrupt transactions. An understanding of the potential avenues for corruption should guide the formulation of appropriate corruption-control policies and similar challenges that will be faced by policy makers in addressing future pandemics.