Greater institutional trust (or trust in government) was significantly associated with lower COVID-19 mortality for the entire pandemic. This association holds true with other public health crises—citizens of African countries during the Ebola outbreak with more trust in government were more likely to follow government-mandated public health policies. 

Institutional Trust and COVID-19 Response

Greater interpersonal trust was significantly associated with lower COVID-19 mortality for most of the pandemic. This corresponds to the theory that controlling pandemics requires large-scale cooperation and therefore potentially a high amount of trust among members of a society. People are more likely to adopt practices that might hurt or inconvenience the individual (such as staying home) but help the collective (by preventing the spread of a disease) if they believe that others would do the same. Therefore, a high level of interpersonal trust could feasibly be related to a country successfully coping with COVID-19.

Interpersonal Trust and COVID-19 Response

More individualist societies were less obedient to movement restrictions than more collectivist societies during the pandemic. This could be because highly individualistic countries tend to have more negative perceptions of government interventions and therefore could be less likely to cooperate with a government’s pandemic response.

Collectivist vs. Individualist Societies and COVID-19 Response

Previous Ebola/SARS/MERS exposure was significantly associated with fewer COVID-19 deaths for part of the pandemic. Countries that experienced SARS or MERS were more likely to develop comprehensive testing policies than countries that had not experienced these diseases. South Korea and Taiwan, in particular, adopted legal frameworks after their SARS and MERS outbreaks that would grant special powers to their governments for testing and tracing to be used in future public health emergencies. Most Western countries, by contrast, were not affected by these diseases and therefore not incentivized to prepare for a future crisis.

Previous Exposure to Ebola/SARS/MERS and COVID-19 Response

Greater media independence was significantly associated with COVID-19 mortality during the initial stages of the pandemic. This finding runs counter to traditional theories on media freedom and emergency response—if the media is free, it is able to report on emergencies and pressure the government to take action. However, media companies can also spread misinformation about the pandemic that stokes doubts over government policies or encourages dangerous public health practices. The spread of misinformation during the pandemic—particularly on social media—contributed to the spread of erroneous health practices (such as super-spreader events, false cures, ‘debunking’ established protections like mask-wearing, etc.) that contributed to the spread of the disease.

Media Freedom and Misinformation: Enabling COVID-19 Deaths?

The association between regime type and COVID-19 response is mixed, suggesting that autocracies are not inherently better at responding to pandemics than democracies. Instead, alternative explanations exist in the literature, particularly concerning a country's culture, institutional and interpersonal trust, media freedom, and previous experience handling public health crises.

Wesleyan University

Google

Anecdotal analysis of different countries’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic has often pitted major autocracies like China against large democracies like the United States. This common media narrative typically notes how China has been more successful in curbing COVID-19, whereas the United States has struggled to mount an effective federal response to the pandemic. This comparison has led some academics to investigate whether autocracies (or dictatorships) are better at handling crises like COVID-19 than are democracies.

Regime Type and COVID-19 Response

There are a few divergent theories among scholars as to why democracies or autocracies might be better or worse at responding to emergencies (such as Covid-19).

Theories for Regime Type and Emergency Response

If the narrative that democracies failed to effectively counter the pandemic persists, then autocrats could have a powerful tool at their disposal to convince even more voters to support them. Autocratic movements could strengthen or arise in countries hard-hit by the pandemic.

COVID-19 and Democracy’s Apparent Weaknesses: Implications

The evidence supporting the association between regime type and pandemic response is mixed. Some case studies seem to suggest that autocracies have better pandemic responses than democracies, while others suggest the opposite. Comprehensive quantitative analyses find that democracies have been better at restricting geographic mobility than autocracies; they also find that certain indicators of democracy are not significantly associated with COVIDmortality. However, the most advanced democracies in the world still appear to have the worst pandemic responses, leaving open questions for further research.

Learn Before

Related

Learn After