As the world has grappled with the coronavirus pandemic, it has been fascinating to observe the different approaches taken across different countries. New research from Oxford University explores the differences along democratic lines, and ponders whether those countries with less democratic freedom have actually been more effective in tackling the virus.
The researchers examined the response to COVID-19 in 111 countries around the world, and found that autocracies imposed sterner restrictions on the movement of people, but despite this, mobility declined by 20% more in democracies.
The study finds that despite autocracies introducing more stringent measures, and their contact tracing apps being more invasive of one’s privacy, democracies were more effective in reducing the mobility of citizens, in large part because of the trust people have in institutions in democracies.
“People are more willing to follow the rules if they trust their government, which they are more likely to do if the government is accountable. That is my interpretation of our findings,” the researchers say. “The COVID-19 pandemic is unfolding at a time when democracy is in decline. More countries have lost than gained civil and political rights each year over the past 14 years. And with China’s forceful lockdown containing the spread of the virus, while cases in Europe and the United States are still going up, many are naturally worried that COVID-19 will exacerbate the decline of democracy. Our findings suggest that they shouldn’t be because democracies have actually done better in reducing movement to contain the spread of the virus. Good examples are South Korean, Taiwan and New Zealand, which are flourishing democracies.”
Cultural importance
The study also found that culture played a significant role in the reaction of people to policy responses. The researchers used Geert Hofstede’s invididualist-collectivist spectrum alongside data from the World Value Survey to gauge the response of countries to policy directives.
The analysis revealed that movement fell more in collectivist countries, which are characterized by group loyalty and obedience to one’s superiors. It’s the kind of culture that makes collective action easier to achieve.
“Democracies and countries with more collectivist cultural traits have been most effective in responding to the pandemic,” the researchers explain. “What countries like China, Taiwan and South Korea have in common is that they are highly collectivist.”
The role trust plays
The importance of trust was highlighted in a second paper, from the University of Chicago, which explored the Ebola outbreak in Africa. The study assessed the state-run healthcare operations in Sierra Leone during the outbreak, and found very low levels of trust in government-run facilities, which resulted in a faster and deeper spread of the disease.
For instance, when people expect treatment to be of poor quality, they tend to stay away from the facilities, and thus remain both untested and untreated. The paper highlights how relatively simple interventions can increase the numbers seeking treatment by 60%, which the authors believe reduced the reproduction of the virus by 19%.
“Intervening to increase the community’s involvement with the local health clinics led them to have greater confidence in the government health system and partake in more medical screenings during the outbreak,” they say. “This insight is important for government and other leaders seeking to flatten the curve of infection during the coronavirus pandemic, as guidance about social distancing and other vital steps is not being universally followed.”
It’s clear that despite attempts to compare nations against one another during the pandemic, things are not quite so straightforward, and culture plays a major role in the success of any interventions.
