IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/polsoc/v42y2023i3p319-333..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“I do not consent”: political legitimacy, misinformation, and the compliance challenge in Australia’s Covid-19 policy response

Author

Listed:
  • Melissa-Ellen Dowling
  • Tim Legrand

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between policy compliance, the emergence of alternate epistemes and authorities in online spaces, and the decline of trust and legitimacy in democratic institutions. Drawing on insights from public policy, regulation theory, and political theory, the paper critically engages with scholarship on “policy-takers” to illuminate the tensions of compliance and legitimacy in liberal states. It proposes a compliance–legitimacy matrix that identifies the features of policy compliance—including consent, legitimacy, expertise, and trust—and their relationship to the disaggregation of policy knowledge. The article applies this framework to a case study of social media posts that respond to policy information during the management of the Covid-19 pandemic in Australia. Through analysis of these posts, the study reveals the distrust in “the science” and experts advocated by government and the calls from skeptic groups for noncompliance with public health measures. The paper argues that public policy faces an epistemic crisis of public confidence, with significant downstream consequences for compliance with public policy initiatives that has been brought on both by the failures of states to cultivate trust in science and the government. The compliance–legitimacy matrix offers a useful tool for policymakers to anticipate and address objections from policy-takers and to preempt and diffuse their fears.

Suggested Citation

  • Melissa-Ellen Dowling & Tim Legrand, 2023. "“I do not consent”: political legitimacy, misinformation, and the compliance challenge in Australia’s Covid-19 policy response," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(3), pages 319-333.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:42:y:2023:i:3:p:319-333.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/polsoc/puad018
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garrett Ward Richards, 2017. "How Research-Policy Partnerships Can Benefit Government: A Win-Win for Evidence-Based Policy-Making," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 43(2), pages 165-170, June.
    2. Marc Debus & Jale Tosun, 2021. "Political ideology and vaccination willingness: implications for policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(3), pages 477-491, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Giliberto Capano & Michael Howlett & Leslie A Pal & M Ramesh, 2023. "Dealing with the challenges of legitimacy, values, and politics in policy advice," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(3), pages 275-287.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lu, Steven Qiang & Vassallo, Jarrod P. & Choi, Ada & Li, Jia, 2024. "The role of political ideology on variety-seeking behavior during crisis-induced threats: Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 166-185.
    2. Garrett Ward Richards, 2019. "The Science–Policy Relationship Hierarchy (SPRHi) model of co-production: how climate science organizations have influenced the policy process in Canadian case studies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 67-95, March.
    3. Mark K. McBeth & Megan Warnement Wrobel & Irene van Woerden, 2023. "Political ideology and nuclear energy: Perception, proximity, and trust," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(1), pages 88-118, January.
    4. Martino Maggetti & Philipp Trein, 2022. "Policy integration, problem-solving, and the coronavirus disease crisis: lessons for policy design [Neglected challenges to evidence-based policy-making: The problem of policy accumulation]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(1), pages 53-67.
    5. Zhaohui Su, 2021. "Rigorous Policy-Making Amid COVID-19 and Beyond: Literature Review and Critical Insights," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-17, November.
    6. Davaalkham Dambadarjaa & Gan-Erdene Altankhuyag & Unurtesteg Chandaga & Ser-Od Khuyag & Bilegt Batkhorol & Nansalmaa Khaidav & Oyunbileg Dulamsuren & Nadmidtseren Gombodorj & Avirmed Dorjsuren & Prami, 2021. "Factors Associated with COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Mongolia: A Web-Based Cross-Sectional Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Lorraine Eden & M. Fernanda Wagstaff, 0. "Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 Gender Equality," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-30.
    8. Lorraine Eden & M. Fernanda Wagstaff, 2021. "Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 Gender Equality," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 28-57, March.
    9. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2023. "Political Ideology and Trust in Government to Ensure Vaccine Safety: Using a U.S. Survey to Explore the Role of Political Trust," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Seungwoo Han, 2024. "Trust and needles: how perceptions of inequality shape vaccination in South Korea," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    11. Backhaus, Insa & Hoven, Hanno & Kawachi, Ichiro, 2023. "Far-right political ideology and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: Multilevel analysis of 21 European countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 335(C).
    12. Stefania Profeti & Federico Toth, 2023. "Climbing the 'ladder of intrusiveness': the Italian government's strategy to push the Covid-19 vaccination coverage further," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(4), pages 709-731, December.
    13. Pieter Vanhuysse & Michael Jankowski & Markus Tepe, 2021. "Vaccine alliance building blocks: a conjoint experiment on popular support for international COVID-19 cooperation formats," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(3), pages 493-506, September.
    14. Qianjin Zong & Zhihong Huang & Jiaru Huang, 2023. "Can open access increase LIS research’s policy impact? Using regression analysis and causal inference," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4825-4854, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:42:y:2023:i:3:p:319-333.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/policyandsociety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.