IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/7swqe_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Locked Down or Locked In? Institutionalized Public Preferences and Pandemic Policy Feedback in 32 Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Nguyen, Hung Hoang Viet
  • Breznau, Nate

    (University of Bremen)

  • Heukamp, Lisa

Abstract

The Novel Coronavirus Pandemic provides a unique opportunity to test theories of policy feedback in times of national emergency. An important question in this field is whether the discrepancy between public attitudes and emergency rules makes ordinary citizens less likely to comply, which in turn can undermine the goals of that national emergency policies such as the recent lockdown. In this study, we first compare 2016 institutionalized non-Covid related public preferences for government intervention to government actions taken at the outbreak of this pandemic in early March 2020 across 32 middle to high income countries, using aggregated data from the International Social Survey Program and country-level Blavatnik Coronavirus Government Response Tracker data. Then, we use the relative discrepancy between them to predict public behaviors shortly after the initial outbreak in late-March into early April using the Measuring Worldwide COVID-19 Attitudes and Beliefs survey. We find no association between public preferences and government response at the outbreak; however, we find some tentative evidence that the discrepancy between them shows a relationship with public behaviors in the subsequent stage, after adjusting for the local severity of the outbreak and the current level of government intervention. Where the government took much stronger interventions in the outbreak stage relative to public preferences for non-Covid government interventions, the public were more likely to engage in risky social behaviors, such as going out when asked not to, attending social gatherings, or not keeping a safe distance from others. In contrast, where the government took weaker measures, the public were instead more likely to avoid risky social behaviors. Although we cannot conclude whether this means that the enforced measures were more or less effective, our results may suggest that governments took stronger measures in countries where they expected more risky behaviors and that there may be a tradeoff between institutionalized public preferences and the ability to curtail social behaviours.

Suggested Citation

  • Nguyen, Hung Hoang Viet & Breznau, Nate & Heukamp, Lisa, 2021. "Locked Down or Locked In? Institutionalized Public Preferences and Pandemic Policy Feedback in 32 Countries," SocArXiv 7swqe_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:7swqe_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/7swqe_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6012d6a0dd2225029958d442/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/7swqe_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:socarx:7swqe_v1. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.