Political Information, Ideas, and Power in the Pandemic Response to COVID-19

Session Submission Type: Full Paper Panel

Session Description

COVID-19 revealed the depth of the ways in which political information, ideas, and institutions shape the response to pandemics—when and how information about the spread of disease is gathered and shared, where treatment and vaccines are taken up, how scientific evidence is deployed and received. The pandemic has also made clear how directly politics shapes the spread of disease and who lives and who dies. During COVID-19, at the local, national, and international level, the rights and responsibilities of individuals and of states have been deeply contested. In some contexts, this has unsettled norms and expectations previously strongly embedded (e.g. global cooperation in international health) while in other contexts development of effective norms around individual behavior (e.g. health seeking behavior in vaccination) and state behavior (e.g. sharing vaccines) have proved more difficult than expected. Misinformation about COVID-19 and contested ideas of what constitutes a “good” response have been both produced by political forces and contributors toward political shifts. This panel focuses on core questions of information, ideas, trust, and power in COVID-19 response, from comparative and international perspectives.

Dionne, Dulani, Ferree, Harris, and Shi explore how politics and political trust influences individuals’ acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines through a study of Malawi. Analyzing data from an original survey, they show how partisan politics affects vaccination in a country that relies significantly on foreign aid for health, characterized by relatively low trust in political leaders, and where mis- and disinformation about vaccines are widespread.

Choi and Fox draw on nationally representative surveys from 17 low and middle income countries in Africa and the Western Pacific to understand how low vaccine availability (due to inequitable global supply) and low vaccine acceptability by the public (due to low trust) intersect to explain variation in vaccination across contexts. They develop a model that suggests a low-capacity and low-trust feedback loop, with compounding effects on policy compliance.

Jarman, Falkenbach, Rozenblum, Rockwell, and Greer seek to understand the role of formal scientific advice systems in the decision-making of governments. Deploying empirical comparative analysis of policymaking in France, Germany, and the UK, they find little evidence to support closed and tailored scientific advice compared to independent and transparent scientific advice systems.

Worsnop explores state surveillance capacity and information sharing during COVID-19 with case studies from the US, UK, and Brazil that suggest that this element of state capacity, often thought of as bureaucratic and technical in nature, is shaped by politics.

Kavanagh and Singh explore why international mechanisms failed to achieve equitable distribution of COVID-19 vaccines. They trace how, in the absence of a single venue for global negotiation, the emergence of two competing law and policy paradigms drove actions that were mis-aligned with domestic political pressures and undermined international action.

Sub Unit

• Theme Panel

Cosponsor

• Division 48: Health Politics & Health Policy

Individual Presentations

• Politics and Vaccine Hesitancy: Evidence from Malawi - Kim Yi Dionne, University of California, Riverside; Boniface Madalitso Dulani, Michigan State University; Karen E. Ferree, University of California, San Diego; Adam Harris, University College London; Weiyi Shi, University of California, San Diego

• Ensuring Access to COVID Vaccines in Low & Mid-Inc Countries: Avail. & Accept. - Ashley M Fox, SUNY at Albany

• Evidence to Advice in France, Germany, UK: Pandemic Science Advice - Holly Jarman, University of Michigan; Michelle Falkenbach, Cornell University; Sarah Denise Rozenblum, Cornell University; Scott L. Greer, University of Michigan

• Vaccine Politics: Law and Inequality in the Pandemic Response to COVID-19 - Matthew Kavanagh, Georgetown University; Renu Singh, Durham University

Chair

• Renu Singh Durham University

Discussants

• Carmen Jacqueline Ho University of Guelph

• Jeremy Youde University of Minnesota, Duluth