TY - JOUR
T1 - Thinking politically about intersectoral action
T2 - Ideas, Interests and Institutions shaping political dimensions of governing during COVID-19
AU - Baum, Fran
AU - Musolino, Connie
AU - Freeman, Toby
AU - Flavel, Joanne
AU - Ceukelaire, Wim De
AU - Chi, Chunhuei
AU - Dardet, Carlos Alvarez
AU - Falcão, Matheus Zuliane
AU - Friel, Sharon
AU - Gesesew, Hailay Abrha
AU - Giugliani, Camila
AU - Howden-Chapman, Philippa
AU - Huong, Nguyen Thanh
AU - Kim, Sun
AU - London, Leslie
AU - McKee, Martin
AU - Nandi, Sulakshana
AU - Paremoer, Lauren
AU - Popay, Jennie
AU - Serag, Hani
AU - Thiagarajan, Sundararaman
AU - Tangcharoensathien, Viroj
AU - Villar, Eugenio
PY - 2024/11/18
Y1 - 2024/11/18
N2 - Our paper examines the political considerations in the intersectoral action that was evident during the SAR-COV-2 virus (COVID-19) pandemic through case studies of political and institutional responses in 16 nations (Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, New Zealand, Nigeria, Peru, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam, UK, and USA). Our qualitative case study approach involved an iterative process of data gathering and interpretation through the three Is (institutions, ideas and interests) lens, which we used to shape our understanding of political and intersectoral factors affecting pandemic responses. The institutional factors examined were: national economic and political context; influence of the global economic order; structural inequities; and public health structures and legislation, including intersectoral action. The ideas explored were: orientation of governments; political actors’ views on science; willingness to challenge neoliberal policies; previous pandemic experie
AB - Our paper examines the political considerations in the intersectoral action that was evident during the SAR-COV-2 virus (COVID-19) pandemic through case studies of political and institutional responses in 16 nations (Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, New Zealand, Nigeria, Peru, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam, UK, and USA). Our qualitative case study approach involved an iterative process of data gathering and interpretation through the three Is (institutions, ideas and interests) lens, which we used to shape our understanding of political and intersectoral factors affecting pandemic responses. The institutional factors examined were: national economic and political context; influence of the global economic order; structural inequities; and public health structures and legislation, including intersectoral action. The ideas explored were: orientation of governments; political actors’ views on science; willingness to challenge neoliberal policies; previous pandemic experie
U2 - 10.1093/heapol/czae047
DO - 10.1093/heapol/czae047
M3 - Article
SN - 1460-2237
VL - 39
SP - i75-i92
JO - Health Policy and Planning
JF - Health Policy and Planning
IS - Supplement_2
ER -