Abstract
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
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | i75-i92 |
| Journal | Health Policy and Planning |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue number | Supplement_2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 18 Nov 2024 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Thinking politically about intersectoral action: Ideas, Interests and Institutions shaping political dimensions of governing during COVID-19'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver