Public perceptions of the role of government and nonstate actors in responding to COVID-19.

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy Pub Date : 2021-09-01 Epub Date: 2021-03-08 DOI:10.1002/rhc3.12216

Daniel Sledge, Herschel F Thomas

{"title":"Public perceptions of the role of government and nonstate actors in responding to COVID-19.","authors":"Daniel Sledge, Herschel F Thomas","doi":"10.1002/rhc3.12216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, we examine public perceptions of the importance of different levels of government and of nongovernmental entities in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. By analyzing the case of COVID-19, we illuminate patterns that may be helpful for understanding public perceptions of the response to a broader range of crises, including the impacts of hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, wildfires, and other hazards. We contribute to the public policy literature on public perceptions of government response to crises and expand it to include consideration of the role of nonstate actors. Drawing on a representative survey of 1200 registered voters in Texas, we find that individuals are more likely to view government as extremely important to respond to the pandemic than nonstate actors. We find that perceptions of the role of state and nonstate actors are shaped by risk perception, political ideology and religion, gender, and race/ethnicity. We do not find evidence that direct impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic consistently shape perceptions of the role of state and nonstate actors.</p>","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8250604/pdf/RHC3-12-266.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12216","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/3/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, we examine public perceptions of the importance of different levels of government and of nongovernmental entities in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. By analyzing the case of COVID-19, we illuminate patterns that may be helpful for understanding public perceptions of the response to a broader range of crises, including the impacts of hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, wildfires, and other hazards. We contribute to the public policy literature on public perceptions of government response to crises and expand it to include consideration of the role of nonstate actors. Drawing on a representative survey of 1200 registered voters in Texas, we find that individuals are more likely to view government as extremely important to respond to the pandemic than nonstate actors. We find that perceptions of the role of state and nonstate actors are shaped by risk perception, political ideology and religion, gender, and race/ethnicity. We do not find evidence that direct impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic consistently shape perceptions of the role of state and nonstate actors.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

公众对政府和非国家行为者在应对 COVID-19 中的作用的看法。

在本文中，我们研究了公众对各级政府和非政府实体在应对 COVID-19 大流行中的重要性的看法。通过分析 COVID-19 案例，我们揭示了一些模式，这些模式可能有助于理解公众对应对更广泛危机（包括飓风、龙卷风、地震、野火和其他灾害的影响）的看法。我们为有关公众对政府危机应对措施的看法的公共政策文献做出了贡献，并将其扩展到对非国家行为者的作用的考虑。通过对得克萨斯州 1200 名注册选民进行代表性调查，我们发现，与非国家行为者相比，个人更倾向于认为政府在应对大流行病方面极其重要。我们发现，对国家和非国家行为者作用的看法受风险意识、政治意识形态和宗教、性别以及种族/民族的影响。我们没有发现证据表明 COVID-19 大流行的直接影响持续影响着人们对国家和非国家行为者作用的看法。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-

CiteScore

7.50

自引率

8.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： Scholarship on risk, hazards, and crises (emergencies, disasters, or public policy/organizational crises) has developed into mature and distinct fields of inquiry. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy (RHCPP) addresses the governance implications of the important questions raised for the respective fields. The relationships between risk, hazards, and crisis raise fundamental questions with broad social science and policy implications. During unstable situations of acute or chronic danger and substantial uncertainty (i.e. a crisis), important and deeply rooted societal institutions, norms, and values come into play. The purpose of RHCPP is to provide a forum for research and commentary that examines societies’ understanding of and measures to address risk,hazards, and crises, how public policies do and should address these concerns, and to what effect. The journal is explicitly designed to encourage a broad range of perspectives by integrating work from a variety of disciplines. The journal will look at social science theory and policy design across the spectrum of risks and crises — including natural and technological hazards, public health crises, terrorism, and societal and environmental disasters. Papers will analyze the ways societies deal with both unpredictable and predictable events as public policy questions, which include topics such as crisis governance, loss and liability, emergency response, agenda setting, and the social and cultural contexts in which hazards, risks and crises are perceived and defined. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy invites dialogue and is open to new approaches. We seek scholarly work that combines academic quality with practical relevance. We especially welcome authors writing on the governance of risk and crises to submit their manuscripts.