Policymaking during COVID-19: Preemptive State Interventions and the Factors Influencing Policy Implementation Success

IF 2.2 3区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Seung-Hyuk Choi, Michelle Allgood, D. Swindell
{"title":"Policymaking during COVID-19: Preemptive State Interventions and the Factors Influencing Policy Implementation Success","authors":"Seung-Hyuk Choi, Michelle Allgood, D. Swindell","doi":"10.1080/15309576.2022.2123837","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract COVID-19 sparked a public health crisis and created a series of public policy challenges. This article examines how COVID-19 interventions played out at the state level given the absence of guidance and coordinated national response. We focus on how the level of policy rigidness and enforcement of behavioral interventions helps us understand the success and failures of reducing the number of positive test rates over a 20-week period (March–July 2020). Specifically, we examine how four specific interventions (masking, school closures, restaurant closures, and travel restrictions) moved through the policy creation and implementation process as outlined by a modified version of Kingdon’s multiple streams approach. We leverage a pooled-OLS approach to identify the agenda-setting and decision-making windows to verify the narrative derived from applying a modified multiple streams approach to the initial wave of policy making around COVID-19 interventions. Using this technique, we find evidence of two distinct agenda-setting windows and a decision-making window. Using these windows, we ascertain that highly restrictive policies are effective in controlling the spread of COVID-19. We find that governors acting as political entrepreneurs may not play as large of a role in the policy-making process, but they are responsive to constituent policy preferences.","PeriodicalId":47571,"journal":{"name":"Public Performance & Management Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Performance & Management Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2022.2123837","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract COVID-19 sparked a public health crisis and created a series of public policy challenges. This article examines how COVID-19 interventions played out at the state level given the absence of guidance and coordinated national response. We focus on how the level of policy rigidness and enforcement of behavioral interventions helps us understand the success and failures of reducing the number of positive test rates over a 20-week period (March–July 2020). Specifically, we examine how four specific interventions (masking, school closures, restaurant closures, and travel restrictions) moved through the policy creation and implementation process as outlined by a modified version of Kingdon’s multiple streams approach. We leverage a pooled-OLS approach to identify the agenda-setting and decision-making windows to verify the narrative derived from applying a modified multiple streams approach to the initial wave of policy making around COVID-19 interventions. Using this technique, we find evidence of two distinct agenda-setting windows and a decision-making window. Using these windows, we ascertain that highly restrictive policies are effective in controlling the spread of COVID-19. We find that governors acting as political entrepreneurs may not play as large of a role in the policy-making process, but they are responsive to constituent policy preferences.
COVID-19期间的政策制定:先发制人的国家干预和影响政策实施成功的因素
新冠肺炎引发了公共卫生危机,也带来了一系列公共政策挑战。本文考察了在缺乏指导和协调一致的国家应对措施的情况下,州一级的COVID-19干预措施是如何发挥作用的。我们关注的是政策刚性和行为干预措施的执行水平如何帮助我们了解在20周(2020年3月至7月)期间减少阳性检测率的成功和失败。具体来说,我们研究了四种具体的干预措施(掩蔽、学校关闭、餐馆关闭和旅行限制)是如何通过Kingdon的多流方法的修改版本来制定和实施政策的。我们利用汇集- ols方法来确定议程设置和决策窗口,以验证将改进的多流方法应用于围绕COVID-19干预措施的初始政策制定浪潮所产生的叙述。使用这种技术,我们发现了两个不同的议程设置窗口和一个决策窗口的证据。利用这些窗口期,我们确定高度限制性政策对控制COVID-19的传播是有效的。我们发现,作为政治企业家的州长可能不会在政策制定过程中发挥那么大的作用,但他们会对选民的政策偏好做出反应。
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
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
16.10%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: Public Performance & Management Review (PPMR) is a leading peer-reviewed academic journal that addresses a broad array of influential factors on the performance of public and nonprofit organizations. Its objectives are to: Advance theories on public governance, public management, and public performance; Facilitate the development of innovative techniques and to encourage a wider application of those already established; Stimulate research and critical thinking about the relationship between public and private management theories; Present integrated analyses of theories, concepts, strategies, and techniques dealing with performance, measurement, and related questions of organizational efficacy; and Provide a forum for practitioner-academic exchange. Continuing themes include, but are not limited to: managing for results, measuring and evaluating performance, designing accountability systems, improving budget strategies, managing human resources, building partnerships, facilitating citizen participation, applying new technologies, and improving public sector services and outcomes. Published since 1975, Public Performance & Management Review is a highly respected journal, receiving international ranking. Scholars and practitioners recognize it as a leading journal in the field of public administration.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信