Search

Crises do not affect populations equally but expose and exacerbate long‐standing vulnerabilities and inequalities. Recovery language such as 'build back better', or 'bounce forward' has been criticised for neglecting underlying inequalities. This paper reports on the process and early outcomes of an inclusive Community Recovery Planning process for the Falkland Islands, in response to Covid‐19. The Falkland Islands is home to a complex community, with close ties and short power distances (due to its small size and remoteness), with differences institutionalised in citizenship statuses and entitlements, and shaped by geopolitical tensions. We aimed to use the 'pandemic as a portal', seeking out previously 'less heard' voices, to make visible previously hidden impacts, and initiate incremental systemic change to tackle them. Community Impact Assessments evidenced specific areas of vulnerability (e.g., housing and income insecurity) and inequalities, largely shaped by differing citizenship status. In tandem with other government currents, the Community Recovery Planning process has contributed to progressive policy changes in Equalities legislation and Income Support. We offer this paper as a demonstration of our methodology for inclusive recovery planning that could be adapted elsewhere. We argue that the inclusion of previously unheard voices contributed to incremental systemic change to reduce inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The outbreak of the SARS CoV2 virus, commonly referred to as the COVID‐19 pandemic, has impacted the social, economic, political, and cultural lives of citizens around the world. The sudden outbreak of the pandemic has exposed the legal preparedness, or lack thereof, of governments to reduce and contain its drastic impact. Strong legislative measures play a crucial role in any epidemic or pandemic situation. In this situation, the Indian Government has requested all state governments to invoke the Epidemic Disease Act (EDA) of 1897 to address the COVID‐19 emergency. The Central Government has also used the powers provided in the Disaster Management Act (DMA) of 2005. As the country is facing its first major health emergency since independence, the existing legislative measures to deal with a COVID‐19 like situation are lacking and require certain amendments to address such situations in the future. This paper aims to present the current constitutional and legislative response to health emergencies in India and attempts to identify gray areas in the statutory provisions. Based on the analysis, this paper suggests several recommendations for amending current legislation and suggests the promulgation of comprehensive public health law. This paper is largely based on primary sources such as the EDA and the DMA, regulations, guidelines, rules issued by the public authorities and court cases related to health and health emergencies along with secondary resources such as newspaper articles and published papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper presents an analysis of the UK government discourse on citizenship during the first 9 months of the COVID‐19 pandemic (March–November 2020). We adopted a socio‐cultural approach to citizenship drawing on the scholarly tradition of ideological dilemmas and rhetorical psychology as well as interdisciplinary work on neoliberalism. In our analysis of over one hundred briefings and other material by the Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet, we identified five interrelated constructions of the 'good citizen': the confined, the heroic, the sacrificial, the unfree and the responsible citizen. The paper maps these constructions onto the ideological dilemmas of freedom/control, passive/active citizenship and individualism/collectivism. We show that, through the rhetorical use of notions of gratefulness for citizens' sacrifice and shared responsibility, the UK government's discourse appears to challenge the dominant model of the neoliberal citizen. However, it solidifies this very same model by responsibilizing individual citizens whilst abdicating itself from responsibility. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Management scholars have recognized organizational responsiveness among the essential capabilities of social organizations. It becomes essential for a social change to occur during a crisis, where the uncertainty or environmental dynamism is high. However, a social change cannot be successful unless constituent subsystems of a social organization exhibit responsiveness. Using systems theory, we conceptualize 'nation' as a social system and examine its responsiveness towards environmental uncertainly, taking an example of the COVID‐19 pandemic. How can state and citizen community responsiveness help fight a pandemic crisis? We test these direct and moderating effects on data representing 14 countries. We perform a hierarchical regression analysis on the restructured, balanced country‐wise panel data. Our findings highlight the importance of state and community interaction effects in controlling pandemic growth. Accordingly, we claim that only a collaborative approach by citizen communities with the respective governments will enable handling an uncertain situation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politics & Policy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

People across the world have responded to the pandemic by mobilizing and organizing to support their communities, setting up mutual aid groups to provide practical, financial, and social support. Mutual aid means short‐term 'crisis response' for some, while for other groups, it is a chance to radically restructure society, and what it means to be a member of that society. Drawing on social representations theory and previous work on citizenship in social and political psychology, we examined the ways in which mutual aid was understood and performed by members of UK Covid‐19 mutual aid groups. We conducted 29 interviews with members of these groups in May/June 2020. A reflexive thematic analysis showed that mutual aid groups were characterized as complex, efficient, and non‐hierarchical units, operating on the principles of solidarity, kindness, and trust. Two tensions were evident in the data, specifically between (1) collaboration with existing organizations and structures (e.g., local government and the police), and resistance to it and (2) maximizing group inclusivity and sustaining political critique. Findings are discussed in relation to existing theoretical and empirical work on citizenship and mutual aid groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined whether (the lack of) social support can explain why researchers have found lower rates of adherence to follow public health guidelines amongst people who perceived themselves as coming from lower social class backgrounds during the COVID‐19 pandemic. To do this, we surveyed 5818 participants from 10 countries during the first wave of lock‐down. Contrary to previous findings, social class was not related to general adherence to COVID‐19 regulations or desire to engage in citizenship behaviours (e.g., showing initiatives to help others during the pandemic). However, we found evidence of an indirect effect whereby those who perceived themselves as higher social class were more likely to be both the recipient and provider of social support which in turn predicted greater adherence and desire to engage in citizenship behaviours during the earlier wave of the pandemic. Our findings highlight the importance of social support in unlocking potential for collective cooperation (i.e., adherence to COVID‐19 rules and desire to engage in citizenship behaviours). They suggest that instead of enforcing strict regulations, government authorities need to address existing social support barriers within lower income communities to facilitate cooperation from everyone in the community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As governments around the globe navigate the effects of COVID‐19 crisis, the urban poor endure the unevenly distributed socio‐economic impacts of the pandemic. This burden is more pronounced in Global South megacities, where millions of people engage in precarious informal employment. We examine how the urban poor in Delhi (India), Dhaka (Bangladesh), and Manila (Philippines) have been disproportionately affected by the crisis. A cross‐case analysis was undertaken to determine how the realities and relations of one context can enrich our understanding of the other. We argue that the current COVID‐19 pandemic has exposed the unequal urban citizenship in these three metropolises. Drawing on research reports, news articles, and interviews with urban poor leaders, we explain how limited government assistance has forced some to retreat to their rural hometowns or rely on self‐help and mutual aid practices to survive. We consider the patterns both in governments' treatment of impoverished citizens and in the unjust effects of lockdown enforcement on marginalised populations. We also discuss the roles that women and non‐government organisations (NGOs) have played in facilitating solidarity‐based practices to help urban poor communities cope with COVID‐19 vulnerabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politics & Policy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)