User:RYNOT1206/Crisis management

Public Sector Crisis Management Outside the United States

While all countries encounter various crises over the course of their existence, they utilize different strategies that reflect their particular structure and circumstances. Autocratic and more centralized governments may address crises in ways that democratic countries could not. These distinctions present opportunities to compare numerous approaches to similar emergencies.

The COVID-19 crisis has proved to be a useful lens to view how crisis management differs by country. In democratic countries like Italy and Spain for example, health care is more decentralized and management is shared between the central and regional governments. While this decentralization may allow for greater autonomy and flexibility, during a major worldwide crisis, coordinating a response may become difficult. Several institutional challenges and political conflicts emerged because limited communication between agencies and two opposing parties controlling different regions and different levels of government. This was especially true in areas of Northern Italy where the regionalist Lega party had a significant influence. In Spain, basic coordination between different governments was not established until a second COVID wave struck.

Iran, an autocratic country, was able to manage their COVID-19 crisis centrally while allowing for flexibility on the ground. it maintained its system of central control but also utilized behavioral economics to motivate citizen compliance and participation. After years of sanctions, Iran was able to develop a level of self-reliance that proved useful during this public health crisis. The government implemented universal measures that did not vary from region to region and developed a citizen focused approach that encouraged engagement. The Iranians produced their own medical supplies and developed and distributed domestic vaccines. Iran enjoyed a greater degree of success in managing the crisis than in Italy and Spain. However, Iran was not immune to some of the issues occurring elsewhere. The government still struggled to enforce compliance measures and some citizens did engage in activities that were restricted.

One noteworthy challenge in the COVID-19 crisis was the impact of Ideological differences on the decision-making and implementation processes of crisis management. Ideology plays a significant role in how institutions are constructed and in the degree of coordination between rival factions in government. The Western emphasis on decentralization has in some ways hindered the effectiveness of government responses to the spread of COVID-19. By relegating the management of health care to regions, political parties are able to implement conflicting measures that fail to achieve the greater national or international goals.

International Cooperation on Crisis Management

Although most studies focus on one or two country-specific examples, it is also important to consider crisis management at a global level. Because each state pursues its own style of crisis management, developing international coordination has proven to be complicated. International organizations and multinational corporations will struggle to adjust their operations to conflicting practices in different countries. Global health organizations have also received scrutiny from around the world for falling short of expectations during previous crises which has deepened the distrust of these international groups. These problems are alarming because global markets continue to integrate and supply chains grow between countries. Crises that impact more than one country will occur more often and will have greater consequences.

References