Dataset Information

COVID-19 and Policy Responses by International Organizations: Crisis of Liberal International Order or Window of Opportunity?

ABSTRACT: The liberal international order is being challenged and international organizations (IOs) are a main target of contestation. COVID-19 seems to exacerbate the situation with many states pursuing domestic strategies at the expense of multilateral cooperation. At the same time, IOs have traditionally benefited from cross-border crises. This article analyzes the policy responses of IOs to the exogenous COVID-19 shock by asking why some IOs use this crisis as an opportunity to expand their scope and policy instruments? It provides a cross-sectional analysis using original data on the responses of 75 IOs to COVID-19 during the first wave between March and June 2020. It finds that the bureaucratic capacity of IOs is significant when it comes to using the crisis as an opportunity. It also finds some evidence that the number of COVID-19 cases among the member states affects policy responses and that general purpose IOs have benefited more.

SUBMITTER: Josepha Debre M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8441772 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

COVID-19 and Policy Responses by International Organizations: Crisis of Liberal International Order or Window of Opportunity?

Josepha Debre Maria M Dijkstra Hylke H

Global policy 20210623 4

The liberal international order is being challenged and international organizations (IOs) are a main target of contestation. COVID-19 seems to exacerbate the situation with many states pursuing domestic strategies at the expense of multilateral cooperation. At the same time, IOs have traditionally benefited from cross-border crises. This article analyzes the policy responses of IOs to the exogenous COVID-19 shock by asking why some IOs use this crisis as an opportunity to expand their scope and ...[more]

PMID: 34539816

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo examine the activities, concerns, and expectations of critical care nurses and professional critical care nursing organizations worldwide.DesignA descriptive survey methodology was used. This study is the fifth worldwide quadrennial review of its type to monitor variations in critical care nursing needs and provide robust evidence to inform policy related to critical care nursing practice.MethodsThe fifth World Federation of Critical Care Nurses international survey of critical care nursing organizations was emailed to potential participants from countries with critical care nursing organizations or known critical care nurse leaders. Data were collected online. Responses were entered into SPSS version 23 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and analyzed by geographical region and national wealth group.FindingsEighty-two national representative respondents participated in the survey, of whom two thirds (n = 56, 68%) had an established critical care nursing organization in their country. The five most important issues identified were working conditions, teamwork, staffing levels, the need for formal practice guidelines and competencies, and wages. The top five critical care nursing organization services that were considered to be of most importance were professional representation, as well as provision of workshops and education forums, national conferences, practice standards and guidelines, and local conferences. The most important contributions expected from the World Federation of Critical Care Nurses were standards for clinical practice and professional practice, international conferences, professional representation, and study and education grants.ConclusionsThe results highlight priority areas for critical care nursing and reinforce the need to address factors that can inform critical care nursing policy and practice. Results of this survey should be incorporated into strategic action plans at the national and international levels.Clinical relevanceNursing leaders, policymakers, and other interested stakeholders should consider these findings when planning critical care workforce requirements. Interested parties should work collaboratively to inform recommendations for further policy and action.

Project description:BackgroundWhile known efficacious preventive health interventions exist, the current capacity to scale up these interventions is limited. In recent years, much attention has focussed on developing frameworks and methods for scale-up yet, in practice, the pathway for scale-up is seldom linear and may be highly dependent on contextual circumstances. Few studies have examined the process of scaling up from decision to implementation nor examined the sustainability of scaled-up interventions. This study explores decision-makers' perceptions from real-world scaled-up case studies to examine how scale-up decisions were made and describe enablers of successful scale-up and sustainability.MethodsThis qualitative study included 29 interviews conducted with purposively sampled key Australian policy-makers, practitioners and researchers experienced in scale-up. Semi-structured interview questions obtained information regarding case studies of scaled-up interventions. The Framework Analysis method was used as the primary method of analysis of the interview data to inductively generate common and divergent themes within qualitative data across cases.ResultsA total of 31 case studies of public health interventions were described by interview respondents based on their experiences. According to the interviewees' perceptions, decisions to scale up commonly occurred either opportunistically, when funding became available, or when a deliberate decision was made and funding allocated. The latter scenario was more common when the intervention aligned with specific political or strategic goals. Decisions to scale up were driven by a variety of key actors such as politicians, senior policy-makers and practitioners in the health system. Drivers of a successful scale-up process included good governance, clear leadership, and adequate resourcing and expertise. Establishing accountability structures and appropriate engagement mechanisms to encourage the uptake of interventions were also key enablers. Sustainability was influenced by evidence of impact as well as good acceptability among the general or target population.ConclusionsMuch like Kingdon's Multiple Streams Theory of 'policy windows', there is a conceptually similar 'window for scale-up', driven by a complex interplay of factors such as political need, strategic context, funding and key actors. Researchers and policy-makers need to consider scalability from the outset and prepare for when the window for scale-up opens. Decision-makers need to provide longer term funding for scale-up to facilitate longer term sustainability and build on the resources already invested for the scale-up process.

Dataset Information

COVID-19 and Policy Responses by International Organizations: Crisis of Liberal International Order or Window of Opportunity?

Publications

COVID-19 and Policy Responses by International Organizations: Crisis of Liberal International Order or Window of Opportunity?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets