A Perspective on the Influence of National Corporate Governance Institutions and Government's Political Ideology on the Speed to Lockdown as a Means of Protection Against Covid-19.
COVID-19
National CGIs
Pandemic response
Journal
Journal of business ethics : JBE
ISSN: 0167-4544
Titre abrégé: J Bus Ethics
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 100972154
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Aug 2022
03 Aug 2022
Historique:
received:
21
11
2020
accepted:
14
07
2022
entrez:
15
8
2022
pubmed:
16
8
2022
medline:
16
8
2022
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
This first wave study of the Covid-19 pandemic investigates why the governments of different countries proceeded to lockdown at different speeds. We draw upon the literature on Corporate Governance Institutions (CGIs) to theorize that governments' decision-making is undertaken in the light of prevailing beliefs, norms, and rules of the collectivity, as portrayed by the focal country's CGIs, in their effort to maintain legitimacy. In addition, drawing on motivated cognition we posit that the government's political ideology moderates this relationship because decision-makers are biased when assessing the impact of lockdown on commerce. Running negative binomial regressions on a sample of 125 countries, we find that the more shareholder-oriented the CGIs, the slower the governmental response in shutting down the economy to protect from the pandemic. Moreover, the main relationship is stronger the more right-leaning the government's ideology. Our study contributes to the research on corporate governance institutions and political ideology and illustrates how societal and ideological biases affect government decision-making, especially when important decisions about public welfare are taken with little information on hand.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35967486
doi: 10.1007/s10551-022-05216-9
pii: 5216
pmc: PMC9362367
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1-18Informations de copyright
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022, Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of InterestNo potential conflict of interests.
Références
Ann Glob Health. 2020 Jul 29;86(1):88
pubmed: 32775219
Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60:307-37
pubmed: 19035826
J Appl Psychol. 2021 Aug;106(8):1188-1201
pubmed: 34424002
Am Psychol. 2006 Oct;61(7):651-70
pubmed: 17032067
J Int Bus Stud. 2021;52(9):1871-1892
pubmed: 34305192
Psychol Bull. 2003 May;129(3):339-75
pubmed: 12784934
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2008 Mar;3(2):126-36
pubmed: 26158879
J Pers. 2004 Aug;72(4):659-86
pubmed: 15210013
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 15;15(9):e0239251
pubmed: 32931506
Psychol Med. 2021 Jan;51(2):201-211
pubmed: 33436130
Psychol Bull. 1990 Nov;108(3):480-98
pubmed: 2270237
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2014 Jun;106(6):1031-51
pubmed: 24841103
Nat Hum Behav. 2021 Apr;5(4):529-538
pubmed: 33686204
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Oct;5(10):
pubmed: 33028699
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Sep 29;117(39):24575-24580
pubmed: 32887803
Nature. 2020 Sep;585(7825):410-413
pubmed: 32365354
J Appl Psychol. 2020 Aug;105(8):771-783
pubmed: 32614203