COVID-19 and democracy: a scoping review.
COVID-19
Democracy
Resilience
Scoping review
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 08 2023
30 08 2023
Historique:
received:
09
11
2022
accepted:
22
06
2023
medline:
1
9
2023
pubmed:
31
8
2023
entrez:
30
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The resilience of democracy is tested under exogenous shocks such as crises. The COVID-19 pandemic has recently tested the resilience of democratic institutions and practices around the world. The purpose of this article is to scope the early research literature that discusses democracy and the COVID-19 pandemic. We review scientific journal articles published during the first two years of the pandemic. We ask three research questions in scoping this body of literature: (1) what are the key topic areas of all published research that associates itself with both democracy and COVID-19, (2) what kinds of conceptual and theoretical contributions has research literature that more specifically discusses democracy under the pandemic produced, and (3) what are the impacts of democracy to the pandemic and vice versa according to empirical research? The scoping review methodology draws on systematic literature search strategies, computational methods, and manual coding. The systematic Web of Science search produced 586 articles for which we conducted a Correlated Topic Model. After technical and manual screening, we identified 94 journal articles that were manually coded. The early research on democracy and the COVID-19 pandemic offers a versatile body of scholarship. The topic modeling shows that the scholarship discusses issues of crises, governance, rights, society, epidemiology, politics, electorate, technology, and media. The body of papers with conceptual and theoretical contributions has offered new insights on the difficulties, possibilities, and means to maintain democracy under a pandemic. Empirical research on democracy's impact on the COVID-19 pandemic and vice versa varies in terms of methodology, geographical scope, and scientific contributions according to the direction of influence studied. Democracy appears to have a significant impact on some aspects of policy responses and epidemiological characteristics of the pandemic. In most parts of the world, the scope, franchise, and authenticity of democracy narrowed down due to the pandemic, albeit in most cases only temporarily. A significant number of papers show that the pandemic has accentuated democratic backsliding but is unlikely to have undermined established democracies that have proved resilient in face of the pandemic. But empirical research has also made visible some weak signals of antidemocratic tendencies that may become more accentuated in the longer run.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The resilience of democracy is tested under exogenous shocks such as crises. The COVID-19 pandemic has recently tested the resilience of democratic institutions and practices around the world.
AIM
The purpose of this article is to scope the early research literature that discusses democracy and the COVID-19 pandemic. We review scientific journal articles published during the first two years of the pandemic. We ask three research questions in scoping this body of literature: (1) what are the key topic areas of all published research that associates itself with both democracy and COVID-19, (2) what kinds of conceptual and theoretical contributions has research literature that more specifically discusses democracy under the pandemic produced, and (3) what are the impacts of democracy to the pandemic and vice versa according to empirical research?
METHODS
The scoping review methodology draws on systematic literature search strategies, computational methods, and manual coding. The systematic Web of Science search produced 586 articles for which we conducted a Correlated Topic Model. After technical and manual screening, we identified 94 journal articles that were manually coded.
RESULTS
The early research on democracy and the COVID-19 pandemic offers a versatile body of scholarship. The topic modeling shows that the scholarship discusses issues of crises, governance, rights, society, epidemiology, politics, electorate, technology, and media. The body of papers with conceptual and theoretical contributions has offered new insights on the difficulties, possibilities, and means to maintain democracy under a pandemic. Empirical research on democracy's impact on the COVID-19 pandemic and vice versa varies in terms of methodology, geographical scope, and scientific contributions according to the direction of influence studied. Democracy appears to have a significant impact on some aspects of policy responses and epidemiological characteristics of the pandemic. In most parts of the world, the scope, franchise, and authenticity of democracy narrowed down due to the pandemic, albeit in most cases only temporarily.
CONCLUSIONS
A significant number of papers show that the pandemic has accentuated democratic backsliding but is unlikely to have undermined established democracies that have proved resilient in face of the pandemic. But empirical research has also made visible some weak signals of antidemocratic tendencies that may become more accentuated in the longer run.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37649016
doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-16172-y
pii: 10.1186/s12889-023-16172-y
pmc: PMC10469824
doi:
Types de publication
Review
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1668Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Econ Lett. 2021 Jun;203:109840
pubmed: 33814654
Geogr J. 2021 Mar;187(1):51-56
pubmed: 33230346
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 19;18(1):143
pubmed: 30453902
J Travel Med. 2020 Nov 9;27(7):
pubmed: 33057667
Nature. 2022 Feb;602(7895):9
pubmed: 35105997
Scand J Public Health. 2021 Feb;49(1):104-113
pubmed: 33427079
J Law Biosci. 2020 Sep 29;7(1):lsaa064
pubmed: 33569176
J Econ Behav Organ. 2021 May;185:647-670
pubmed: 36540422
East Mediterr Health J. 2020 Oct 13;26(10):1173-1183
pubmed: 33103744
SSM Popul Health. 2021 Jun 12;15:100832
pubmed: 34189240
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Sep 1;117(35):21201-21208
pubmed: 32788356
Society. 2021;58(1):60-65
pubmed: 33840868
Sci Rep. 2020 Nov 3;10(1):18909
pubmed: 33144595
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2022 Feb;29(6):8694-8704
pubmed: 34490579
Hum Factors. 2020 Nov;62(7):1077-1086
pubmed: 32741224
Soc Sci Med. 2021 Sep;285:114244
pubmed: 34399291
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2020 Dec 1;45(6):997-1012
pubmed: 32464665
Glob Public Health. 2020 Sep;15(9):1413-1416
pubmed: 32564670
OMICS. 2021 May;25(5):279-284
pubmed: 33961517
World Dev. 2021 Jan;137:105207
pubmed: 32989341
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2021 Dec 1;46(6):959-987
pubmed: 34075406
Disasters. 2021 Dec;45 Suppl 1:S26-S47
pubmed: 34874072
Econ Model. 2022 Jan;106:105682
pubmed: 34776576
Front Public Health. 2021 Jul 06;9:678210
pubmed: 34295870
Eur J Epidemiol. 2020 Nov;35(11):1099-1103
pubmed: 32776268
Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2021 Jan 19;12(1):
pubmed: 33215987
New Solut. 2020 Nov;30(3):161-167
pubmed: 32956010
PLoS One. 2021 Jun 22;16(6):e0253485
pubmed: 34157050
Med Law Rev. 2021 Dec 6;29(4):613-638
pubmed: 34516630
Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 5;5(1):210
pubmed: 27919275
J Popul Econ. 2022;35(1):197-240
pubmed: 34548754
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Sep 07;(9):MR000025
pubmed: 21901737
J Hum Rights Pract. 2020 Sep 15;12(2):250-259
pubmed: 34191948