![]() ![]() ĭuring periods of crisis and high uncertainty, the demand for scientific and technical expertise increases as governments and the public search for certainty in understanding problems and choosing responses. From the beginning of the crisis up to the time of writing, one can observe a myriad of national and local responses to COVID-19, which differ in the composition of the policy mix but also in the timing and intensity of policy adoption. The potential mortality, morbidity, and life disruptions are difficult to predict, but waiting to act until the facts are certain is unacceptable to many political leaders. While this is common to many types of disasters, pandemics are a rising tide, with prolonged uncertainty and accumulating cases. Imposing such restrictions is a significant challenge for political leaders, who are pressured to decide under time constraints, often with limited knowledge of the future course of the crisis and the impacts of their decisions. These government measures resulted in a range of unprecedented economic and social impacts. Following the outbreak of COVID-19, governments around the world took unprecedented measures to curb the spread of the virus, to protect high-risk groups and to prevent the overloading of health care systems. ![]() The Corona crisis is a vivid example of a critical juncture in the history of nations. ![]() This increased their awareness of the dilemmas the government faces. Participants felt that they could express a nuanced opinion, communicate arguments, and appreciated the opportunity to evaluate relaxation options in comparison to each other while being informed about the consequences of each option. 80% of the participants state that PVE is a good method to let citizens participate in government decision-making on relaxing lockdown measures. Conversely, participants disfavoured options to relax restrictions for specific groups of citizens as they found it important that decisions lead to “unity” and not to “division”. We found wide support for prioritising the re-opening of contact professions. Citizens advised to relax lockdown measures, but not to the point at which the healthcare system becomes heavily overloaded. We show how these preferences can be used to rank options in terms of desirability. ![]() For instance, we established that participants assign an equal value to a reduction of 100 deaths among citizens younger than 70 years and a reduction of 168 deaths among citizens older than 70 years. The results of the PVE informed policymakers about people’s preferences regarding (the impacts of) the relaxation options. Participants received information regarding the societal impacts of each relaxation option, such as the impact of the option on the healthcare system. By making use of the novel method Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE), participants were asked to recommend which out of the eight options they prefer to be relaxed. Here, as one of the exceptions, we report the results of 30,000 citizens advising the government on eight different possibilities for relaxing lockdown measures in the Netherlands. Public participation in decisions regarding (the relaxation of) these measures has been notably absent, despite being recommended in the literature. Following the outbreak of COVID-19, governments took unprecedented measures to curb the spread of the virus. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |