Science, Politics, and the Pandemic
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20269593 |
|---|---|
| Authors | J Nicholas Ziegler, Jeffrey Ziegler (0000-0003-3905-7488, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 119 |
| Issue | 820 |
| Pages | 303-309 |
| Publication date | 2020-10-20 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Current History (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0011-3530 • E-ISSN: 1944-785X |
| Publisher | University of California Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1525/curh.2020.119.820.303 |
| OpenAlex | W3093665644 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
Comparing the virus responses in Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States shows that in order for scientific expertise to result in effective policy, rational political leadership is required. Each of these three countries is known for advanced biomedical research, yet their experiences in the COVID-19 pandemic diverged widely. Germany’s political leadership carefully followed scientific advice and organized public–private partnerships to scale up testing, resulting in relatively low infection levels. The UK and US political responses were far more erratic and less informed by scientific advice—and proved much less effective
Advice (programming) · Business · Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) · Infectious disease (medical specialty) · Order (exchange) · Pandemic · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Sociology · Healthcare Systems and Challenges · Law · Medicine · Public Administration
| Citations per year | 0.8 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2021 - 2023 (3) |
| Highly cited | No |