Political and administrative decentralization and responses to Covid-19
Comparison of the United States and South Korea
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21652384 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sanghee Park (0000-0003-0527-728X, Boise State University), Loretta Fowler (0000-0001-6104-315X, Boise State University) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 289-299 |
| Publication date | 2021-11-16 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1093-4537 • E-ISSN: 1532-4273 |
| Publisher | Emerald (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1108/ijotb-02-2021-0022 |
| OpenAlex | W3198456270 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 21 |
Purpose This study explains the variation of government responses to the pandemic by focusing on how centralization/decentralization in politics and administration creates conflicts and coordination problems. Specifically, the authors make comparisons between the U.S. and South Korea to reveal differences in macro-level structures and associated responses. One of the key points of comparison is the centralized, hierarchical governance system, which may thwart or facilitate a coordinated response. Design/methodology/approach This is an in-depth comparative case study of the two countries that showed different trajectories during the initial response to COVID-19. The comparison allows us to highlight the long-standing debate about centralization/decentralization and offers implications for government responses to crises shaped by political systems and administrative structures. Findings While there are inherent pros and cons to decentralization, the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the institutional limitations in American federalism and the advantages that centralized administrative coordination creates during times of crisis. American federalism has unveiled systematic problems in coordination, along with the leadership crisis in polarized politics. The response from South Korea also reveals several issues in the administratively centralized and politically polarized environment. Research limitations/implications While the authors risk comparing apples and oranges, the variation unveils systematic contradictions in polarized politics and offers important implications for government responses in times of crisis. However, this article did not fully account for individual leadership as an independent factor that interacts with existing political/administrative institutions. Practical implications There is certainly no one best way or one-size-fits-all solution to mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic in countries under different circumstances. This article demonstrates that one of the essential determining factors in national responses to the pandemic is how the political and administrative dimensions of centralization/decentralization are balanced against each other. Originality/value Unlike previous studies explaining the country-level responses to COVID-19, this study focuses on the variance of political and administrative decentralization within each country from the political-administrative perspective and reveals the systematic contradictions in coordination and the leadership crisis in polarized politics
Central government · Corporate governance · Decentralization · Economic system · Economics · Federalism · Local government · Management · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Local Government Finance and Decentralization · Public Administration · Public Policy and Administration Research
Artificial intelligence in the Covid-19 pandemic
Network evolution in subnational epistemic learning during crises
Reclaiming the Authority to Plan
Policy Compliance Under Disagreement
Should the market decide where the waste goes? Municipal bidding war between private landfills in Santiago de Chile
Advancing Transportation Justice
Decentralization of Internal Crisis Management and Communication
Delay of routine health care during the Covid-19 pandemic
Gendered leadership during the Covid-19 pandemic
Making sense of the U.S. Covid-19 pandemic response
Fighting Covid ‐19 with Agility, Transparency, and Participation
American Federalism and the Search for Models of Management
Institutional Collective Action During Covid‐19
Leadership Style, Crisis Response and Blame Management
Political Transaction Costs and the Politics of Administrative Design
State Rules and Local Governance Choices
The State of American Federalism 2016–2017
Some Critical Issues in Government Centralization and Decentralization
Learning under Uncertainty
Emergency Management
The Politics of Blame Avoidance
Crises and Crisis Management
The Risk Game and the Blame Game
Ideas, interests and practical authority in reform politics
Intergovernmental Political Competition in American Federalism
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |