A Multi-Criteria Framework for Pandemic Response Measures
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22069271 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Love Ekenberg (0000-0002-0665-1889, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, corresponding author), Adriana Mihai (0000-0002-2683-7111, University of Bucharest), Tobias Fasth (0000-0002-2324-1021, Public Health Agency of Sweden), Nadejda Komendantova (0000-0003-2568-6179, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis), Mats Danielson (0000-0001-6502-9670, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 9 |
| Pages | 583706-583706 |
| Publication date | 2021-04-20 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Frontiers in Public Health (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2296-2565 • E-ISSN: 2296-2565 |
| Publisher | Frontiers Media SA (PUBLISHER • CH) |
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2021.583706 |
| PMID | 33968871 |
| OpenAlex | W3155447296 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 7 |
| References cited | 41 |
In managing the COVID-19 pandemic, several compelling narratives seem to have played a significant role in the decision-making processes regarding which risk mitigation and management measures to implement. Many countries were to a large extent unprepared for such a situation, even though predictions about a significant probability for a pandemic to occur existed, and national governments of several countries often acted in an uncoordinated manner, which resulted in many inconsistencies in the disaster risk reduction processes. Limited evidence has also made room for strategic narratives meant to persuade the public of the chosen set of actions, even though the degree of uncertainty regarding the outcomes of these was high, further complicating the situation. In this article, we assume a normative standpoint regarding rhapsodic decision making and suggest an integrated framework for a more elaborated decision analysis under the ambiguity of how to contain the virus spread from a policy point of view, while considering epidemiologic estimations and socioeconomic factors in a multi-stakeholder-multi-criteria context based on a co-creative work process for eliciting attitudes, perceptions, as well as preferences amongst relevant stakeholder groups. The framework, applied in our paper on Romania for demonstrative purposes, is used for evaluating mitigation measures for catastrophic events such as the COVID-19 situation, to mobilize better response strategies for future scenarios related to pandemics and other hazardous events, as well as to structure the production and analysis of narratives on the current pandemic effects
Ambiguity · Business · Environmental health · Geography · Narrative · Normative · Pandemic · Political science · Population · Public relations · Socioeconomic status · Stakeholder · Computer Science · COVID-19 epidemiological studies · COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts · Disaster Management and Resilience · Engineering · Medicine
Use of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to support decision-making during health emergencies
A risk-based decision framework for policy analysis of societal pandemic effects
The Sars-CoV-2 Pandemic in High Income Countries Such as Canada
Living in a pandemic
From federal transfers and local investments to a potential convergence of Covid-19 and climate change
Learning from Covid-19
Crisis Governance at the Local Level
Deliberation, Representation, Equity
Advances In Experimental Social Psychology
An evidence review of face masks against Covid-19
Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on Covid-19 in Europe
Mortality and Morbidity in the 21st Century
Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with Covid-2019
Metaphors We Think With
The proximal origin of Sars-CoV-2
System Dynamics Modeling
Early Transmission Dynamics in Wuhan, China, of Novel Coronavirus–Infected Pneumonia
Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms
The Ethics of Care
Diverging Life Expectancies and Voting Patterns in the 2016 US Presidential Election
Ethical Considerations of Using Narrative to Communicate Science
An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values
Whence Differences in Value Priorities
| Unique citing works | 7 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,4 |
| Citation span | 2021 - 2025 (5) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 7 |