Prioritized sectors in the initial government response to face COVID-19. A systematic review.

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56294/sctconf2024.1144

Keywords:

Pandemia, COVID-19, Políticas públicas

Abstract

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic, declared by the World Health Organization in March 2020, has unleashed an unprecedented health crisis that has affected all aspects of human life. Governments around the world were forced to respond quickly to mitigate the effects of the spread of the virus, implement containment measures, and support their citizens during this global emergency. This study focuses on analyzing how governments prioritized their actions in different sectors during the initial phase of the pandemic.
Objective: Identify the prioritized sectors in the first government measures implemented globally to confront the COVID-19 pandemic.
Method: This systematic review adheres to the guidelines established in the PRISMA Statement. From an exhaustive search in the Scopus database, a total of 97 scientific articles were identified. After a rigorous evaluation of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 36 articles were selected that met the specific objectives of the research.
Results: The analysis of the selected articles revealed that the government measures adopted to confront the pandemic covered a wide range of human activities. However, an evident prioritization was observed in three specific sectors during the initial stage of the crisis at a global level: Social sector, health sector and economic sector.
Conclusions: The analysis of the reviewed literature demonstrates that governments, in their initial response to COVID-19, focused their efforts mainly on three sectors. This prioritization reflects a comprehensive strategy that encompassed containment of the virus, protection of health systems, and support for affected economies and societies.

References

1. Xie X, Zhang Y, Zhang RJ, Ding Y, Guo Y. Better support for national than local system during the COVID‐19 pandemic in China. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy. 2022 Apr 11;22(1):183–97.

2. Johns Hopkins University. Johns Hopkins University. 2023 [cited 2024 May 30]. COVID-19 Dashboard by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU). Available from: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

3. Olimat MS. The Greater Middle East Covid-19 Crisis Management: Challenges and Opportunities. J Int Womens Stud [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2024 May 30];23(3):3–24. Available from: https://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2763&context=jiws

4. Valdez Huarcaya W, Miranda Monzón JA, Napanga Saldaña EO, Driver CR. Impacto de la COVID-19 en la mortalidad en Perú mediante la triangulación de múltiples fuentes de datos. Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública. 2022 Jun 3;46:1.

5. Clemente Suárez VJ, Navarro Jiménez E, Moreno Luna L, Saavedra Serrano MC, Jimenez M, Simón JA, et al. The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Social, Health, and Economy. Sustainability. 2021 Jun 2;13(11):6314.

6. Nurmandi A, Zahra A, Congge U. What are the Governmental Response Policies on COVID-19? A Meta-Thematic Analysis of Government Response Policy in the World. Open Public Health J. 2022 Mar 14;15(1).

7. Bajra UQ, Aliu F, Aver B, Čadež S. COVID-19 pandemic–related policy stringency and economic decline: was it really inevitable? Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja. 2023 Mar 31;36(1):499–515.

8. Dewi A, Nurmandi A, Rochmawati E, Purnomo EP, Dimas Rizqi M, Azzahra A, et al. Global policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic: proportionate adaptation and policy experimentation: a study of country policy response variation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Health Promot Perspect. 2020 Nov 7;10(4):359–65.

9. Peci A, Avellaneda CN, Suzuki K. Governmental responses to COVID-19 Pandemic. Revista de Administração Pública. 2021 Feb;55(1):1–11.

10. Capano G, Howlett M, Jarvis DSL, Ramesh M, Goyal N. Mobilizing Policy (In)Capacity to Fight COVID-19: Understanding Variations in State Responses. Policy Soc. 2020 Jul 2;39(3):285–308.

11. Pineda Gea F, Téllez Ramos CM, Gutiérrez Aburto RA. Metodología Aplicada en la Redacción de Trabajos Monográficos de Tipo Revisión Sistemática. Revista Ciencia y Tecnología El Higo. 2023 Jun 30;13(1):2–19.

12. Codina L. Revisiones tradicionales, sistemáticas o de alcance: ¿cómo elegir el tipo de revisión de la literatura que corresponde en cada caso? INFONOMY. 2023;2(2).

13. Paudel D, Neupane RC, Sigdel S, Poudel P, Khanal AR. COVID-19 Pandemic, Climate Change, and Conflicts on Agriculture: A Trio of Challenges to Global Food Security. Sustainability. 2023 May 19;15(10):8280.

14. Osman ND, Hassan FM, Tajudin AA, Ali MNA. COVID-19 as a National Security Issue in Malaysia: A Comparison with the Italian and Australian Perspectives. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. 2021 Jul 8;10(4):261.

15. Rasevic Z. The resort to military force in the COVID-19 health emergency: A justification. Revista Científica General José María Córdova. 2021 Jul 1;19(35):549–69.

16. Harrington J. Indicators, security and sovereignty during COVID-19 in the Global South. Int J Law Context. 2021 Jun 10;17(2):249–60.

17. Caponnetto P, Benenati A, Maglia MG. Psychopathological Impact and Resilient Scenarios in Inpatient with Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders Related to Covid Physical Distancing Policies: A Systematic Review. Behavioral Sciences. 2021 Apr 13;11(4):49.

18. Francis L. Negative Freedom in Crisis Times. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie. 2021;107(1):79–89.

19. Fusco GG. Lockdown: A Commentary. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis Folia Iuridica. 2021 Sep 30;96:59–70.

20. Valutytė R, Jočienė D, Ažubalytė R. Legality of Human Rights Restrictions During the COVID-19 Pandemic Under the European Convention on Human Rights. Tilburg Law Review. 2021 Dec 28;26(1):1–15.

21. Seyhan E. Pandemic Powers: Why Human Rights Organizations Should Not Lose Focus on Civil and Political Rights. J Hum Rights Pract. 2020 Dec 4;12(2):268–75.

22. Nurkic B. THE RULE OF LAW CRISIS AND SELF-INCURRED IMMATURITY. Journal of Liberty and International Affairs, Institute for Research and European Studies - Bitola. 2020;6:67–79.

23. Seddighi H, Salmani I, Seddighi S. Saving Lives and Changing Minds with Twitter in Disasters and Pandemics: A Literature Review. Journalism and Media. 2020 Nov 19;1(1):59–77.

24. Lankford AM, Storzieri D, Fitsanakis J. Spies and the Virus: The COVID-19 Pandemic and Intelligence Communication in the United States. Front Commun (Lausanne). 2020 Dec 3;5.

25. Mäntyneva P, Ketonen EL, Hiilamo H. Initial social-policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Global North – A scoping review. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. 2023 Dec 18;43(13/14):1–18.

26. Dąbrowska-Kłosińska P. The Protection of Human Rights in Pandemics—Reflections on the Past, Present, and Future. German Law Journal. 2021 Sep 15;22(6):1028–38.

27. Papamichail A. The Global Politics of Health Security before, during, and after COVID-19. Ethics Int Aff. 2021 Oct 21;35(3):467–81.

Downloads

Published

2024-08-11

How to Cite

1.
Aguilar-Janto LE, Quiroz-Valenzuela RJ, Mendoza-Barrientos LC. Prioritized sectors in the initial government response to face COVID-19. A systematic review. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias [Internet]. 2024 Aug. 11 [cited 2024 Dec. 2];3:.1144. Available from: https://conferencias.ageditor.ar/index.php/sctconf/article/view/1144