Abstract
Austria traditionally is a federal consensus democracy with many formal and informal veto-players. Its handling of the Covid-19 pandemic between February 2020 and May 2021 provides evidence of advantages as well as disadvantages of such systems. As long as actors on all levels held similar views on how to proceed and put cooperation before contestation and electoral considerations, reactions to combat the virus were very effective and met with the broad support of the opposition, regional governments, and citizens. Austria quickly introduced social-distancing measures, accompanied by generous financial programs to offset negative effects on the economy. Following established patterns of policy-making, government assumed the leading role, while corporatist actors were involved in the negotiation and implementation of the measures. As a result, the spread of Covid-19 remained low. Once policy differences between political actors increased and significant parts of the public became critical toward strict containment measures, cooperation was replaced by contestation. Austria still managed to avoid a medical disaster. However, government actions now became much less decisive and effective.
Originalsprache | Englisch |
---|---|
Titel | Governments' Responses to the Covid-19 Pandemic in Europe |
Untertitel | Navigating the Perfect Storm |
Redakteure/-innen | Kennet Lynggaard, Mads Dagnis Jensen, Michael Kluth |
Erscheinungsort | Cham, Switzerland |
Herausgeber (Verlag) | Palgrave Macmillan |
Kapitel | 33 |
Seiten | 397-407 |
Seitenumfang | 11 |
ISBN (Print) | 9783031141447 |
DOIs | |
Publikationsstatus | Veröffentlicht - 2023 |
Publikationsreihe
Name | Governments' Responses to the Covid-19 Pandemic in Europe |
---|
Bibliographische Notiz
Publisher Copyright:© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023.
Systematik der Wissenschaftszweige 2012
- 506 Politikwissenschaften