Federalism in a Time of Plague: How Federal Systems Cope With Pandemic

• Date: 01 August 2020
• DOI: 10.1177/0275074020941695
• Author: Mark J. Rozell,Clyde Wilcox
• Published date: 01 August 2020
• Subject Matter: Executive Leadership & FederalismConfronting Federalism in the Age of COVID-19

https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020941695

American Review of Public Administration

2020, Vol. 50(6-7) 519 –525

© The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0275074020941695

journals.sagepub.com/home/arp

Confronting Federalism in the Age of COVID-19

The rapid spread of COVID-19 has challenged governments

across the world. With millions of infections and hundreds of

thousands of deaths, the human toll has been horrific. Many

who survive the virus are ill for weeks or months, and some

have suffered permanent damage to hearts and lungs. In

many countries, health care systems have been overrun, lead-

ing to rationing of ventilators and even hospital beds, and to

the deaths of health care workers. Economic costs have been

massive as well, as countries have locked down to prevent

the spread of the virus and businesses have closed. The final

economic cost is likely to be staggering.

The impact of the virus has varied across countries for

demographic reasons, including the age structure of the pop-

ulation and the prevalence of multigenerational families,

population density, and the number of citizens who traveled

abroad. There are cultural differences at play too, with Asian

countries and territories such as South Korea, Taiwan, and

Hong Kong doing especially well. And differences in the

capacities of health care systems have affected the treatment

options available.

Some countries (Iceland, Singapore, South Korea) moved

quickly to contain the virus, while others (Brazil, United

States, United Kingdom) reacted slowly or not at all. Some

countries such as South Korea and Iceland launched national

programs of testing and contact tracing. New Zealand blocked

international travel and began to lock down with only a small

number of cases. As the images of the unfolding disaster in

Italy were broadcast throughout Europe and then the rest of

the world, Spain was slow to react, Germany was fast. Canada

responded quickly, the United States slowly and incoherently.

Countries headed by women—Germany, New Zealand,

Taiwan, Iceland, Finland, Norway, and Denmark—all had

relatively rapid responses based on wide consultation with

public health and other experts, and their leaders engaged in

calm and regular communication with citizens. These coun-

tries invested early in testing and contact tracing, allowing

them in some cases to keep schools open. In Norway and

Denmark, the prime ministers had special press conferences

for children only, and in New Zealand, the prime minister

told children that the Easter Bunny and the tooth fairy were

essential workers but might be a bit delayed this year.

941695ARPXXX10.1177/0275074020941695The American Review of Public AdministrationRozell and Wilcox

research-article2020

1George Mason University, Fairfax and Arlington, VA, USA

2Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA

Corresponding Author:

Mark J. Rozell, Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason

University, Arlington, VA 22201, USA.

Email: mrozell@gmu.edu

Federalism in a Time of Plague:

How Federal Systems Cope

With Pandemic

Mark J. Rozell1 and Clyde Wilcox2

Abstract

This article compares and contrasts the responses of Australia, Canada, Germany, and the United States to the COVID-19

outbreak and spread. The pandemic has posed special challenges to these federal systems. Although federal systems typically

have many advantages—they can adapt policies to local conditions, for example, and experiment with different solutions

to problems—pandemics and people cross regional borders, and controlling contagion requires a great deal of national

coordination and intergovernmental cooperation.

The four federal systems vary in their relative distribution of powers between regional and national governments, in the

way that health care is administered, and in the variation in policies across regions. We focus on the early responses to

COVID-19, from January through early May 2020. Three of these countries—Australia, Canada, and Germany—have done

well in the crisis. They have acted quickly, done extensive testing and contact tracing, and had a relatively uniform set of

policies across the country. The United States, in contrast, has had a disastrous response, wasting months at the start of the

virus outbreak, with limited testing, poor intergovernmental cooperation, and widely divergent policies across the states and

even within some states. The article seeks to explain both the relative uniform responses of these three very different federal

systems, and the sharply divergent response of the United States.

Keywords

federalism, COVID-19, pandemic, social welfare, polarization