Challenges Associated With the Response to the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic in Africa-An African Diaspora Perspective

Nexus between drivers of COVID-19 and country risks

COVID-19 has disrupted all spheres of life, including country risk regarding the exposure of economies to multi-dimensional risk drivers. However, it remains unexplored how COVID-19 has impacted different drivers of country risk in a probabilistic network setting. This paper uses two datasets on country-level COVID-19 and country risks to explore dependencies among associated drivers using a Bayesian Belief Network model. The drivers of COVID-19 risk, considered in this paper, are hazard and exposure, vulnerability and lack of coping capacity, whereas country risk drivers are economic, financing, political, business environment and commercial risks. The results show that business environment risk is significantly influenced by COVID-19 risk, whereas commercial risk (demand disruptions) is the least important factor driving COVID-19 and country risks. Further, country risk is mainly influenced by financing, political and economic risks. The contribution of this study is to explore the impact of various drivers associated with the country-level COVID-19 and country risks in a unified probabilistic network setting, which can help policy-makers prioritize drivers for managing the two risks.

A framework for supporting health capability-based planning: Identifying and structuring health capabilities

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted that health security systems must be redesigned, in a way that they are better prepared and ready to cope with multiple and diverse health threats, from predictable and well-known epidemics to unexpected and challenging pandemics. A powerful way of accomplishing this goal is to focus the planning on health capabilities. This focus may enhance the ability to respond to and recover from health threats and emergencies, while helping to identify the level of resources required to maintain and build up those capabilities that are critical in ensuring the preparedness of health security systems. However, current attempts for defining and organizing health capabilities have some important limitations. First, such attempts were not designed to consider diverse scenarios and multiple health threats. Second, they provide a limited representation of capabilities and lack a systemic perspective. Third, they struggle to identify capability and resource gaps. In this article, we thus propose a new framework for identifying and structuring health capabilities and support health capability planning. The suggested framework has three main potential benefits. First, the framework may help policymakers in planning under high levels of uncertainty, by considering multiple realistic and stressful scenarios. Second, it can provide risk analysts with a more comprehensive representation of health capabilities and their complex relationships. Third, it can support planners in identifying resource and capability gaps. We illustrate the use of the framework in practice considering an outbreak scenario caused by three different health threats (COVID-19, Ebola, and Influenza viruses).

Assessing Response Readiness to Health Emergencies: A Spatial Evaluation of Health and Socio-Economic Justice in Pakistan

COVID19 pandemic has put the global health emergency response to the test. Providing health and socio-economic justice across communities/regions helps in resilient response. In this study, a Geographic Information Systems-based framework is proposed and demonstrated in the context of public health-related hazards and pandemic response, such as in the face of COVID19. Indicators relevant to health system (HS) and socio-economic conditions (SC) are utilized to compute a response readiness index (RRI). The frequency histograms and the Analysis of Variance approaches are applied to analyze the distribution of response readiness. We further integrate spatial distributional models to explore the geographically-varying patterns of response readiness pinpointing the priority intervention areas in the context of cross-regional health and socio-economic justice. The framework's application is demonstrated using Pakistan's most developed and populous province, namely Punjab (districts scale, n = 36), as a case study. The results show that ~ 45% indicators achieve below-average scores (value < 0.61) including four from HS and five from SC. The findings ascertain maximum districts lack health facilities, hospital beds, and health insurance from HS and more than 50% lack communication means and literacy-rates, which are essential in times of emergencies. Our cross-regional assessment shows a north-south spatial heterogeneity with southern Punjab being the most vulnerable to COVID-like situations. Dera Ghazi Khan and Muzaffargarh are identified as the statistically significant hotspots of response incompetency (95% confidence), which is critical. This study has policy implications in the context of decision-making, resource allocation, and strategy formulation on health emergency response (i.e., COVID19) to improve community health resilience.

Challenges to evidence-informed decision-making in the context of pandemics: qualitative study of COVID-19 policy advisor perspectives

INTRODUCTION

The exceptional production of research evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic required deployment of scientists to act in advisory roles to aid policy-makers in making evidence-informed decisions. The unprecedented breadth, scale and duration of the pandemic provides an opportunity to understand how science advisors experience and mitigate challenges associated with insufficient, evolving and/or conflicting evidence to inform public health decision-making.

OBJECTIVES

To explore critically the challenges for advising evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) in pandemic contexts, particularly around non-pharmaceutical control measures, from the perspective of experts advising policy-makers during COVID-19 globally.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 27 scientific experts and advisors who are/were engaged in COVID-19 EIDM representing four WHO regions and 11 countries (Australia, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Ghana, Hong Kong, Nigeria, Sweden, Uganda, UK, USA) from December 2020 to May 2021. Participants informed decision-making at various and multiple levels of governance, including local/city (n=3), state/provincial (n=8), federal or national (n=20), regional or international (n=3) and university-level advising (n=3). Following each interview, we conducted member checks with participants and thematically analysed interview data using NVivo for Mac software.

RESULTS

Findings from this study indicate multiple overarching challenges to pandemic EIDM specific to interpretation and translation of evidence, including the speed and influx of new, evolving, and conflicting evidence; concerns about scientific integrity and misinterpretation of evidence; the limited capacity to assess and produce evidence, and adapting evidence from other contexts; multiple forms of evidence and perspectives needed for EIDM; the need to make decisions quickly and under conditions of uncertainty; and a lack of transparency in how decisions are made and applied.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest the urgent need for global EIDM guidance that countries can adapt for in-country decisions as well as coordinated global response to future pandemics.

Covid-19 Riskscapes: Viral Risk Perceptions in the African Great Lakes

In this article we explore Covid-19 riskscapes across the African Great Lakes region. Drawing on fieldwork across Uganda and Malawi, our analysis centers around how two mobile, trans-border figures - truck drivers and migrant traders - came to be understood as shifting, yet central loci of perceived viral risk. We argue that political decision-making processes, with specific reference to the influence of Covid-19 testing regimes and reported disease metrics, aggravated antecedent geographies of blame targeted at mobile "others". We find that using grounded riskscapes to examine localised renditions of risk reveals otherwise neglected forms of discriminatory discourse and practice.

Prioritizing Multidimensional Interdependent Factors Influencing COVID-19 Risk

COVID-19 has significantly affected various industries and domains worldwide. Since such pandemics are considered as rare events, risks associated with pandemics are generally managed through reactive approaches, which involve seeking more information about the severity of the pandemic over time and adopting suitable strategies accordingly. However, policy-makers at a national level must devise proactive strategies to minimize the harmful impacts of such pandemics. In this article, we use a country-level data-set related to humanitarian crises and disasters to explore critical factors influencing COVID-19 related hazard and exposure, vulnerability, lack of coping capacity, and the overall risk for individual countries. The main contribution is to establish the relative importance of multidimensional factors associated with COVID-19 risk in a probabilistic network setting. This study provides unique insights to policy-makers regarding the identification of critical factors influencing COVID-19 risk and their relative importance in a network setting.

The Social Lives of Infectious Diseases: Why Culture Matters to COVID-19

Over the course of the year 2020, the global scientific community dedicated considerable effort to understanding COVID-19. In this review, we discuss some of the findings accumulated between the onset of the pandemic and the end of 2020, and argue that although COVID-19 is clearly a biological disease tied to a specific virus, the culture-mind relation at the heart of cultural psychology is nonetheless essential to understanding the pandemic. Striking differences have been observed in terms of relative mortality, transmission rates, behavioral responses, official policies, compliance with authorities, and even the extent to which beliefs about COVID-19 have been politicized across different societies and groups. Moreover, many minority groups have very different experiences of the pandemic relative to dominant groups, notably through existing health inequities as well as discrimination and marginalization, which we believe calls for a better integration of political and socioeconomic factors into cultural psychology and into the narrative of health and illness in psychological science more broadly. Finally, individual differences in, for example, intolerance of uncertainty, optimism, conspiratorial thinking, or collectivist orientation are influenced by cultural context, with implications for behaviors that are relevant to the spread and impact of COVID-19, such as mask-wearing and social distancing. The interplay between cultural context and the experience and expression of mental disorders continues to be documented by cultural-clinical psychology; the current work extends this thinking to infectious disease, with special attention to diseases spread by social contact and fought at least in part through social interventions. We will discuss cultural influences on the transmission, course, and outcome of COVID-19 at three levels: (1) cross-society differences; (2) within-society communities and intergroup relations; and (3) individual differences shaped by cultural context. We conclude by considering potential theoretical implications of this perspective on infectious disease for cultural psychology and related disciplines, as well as practical implications of this perspective on science communication and public health interventions.

Global Systemic Risk and Resilience for Novel Coronavirus and COVID-19

This Special Issue is dedicated to issues and challenges related to pandemic risk and resilience, with a focus on policy and operations of global systems in the COVID-19 pandemic. The cascading effects of emerging and reemerging infectious diseases to the global economy are a critical interest. Measures to confront the ongoing pandemic are an urgent need. Data analysis at regional and global scales is helping to prioritize response and resilience across locations of high risks. The risk sciences are available for addressing human health and infection risks; the evaluation of risk management strategies and tradeoffs; risk perception as it relates to information processing and receiving risk communication; and tracking system resilience as it relates to various imposed measures.