Open Access
The COVID-19 lockdown paradox : democratic support during democratic restrictions
Loading...
Files
COVID19_lockdown_2024.pdf (438.58 KB)
Full-text in Open Access, Published version, OnlineFirst
License
Attribution 4.0 International
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
1755-7739; 1755-7747
Issue Date
Type of Publication
Keyword(s)
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Citation
European political science review, 2024, OnlineFirst
Cite
OANA, Ioana-Elena, BOJAR, Abel, WANG, Chendi, The COVID-19 lockdown paradox : democratic support during democratic restrictions, European political science review, 2024, OnlineFirst - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/77453
Abstract
Previous research has shown that positive perceptions of government performance are linked to higher levels of citizens’ support for democracy. However, the policy response to the COVID-19 crisis presented a unique paradox as relative success in preventing the virus spread depended on expanding executive powers, often at the cost of individual freedoms. Exploring this paradox, we investigate whether the link between perceptions of government performance and support for democracy holds in a situation where positive performance essentially means a restriction of freedoms. Using original survey data from seven European countries, we show that notwithstanding the democratic sacrifices, people with positive evaluations of the government’s response are more likely to maintain support for the democratic system. Nevertheless, people weighed responses to the health domain more heavily than to the economic domain, suggesting that the output legitimacy – democratic support link varies across domain-specific evaluations.
Table of Contents
Additional Information
Published online: 13 November 2024
External Links
Publisher
Version
Research Projects
European Commission, 810356
Sponsorship and Funder Information
This article was published Open Access with the support from the EUI Library through the CRUI - CUP Transformative Agreement (2023-2025). The data were collected for the SOLID research project (“Policy Crisis and Crisis Politics, Sovereignty, Solidarity and Identity in the EU Post-2008”) financed by EU Grant Agreement 810356 – ERC-2018-SyG (SOLID).