dc.contributor.author | TASSINARI, Fabrizio | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-11-26T09:50:57Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-11-26T09:50:57Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1814/68999 | |
dc.description | Published online November 12, 2020 | en |
dc.description.abstract | When a cataclysmic crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic struck, one might assume that each of the Nordic countries would be equally well prepared to respond effectively. On this latter count, however, the evidence so far is confounding: Neighbors such as Sweden and Denmark took drastically different approaches to their coronavirus responses, with a quest for herd immunity in the former case and draconian lockdowns in the latter case. Supposedly very close in their underlying social and political structures, and making decisions on the basis of evidence, science and rigorous public management, Sweden and Denmark nonetheless adopted wildly divergent responses. | |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | Berggruen Institute | en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Noema Magazine Article | en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | 2020 | en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | [STG] | en |
dc.relation.uri | https://www.noemamag.com/a-tale-of-two-pandemics/ | en |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | en |
dc.subject | Covid-19 | en |
dc.subject | Coronavirus | en |
dc.title | A tale of two pandemics : the Nordic response to COVID-19 reveals a dark side of consensus politics | en |
dc.type | Other | en |