The securitization of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, Asia, and Oceania: Mixes of imbalanced securitizing narratives and measures

Dionysios Stivas*, Krzysztof Sliwinski

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Abstract

Governments across the world resorted to different forms of narratives and measures to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. This study observed the responses of six administrations (China, Sweden, UK, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and New Zealand) through the lenses of the securitization theory as complemented with tailor-made methodological tools. Introducing the concept of the ‘securitization gap’ between the securitizing narratives’ intensity and the securitizing measures’ stringency this study argues that a consistency between the rhetoric’s intensity and measures’ severity did not impact the governments’ capacity to manage the COVID-19 outbreak. Further, this study finds a relation between the stringency of the securitizing measures and the management of COVID-19. Administrations that resorted to severe forms of securitization managed to spare more lives from the virus than administrations that did not enforce stringent securitizing tactics. Lastly, this study argues that the agreement of the general public with the securitizing narratives and the securitizing measures did not drastically influence the COVID-19 fatalities in the concerned case studies.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages19
JournalStosunki Miedzynarodowe - International Relations
Volume3
Issue number16
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 21 Nov 2023

Scopus Subject Areas

  • Political Science and International Relations

User-Defined Keywords

  • COVID-19
  • Securitization
  • Pandemic
  • Health Policy
  • Narratives

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The securitization of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, Asia, and Oceania: Mixes of imbalanced securitizing narratives and measures'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this