📌 Why Some Departments Contained COVID-19 Better
Why did some Bolivian departments manage COVID-19 more successfully than others? This study argues that low government legitimacy undermines coordinated responses to national crises—especially where political polarization politicizes the response. Low legitimacy also magnifies existing challenges such as poverty and weak infrastructure, making effective implementation and compliance more difficult.
📊 What Was Measured and Compared
- Daily observations of subnational coronavirus policy across Bolivian departments
- Cell phone mobility data to track population movement and de facto compliance
- Administrative records on COVID-19 cases and deaths
🔬 Research Design and Key Variables
- Political alignment of departments relative to the president was used to assess the degree of local–national coordination
- Policy implementation, citizen mobility, and protest activity were tracked over time to link political divisions with on-the-ground behavior
📈 Key Findings
- Political divisions shaped both governors’ policy choices and citizens’ behavior.
- Departments that opposed the president were more likely to diverge from the stricter national policy; these departments also experienced higher mobility and greater protest activity.
- Departments aligned with the president were more likely to mirror national policy and saw longer periods of citizen compliance with quarantine and restrictions.
- Low legitimacy intensified the effects of poverty and poor infrastructure, further hampering coordinated crisis response when the pandemic was politicized.
⚖️ Why This Matters
These findings show that legitimacy and partisan alignment at the subnational level can determine the effectiveness of national crisis policies. For policymakers and scholars, the results highlight that building trust and depoliticizing emergency responses are central to achieving coordinated public-health outcomes.
