During the COVID-19 pandemic, governments worldwide confronted a monumental challenge: balancing the imperative of infection control with the equally critical need to sustain economic stability. This balancing act, complex and fraught with trade-offs, differed significantly across countries influenced by diverse approaches to public health interventions, vaccination strategies, and socioeconomic policies. A recent study by Professor Hiroaki Masuhara of Shinshu University and Professor Kei Hosoya of Kokugakuin University provides an in-depth comparative analysis of these dynamics, revealing crucial insights into how varying attitudes towards risk and patience shaped pandemic outcomes.
The research focuses on OECD member countries alongside Singapore and Taiwan, spanning from the outbreak’s early days in 2020 through to the end of 2022. By analyzing temporal data on COVID-19 mortality, vaccination rollout, production, and consumption metrics, the study sheds light on the multifaceted nature of government responses and societal resilience in the face of unprecedented disruption. Intriguingly, the data underscores that infection control was rarely sustained long-term; initial successes in some regions often diminished, illustrating the viral resilience and evolving public health challenges.
One of the most striking findings is the stark disparity in mortality outcomes. Eastern European countries and the United Kingdom exhibited persistently high death rates throughout the pandemic period, attributed in part to lower public trust and heterogeneous policy implementations. Conversely, countries like Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan maintained relatively low fatality rates during the pandemic’s first year, a feat linked to earlier and stricter social distancing mandates and higher compliance levels within their populations. However, by 2022, mortality in these countries rose substantially, reflecting challenges in sustaining stringent infection control measures over extended periods.
Economic ramifications of the pandemic responses were profound and uneven. The suppression of viral transmission was largely achieved through stay-at-home orders, business closures, and mobility restrictions, which corresponded with significant contractions in production and consumption across nearly all countries studied. Notably, with exceptions such as Norway, Finland, and Israel, the majority experienced economic downturns, emphasizing the inherent tension between controlling the pandemic and preserving economic vitality. These economic declines had far-reaching implications, impacting employment, supply chains, and consumer confidence and raising critical questions about the sustainability of such interventions.
The interplay between societal risk attitudes and pandemic outcomes emerges as a crucial analytical lens in the study. Countries characterized by higher levels of patience and risk aversion — notably the Nordic nations and many Pacific Rim countries — demonstrated more effective synchronization of health and economic objectives. High public trust in government policies further complemented these risk preferences, enabling more cohesive adherence to public health directives and concerted efforts to stabilize economies. This behavioral dimension underscores the importance of cultural and psychological factors in pandemic governance.
In contrast, the United States presents a complex case of relatively low patience coupled with elevated risk tolerance. This profile corresponded with comparatively higher mortality rates but a more rapid economic reopening process, featuring a steady recovery in production and consumption metrics. The U.S. model illustrates the trade-offs inherent in risk acceptance, and the study highlights how such behavioral factors can modulate the trajectory of both the pandemic and economic revival, revealing that health and economic priorities are often inversely related in policy execution.
Japan’s scenario further illustrates the nuanced effects of societal attitudes on recovery dynamics. Despite notable risk aversion and generally low confidence levels, Japan experienced weaker economic revival patterns relative to its risk-tolerant counterparts. The research suggests that while risk aversion contributed to limiting exposure to the virus, it also slowed normalization of economic activities, highlighting a potentially double-edged effect of cautious public behavior on societal recovery.
Professor Masuhara emphasizes the necessity of tailoring public health and economic policies to the heterogeneous time preferences and risk attitudes inherent within different populations. By recognizing and integrating these behavioral variables, governments can design more adaptive and effective interventions that optimize outcomes across both health and economic dimensions. These insights advocate for a more nuanced, culturally sensitive framework in pandemic preparedness and response strategies, moving beyond one-size-fits-all solutions.
Furthermore, the influence of neighboring countries and geopolitical contexts plays a salient role in shaping national responses. Cross-border contagion risks and policy diffusion effects mean that pandemic management cannot be isolated within individual countries. Regional cooperation and harmonization of measures are vital to mitigating spillover effects and sustaining collective resilience, suggesting that future frameworks must incorporate multilateral considerations into their design.
Behavioral economics emerges as a pivotal field in understanding and predicting pandemic trajectories. The study leverages data/statistical analysis to quantify how patience, trust, and risk tolerance variables tangibly influence mortality and economic indicators, reinforcing the significance of psychosocial factors alongside traditional epidemiological and economic models. This synthesis offers a promising direction for integrating interdisciplinary insights into public health policymaking.
The study’s temporal focus from 2020 through 2022 provides a comprehensive view of pandemic evolution, highlighting the transition from emergency response to recovery phases. Importantly, it conveys that initial gains in infection control are fragile and susceptible to erosion without sustained public cooperation and policy calibration. Economic recovery, while achievable, requires navigating social complexities and endemic viral presence, indicating that future pandemic strategies must balance vigilance with flexibility.
Reflecting on the future, Prof. Masuhara advocates for informed social defense mechanisms grounded in public understanding of time preferences and behavioral tendencies. Such an adaptive social contract, incorporating voluntary behavioral changes and trust-building, can complement formal governmental interventions. This dual approach promises enhanced societal robustness against emerging infectious diseases.
In conclusion, this cross-country analysis elucidates the interdependent challenges of managing public health and economic welfare amid a global pandemic. By illuminating the critical roles of behavioral attitudes, trust, and risk tolerance, the study offers actionable insights for policymakers and stakeholders aiming to craft resilient, responsive systems. As the global community prepares for future pandemics, integrating these multifaceted lessons will be indispensable for safeguarding both lives and livelihoods on a planetary scale.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Which countries performed better in the COVID-19 pandemic? Lessons from and for governments
News Publication Date: 7-Aug-2025
Web References: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2025.05.008
Image Credits: Professor Hiroaki Masuhara from Shinshu University and Professor Kei Hosoya from Kokugakuin University, Japan
Keywords: COVID 19, Vaccination, Behavioral economics, Human mobility, Macroeconomics
