[ad_1]
In June-December last year, researchers from the Institute of International Relations and Political Sciences (VU TSPMI) of Vilnius University implemented the scientific project “Response of Lithuania and other EU Member States to the COVID-19 pandemic: impact in public policies and emergency management ”.
During the study, 25 interviews were conducted with state and municipal politicians and other members of the public. According to the researchers who worked on the project, one of the main problems in managing the pandemic was the lack of an impartial and objective assessment of the situation.
“It just came to our attention then. It was a complex and confusing public health crisis that had far-reaching effects on the economy. The lack of information and the high risk to public health demanded quick and innovative solutions.
In terms of crisis management, it was a progressive or long-lasting crisis ”, summarizes Vitalis Nakrošis, head of research, the situation in recent years.
Lithuania has made a strong start to crisis management
According to data collected by researchers, Lithuania was one of the first in the world to tighten and release the quarantine. The countries that coped best with the first wave, including Lithuania, loosened their bans in the summer and relaxed as much as possible the excessive reliance on their own forces and undermined preparations for the fall.
“There may have been too much assurance that I was not well prepared for the second wave. {…} Even with the best data and analysis, there will always be some uncertainty, uncertainty. One of the biggest dangers is calming down, thinking that already we know how to manage things, when in reality the world presents all kinds of surprises and shows that many times we are overly confident in our abilities, “summarized Dr. Vytautas Kuokštis.
However, statistics show that the situation was similar in all countries that introduced tighter restrictions during the first wave of the pandemic and had fewer patients.
According to scientists, crisis management in Lithuania lacked the flexibility of politicians and the ability to adapt to the situation. It is said that while the political leadership was good at the start of the pandemic, it eventually deteriorated, and the politicians leading the crisis management gradually lost the public’s trust.
The knowledge gathered during the interviews with the researchers also shows that there was a lack of participation of health systems experts to inform the public about the situation and of the participation of non-governmental organizations in solving the consequences of the pandemic.
According to V. Kuokštis, the question of the influence of the elections to the Seimas on the management of the pandemic was also raised. Opinions differ here.
“We cannot unequivocally state that the Seimas elections had an impact on liberalization or subsequent tightening. Such an opinion was expressed during interviews, but other interviewees disagreed.
It is true that the Seimas elections could have had an impact, because simply the priorities were different, less attention was paid to the preparation for the second wave ”, said the researcher.
The economic stimulus policies have also been criticized
As with the restrictions, Lithuania was one of the first in Europe to announce an economic stimulus package in the spring. However, according to the researchers, the economic decisions were not entirely correct: there was a lack of consultation with the companies and the aid measures were not well thought out.
“In other words, don’t think about saving, borrow, if necessary, to support businesses, jobs, people’s incomes until the crisis is managed and the infection curve flattens.
Respond to the situation quickly and manage expectations so that there is no panic or pessimism ”, the economic crisis management recommendations were provided by VU TSPMI prof. Ramūnas Vilpišauskas.
R. Vilpišauskas also highlighted the fact that, despite the problems, during the autumn Lithuania was almost the best country in the European Union to cope with the financial crisis. The most effective measures taken by the state are tax deferral, small business support, downtime compensation, and disability benefits.
“It was probably more learning from my own experience, influenced by trial and error. What needs to be emphasized was learned mainly by officials at the political level, ”said R. Vilpišauskas.
In their review, the researchers also make 12 recommendations to politicians, ranging from civil service reform to greater involvement of experts.
“The issue of strengthening resilience in the public administration system is mainly on the new government’s agenda. {…} It is very important to reflect on the experience of crisis management, since its management is not usually carried out according to a prior plan and established procedures. Therefore, once the Covid-19 epidemic is over, it would be very convenient to carry out an effective evaluation, during which the most important achievements and errors could be identified, ”recommended V. Nakrošis, director of the study.
You can view the full study summary at tspmi.vu.lt.
[ad_2]
