Cited by 37Public Administration and Political AnalysisPublic Policy and Administration ResearchDisaster Management and Resilience

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Public governance, agility and pandemics: a case study of the UK response to COVID-19

Open access
Joyce, Paul·2021·International Review of Administrative Sciences

Abstract

The UK government’s leaders initially believed that it was among the best-prepared governments for a pandemic. By June 2020, the outcome of the collision between the government’s initial confidence, on the one hand, and the aggressiveness and virulence of COVID-19, on the other, was evident. The UK had one of the worst COVID-19 mortality rates in the world. This article explores the UK government’s response to COVID-19 from a public administration and governance perspective. Using factual information and statistical data, it considers the government’s preparedness and strategic decisions, the delivery of the government response, and public confidence in the government. Points for practitioners Possible lessons for testing through application include: Use the precautionary principle to set planning assumptions in government strategies to create the possibility of government agility during a pandemic. Use central government’s leadership role to facilitate and enable local initiative and operational responses, as well as to take advantage of local resources and assets. Choose smart government responses that address tensions between the goal of saving lives and other government goals, and beware choices that are unsatisfactory compromises.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0020852320983406

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 6 · Cited by 37

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Baubion C, 2013, OECD Risk Management: Strategic Crisis Management
  2. Calvert J, Arbuthnott G, Leake J (2020) Coronavirus: 38 days when Britain sleepwalked into disaster. Available at: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/coronavirus-38-days-when-britain-sleepwalked-into-disaster-hq3b9tlgh (accessed 19 April 2020).
  3. Johnson B (2020a) PM statement at coronavirus press conference: 3 March 2020. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-at-coronavirus-press-conference-3-march-2020 (accessed 18 April 2020).

Metadata

Authors
Joyce, P.
Affiliations
University of Birmingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Joyce, Paul
Venue
International Review of Administrative Sciences
Published
2021-01-14
Volume
87
Issue
3
Pages
536-555
ISSN
  • 0020-8523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7226
OpenAlex
W3120368504
Cited by
37
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4
FWCI
27.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Review of Administrative Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Cairn.info (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Public Administration and Political Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, public governance, UK government response, pandemic preparedness, precautionary principle, central-local government relations, public trust in government, strategic decision-making, COVID-19 mortality, public administration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Public governance, agility and pandemics: a case study of the UK response to COVID-19. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0020852320983406
The paper
Joyce, P. (2021). Public governance, agility and pandemics: a case study of the UK response to COVID-19. International Review of Administrative Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852320983406