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 accessAbstract
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Joyce (2021) points to the numerous concerns raised by elected mayors and local government leaders, and to the partial and deteriorating engagement with the devolved nations in decision making as it became less and less meaningful as the nature of the risk changed.”
From Risk Governance, State Capacity, and Critical Human Security: Evolution of Risk Governance in Response to Systemic Risk in the UK and South Korea (2025) · cites this paper as Joyce (2021)
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 6 · Cited by 37
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Baubion C, 2013, OECD Risk Management: Strategic Crisis Management
- 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).
- 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
- ORCID
- Joyce, Paul
- Venue
- International Review of Administrative Sciences
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- 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
- hybrid
- doi.org
- 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