The Fragmented Nature of Pandemic Decision-making

Pandemic Decision-making

Gruppe 173Pfad 131Gruppe 174Pfad 132Gruppe 175Pfad 133Gruppe 176Pfad 134Gruppe 177Pfad 135Gruppe 178Pfad 136Gruppe 179Pfad 137Gruppe 180Pfad 138Gruppe 181Pfad 139Gruppe 182Pfad 140Gruppe 183Pfad 141Gruppe 184Pfad 142Gruppe 185Pfad 143Gruppe 186Pfad 144Gruppe 187Pfad 145Gruppe 188Pfad 146Gruppe 189Pfad 147Gruppe 190Pfad 148Gruppe 191Pfad 149Gruppe 192Pfad 150Gruppe 193Pfad 151Gruppe 194Pfad 152Gruppe 195Pfad 153Gruppe 196Pfad 154Gruppe 197Pfad 155Gruppe 198Pfad 156Gruppe 199Pfad 157Gruppe 200Pfad 158Gruppe 201Pfad 159Gruppe 202Pfad 160Gruppe 203Pfad 161Gruppe 204Pfad 162Gruppe 205Pfad 163Gruppe 206Pfad 164Gruppe 207Pfad 165Gruppe 208Pfad 166Gruppe 209Pfad 167Gruppe 210Pfad 168Gruppe 211Pfad 169Gruppe 212Pfad 170Gruppe 213Pfad 171Gruppe 214Pfad 172Gruppe 215Pfad 173Gruppe 216Pfad 174Gruppe 217Pfad 175Gruppe 218Pfad 176Gruppe 219Pfad 177Gruppe 220Pfad 178Gruppe 221Pfad 179Gruppe 222Pfad 180Gruppe 223Pfad 181Gruppe 224Pfad 182Gruppe 225Pfad 183Gruppe 226Pfad 184Gruppe 227Pfad 185Gruppe 228Pfad 186Gruppe 229Pfad 187Gruppe 230Pfad 188Gruppe 231Pfad 189Gruppe 232Pfad 190Gruppe 233Pfad 191Gruppe 234Pfad 192Gruppe 235Pfad 193Gruppe 236Pfad 194 Gruppe 271Pfad 224Gruppe 256Pfad 209Gruppe 257Pfad 210Gruppe 258Pfad 211Gruppe 259Pfad 212Gruppe 260Pfad 213Gruppe 261Pfad 214Gruppe 262Pfad 215Gruppe 263Pfad 216Gruppe 264Pfad 217Gruppe 265Pfad 218Gruppe 266Pfad 219Gruppe 267Pfad 220Gruppe 268Pfad 221Gruppe 269Pfad 222Gruppe 270Pfad 223

The Fragmented Nature of Pandemic Decision-making: Comparative and Multilevel Legal Analysis

The unfolding of the COVID-19 pandemic sheds light on the role that multiple legal instruments play during such events, whether at the international, regional-European, or national levels. Countries the world over have been confronted with the pandemic’s impact on all aspects of their societies and they face the corresponding challenge of responding within the aegis of their respective legal systems. While the need for international coordination has only increased, a variety of legal issues have also arisen distinctly depending on the national setting. It is against this background that the current project aims to assume a simultaneously comparative and multilevel perspective to evaluate the different layers of pandemic decision-making.

One such example is provided by the legal underpinnings of the information-sharing system of disease surveillance. The system is defined by an overlap of public international law (managed by the World Health Organization), European law (focused on the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control), and national comparative constitutional and administrative law (regarding the collection and dissemination of epidemiological data by public authorities).

Furthermore, the adoption of restrictive public health measures, such as individual or community-level quarantines (a.k.a. lockdowns), will also be dependent on the public law framework of any given country. Particularly, the distribution of powers in the field of healthcare (and public health more generally) plays a crucial role in determining which institutions will make specific decisions and under what legal basis. In a similar vein, a closer look at the social law components shaping the provision of healthcare services illustrates how access to them may be guaranteed. Similarly, other areas of the law at stake during the COVID-19 pandemic warrant a multilevel and comparative analysis. How a nation regulates and promotes innovation will impact the emergence of medical technologies that can respond to the spread of the disease. The debate on how law tackles the ethical concerns that are raised by the development of new technologies has been reinvigorated. This includes concerns on the potential for the invasion of individuals’ privacy and the risk of misuse, as well as the tragic choices that are associated with the allocation of scarce resources.

The current project aims to explore all of these dimensions, as well as others which may also be relevant for the assessment of decision-making in times of pandemic within the framework of the rule of law. Ultimately, the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic cannot be overcome by remaining within “silo thinking”, including in the legal field. An integrative legal approach, involving several perspectives is patently necessary.


Dr Pedro Villarreal

Irene Domenici

This project ended with publication of a special issue of the European Journal of Health Law, see: Volume 29 (2022): Issue 1 (Mar 2022).