Global Diffusion of COVID-19 Policies: The Role of Geographic, Institutional, and Cultural Cues

by Brian Y. An, Simon Porcher, & Shui-Yan Tang

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, governments worldwide have grappled with the adoption of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), offering a unique opportunity to study policy diffusion dynamics. As the pandemic unfolded globally, leaders were faced with the dual challenges of responding to the pace of disease development while navigating socio-economic circumstances unique to their countries. With limited international coordination, each nation independently established its policy approaches, making the study of horizontal diffusion within global governance feasible. 

This study seeks to address critical questions regarding the diffusion of COVID-19 policies:

  1. Do government leaders draw cues from other countries’ policy behaviors?
  2. If so, which countries do they benchmark their policymaking against in terms of geographic, cultural, and institutional similarities?
  3. How do these diffusion dynamics evolve over time, and do certain cues become more prominent as policy learning progresses?

By analyzing worldwide government responses from January 1, 2020, to June 1, 2021, this study employs event history and time fixed-effects ordered logistic regression models. The analysis focuses on nine universal NPIs, including domestic lockdowns, travel bans, and mask mandates. The findings suggest that leaders indeed draw policy cues from geographic, cultural, and institutional peers, with significant temporal nuances. While geographic and institutional influences wane over time, cultural cues become increasingly prominent in shaping policy adoptions.

These empirical findings offer novel insights into policy diffusion dynamics during crises. The study reaffirms the relevance of geographic clustering in policy adoption, although its influence diminishes over time as more information becomes available. Similarly, the declining role of institutional proximity highlights the evolving nature of policy learning. Notably, the growing influence of cultural cues underscores the significance of cultural considerations in crisis management policymaking. This finding emphasizes the importance of policy-culture fit, where successful interventions are closely linked to public cooperation and compliance.

In conclusion, the study sheds light on the dynamic processes of global policy diffusion during the COVID-19 pandemic. By unraveling the evolving role of geographic, cultural, and institutional similarities, it offers valuable insights for policymakers and practitioners. Understanding these dynamics is essential for effective crisis management and policy design in an interconnected world.

You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at 

An, Brian Y., Simon Porcher and Shui-Yan Tang. 2024. “ Global Diffusion of COVID-19 Policies: The Role of Geographic, Institutional, and Cultural Cues.” Policy Studies Journal 52(1): 169–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12514.

About the Authors

Brian An is an assistant professor, Director of Master of Science in Public Policy (MSPP) program, and Co-Director of Center for Urban Research in the School of Public Policy at Georgia Institute of Technology.



Dr. Simon Porcher is a full professor of Strategy and Public Management at Université Paris Panthéon-Assas. He studies how cross-sector partnerships create value and respond to grand challenges.

Check out his personal website here: https://sites.google.com/site/simporcher/?pli=1

Shui-Yan Tang is Frances R. and John J. Duggan Professor of Public Administration and Chair of the Department of Public Policy and Management in Sol Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California.


Drivers of (In)equity in Collaborative Environmental Governance

by Kristin Babson Dobbin

In recent decades, collaborative governance has reshaped environmental policy by encouraging horizontal cooperation among stakeholders in an effort to create more mutually beneficial, locally appropriate policies. However, despite its potential advantages, there is a lack of empirical evaluation of the approach, particularly regarding equity. Our study focuses on California’s groundwater management overhaul, known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), to examine the conditions under which equity is or is not promoted in collaborative processes.

The chronic groundwater management challenges in California, especially in the San Joaquin Valley, contribute to the state’s widespread drinking water inequities disproportionately affecting low-income rural communities. The severe drought from 2012 to 2016 exacerbated these issues, leading to the implementation of SGMA. Under SGMA, local agencies formed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater and develop Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) addressing undesirable groundwater outcomes. Our study analyzes GSPs in critically overdrafted basins to assess their impact on vulnerable drinking water users and environmental justice communities.

We derive five hypotheses for factors influencing equity in collaborative governance derived from the existing literature— the extent of collaboration, representation, elite capture, stakeholder engagement, and problem severity/salience. We then test these hypotheses using Boosted Regression and Classification Trees (BRCT) comparing results across three models, each with a distinct measure of drinking water equity used as the dependent variable. 

Across all three models, our results support the hypotheses, underscoring the importance of collaboration, representation, elite capture, stakeholder engagement, and problem severity/salience in influencing the distribution of benefits, costs, and risks for vulnerable drinking water users in groundwater plans(see Figure 1). Nonetheless, the raw change in the dependent variables associated with these factors is in most cases quite limited. For example, when moving from zero to eighty percent representation for drinking water users on the GSA board of directors, we only predict a six-percentage point increase in environmental justice rubric score from 40.65 to 46.60. Thus, we assert additional interventions beyond the scope of the factors studied herein are likely essential if we are to increase social equity in decentralized collaborative decision making. 

Comparing the influence of these five factors within and among the models lends additional important insights. Among them, our findings suggest that it might be easier to improve equity in the distribution of collaborative governance benefits than in the distribution of risks or burdens. Also notable is that across equity measures, representation in decision-making roles is consistently more influential than traditional stakeholder engagement. Finally,  given that many of the estimated associations are nonlinear, our findings underscore the importance of addressing threshold effects and optima, rather than presence or absence, when seeking to advance specific collaborative outcomes.

Future research should focus on a nuanced understanding of local institutional design as well as the potential role of external linkages with outside organizations given that some research indicates they may increase accountability. Such work can help us understand the potential and limits of collaborative governance for ensuring positive environmental outcomes for all.

You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at

Dobbin, Kristin Babson, Kuo, Michael, Lubell, Mark, Bostic, Darcy, Mendoza, Jessica, and Echeveste, Ernest 2023. “ Drivers of (in)equity in collaborative environmental governance”. Policy Studies Journal 51, 375–395. https://doi-org.echo.louisville.edu/10.1111/psj.12483

About the Authors

Kristin Dobbin (she/her) is an assistant professor of cooperative extension in water justice policy and planning at UC Berkeley in the Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management. Her work focuses on understanding the causes of, and solutions to, drinking water inequities in California. Kristin holds a PhD from the University of California Davis and was a NSF Social, Behavior and Economic Sciences postdoctoral fellow at UCLA.