新冠肺炎與民主國家清零的防疫政策：紐西蘭與澳洲的分析

The Zero-COVID Approach under Democracy: Analysis of New Zealand, Australia

獅安德(Andreas Loew)

指導教授 ： 張佑宗

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/政治學研究所/碩士(2022年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU202200505

摘要

本篇論文分析國家在新冠肺炎危機下的高級政策戰略。分析框架分別三種類的大規模防疫戰略，放手政策，遏制政策與清零政策。國家的策略選擇的自由被兩個方面限制，即國家的廣義國家能力與邊境管理能力。以此兩個因素為出發點，便可以建立一個根據所謂選擇集為單位的２ｘ２類型，而按照這類型進行比較分析。

接下來，本文主張重建選擇者在關鍵時刻面對的情況爲了瞭解決策結果。此重建包括事情發生的時間點，順序與背景。在兩個個案研究裏的重建依賴選擇者在公共平臺的發表。表示疫情的嚴重度與人民的行爲反應的時間序列數據進一步補充重建。

個案研究包括紐西蘭與澳洲。兩個案子一開始都選擇清零政策，但是他們的不同政府制度還是關鍵的干預變量。紐西蘭是單一政府，政策戰略一律也是被中央政府決定，而澳洲才是聯邦政府，關鍵的抉擇者倒是州政府。接下來，Ｄｅｌｔａ變異株的出現與快速增加的疫苗率改變情況，使得兩個國家放棄清零政策，但是政府制度的因素仍然發揮效果，仍然導致不同的出口路綫。

關鍵字

比較政治 ； 決策分析 ； 新冠肺炎 ； 清零政策 ； 澳洲 ； 紐西蘭 ； 聯邦制度

並列摘要

This thesis analyzes countries’ high level public policy response strategies to the COVID-19 crisis. The analytical framework distinguishes between three categories of response strategies, “hands-off”, “containment”, and “zero-COVID”. It then argues that the feasibility of policy responses was constrained along two structural dimensions, general state capacity and border control capacity. This results in the suggestion that a 2×2 typology may be gainfully employed for organizing comparative inquiry into responses.

Next it is argued that “critical juncture” decision making situations may have strongly codified patterns of response strategies. Analysis of the decision making situation is based on a reconstruction of timing, sequence and context via time-series epidemiological and behavioral data as well as public statements of decision makers.

Two democratic zero-COVID cases are analyzed, New Zealand and Australia. Both countries converged on a zero-COVID approach, although via different pathways. The unitary top-down response in New Zealand stands in sharp contrast with a bottom-up, fragmented response in the federation of the Australian Commonwealth. Divergence was also observed in the exit pattern, once the arrival of the delta variant and increasing population vaccination rates made the zero-COVID response more and more unfeasible in democratic settings.

並列關鍵字

Policy Making Analysis ； COVID-19 ； Australia ； New Zealand ； Zero-COVID ； Federalism

參考文獻

Abbey, Enoch J., et al. 2020. “The Global Health Security Index is not predictive of coronavirus pandemic responses among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries.” PloS one 15(10): e0239398.

Bermeo, Nancy and Larry Bartels. 2014. Mass politics in tough times: opinions, votes and protest in the Great Recession. Oxford University Press.

Billah, Arif, Mamun Miah, and Nuruzzaman Khan. 2020. “Reproductive number of coronavirus: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on global level evidence.” PloS one 15(11): e0242128.

Brooks, Eleanor, Anniek de Ruijter, and Scott L. Greer. 2021. “The European Union Confronts COVID-19: Another European Rescue of the Nation State?” In Coronavirus Politics, eds. Scott L. Greer. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan University Press, 235-248.

Coppedge, Michael. 1999. “Thickening thin concepts and theories: combining large N and small in comparative politics.” Comparative Politics 31(4): 465-476.