Participation of Civil Society Organisations and Academia in COVID-19 Governance: Insights from a Six Country Study

Clicks: 1
ID: 313446
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #54 of 66 articles by views in Health policy and planning

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
This paper focuses on the engagement of persons and groups with diverse interests in the governance of the COVID-19 pandemic. During emergencies, involving diverse perspectives in governance mechanisms can contribute to more equitable and evidence-based policies that address societal needs. Previous literature shows that, even with the intent to include diverse perspectives , there can be gaps in engaging non-governmental entities in epidemic governance. This study sought to analyze participation of two important interest groups: academia and civil society organisations (CSOs) during the COVID-19 response, to identify best practices and strategies for enhancing their roles in future health crisis governance. We adopted a comparative case study design to collect data from six countries: Nigeria, Singapore, South Africa, Bangladesh, Jordan, and the United Kingdom, representing varied political and economic contexts, geographic locations, and response strategies during the pandemic. Data sources included key informant interviews and focus group discussions with a total of 64 stakeholders, including government officials, academic experts, and personnel from CSOs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, CSOs actively participated in response efforts, but in the six countries we analyzed, they largely did so independently of the government, particularly during the initial response phase. In some countries, governments involved CSOs only after reports of clusters of new transmission, primarily for risk communication and service delivery like vaccine distribution, without involving them in governance mechanisms like making pandemic preparedness and response policies. Other governments worked with public universities to gather evidence for decision-making and policy formulation starting from the pre-pandemic phase to the initial phase of the pandemic. Across disciplines, experts in epidemiology, mathematical modelling and infectious diseases were more likely to be consulted, whereas economists, sociologists, ethicists and anthropologists were less involved.
Reference Key
openalex_W7161387520 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Sumegha Asthana, 林柔嘉, Sanjana Mukherjee, Alexandra Phelan, Ibrahim Bola Gobir, J J Woo, Clare Wenham, Mohammad Mushtuq Husain, Tahmina Shirin, Nevashan Govender, M. Al Nsour, Winifred Ukponu, Adachioma C Ihueze, Sumit Asthana, Renee Vongai Mutare, Claire J. Standley
Journal Health policy and planning
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/heapol/czag063
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.