Communicative interaction between the public and the government authorities in the conditions of the pandemic: analysis of challenges and opportunities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51599/is.2022.06.03.07Keywords:
COVID-19, communication, public organizations, digital tools, quarantine restrictions.Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of the study is to identify the main trends of communication changes at the level of public organizations that have arisen as a result of the pandemic, as well as to identify their impact on democratization in Ukraine.
Results. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant changes in communication processes around the world. Quarantine restrictions have acted as additional unfavorable factors, exacerbating the already unstable political dialogue between countries. The pandemic has raised many questions concerning the restriction of citizens’ rights and freedoms due to the quarantine measures. But at the same time, it is the substandard situation, the solution that the world had not found before, that has united the society, focused attention on vulnerable groups of the population, intensified volunteering, cross-sectoral support and interaction, united civil society institutions, and developed distance communication. The article focuses on the study of regional public organizations, namely their experience in communicative interaction in the conditions of the pandemic. This made it possible to define and characterize the main functions of public organizations in the region under modern challenges. The main areas that are subject to changes in the communication processes of public organizations are outlined. The ways to improve cooperation between authorities and public organizations are defined.
Scientific novelty. The necessity of using digital tools by members of public organizations in the region to communicate with each other and outside the organization was proved.
Practical value. Based on the conducted research, the main advantages and disadvantages of communication between the public and the authorities were established, as well as new opportunities for organizing work during the COVID-19 pandemic were proposed.
References
Repucci, S., & Slipowitz, A. (2020). The freedom house survey for 2020: Democracy in a Year of Crisis. Journal of Democracy, 32(2), 45–60.
Freedom House Survey (2020). Available at: https://freedomhouse.org/issues/democracies-decline.
Karabulut, G., Zimmermann, K. F., & Cansin Dokerf, A. C. (2021). Democracy and COVID-19 outcomes. Economics Letters, 203, 109840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2021.109840.
International IDEA (2021). Global overview of COVID-19: Impact on elections. Available at: https://www.idea.int/news-media/multimedia-reports/global-overview-covid-19-impact-elections.
Engler, S., Brunner, P., Loviat, R., Abou-Chadi, T., Leemann, L., Glaser, A., & Kübler, D. (2021). Democracy in times of the pandemic: explaining the variation of COVID-19 policies across European democracies. West European Politics 44(5-6), 1077–1102. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2021.1900669.
Wang, C., Wang, Z., & Wang, G., Yiu-Nam Lau, Y., Zhang, K., & Li, W. (2021). COVID-19 in early 2021: current status and looking forward. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, 6, 114. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-021-00527-1
Harris, Ph., & Moss, D (2020). Covid, pandemics, plague and public affairs: lessons from history. Journal of Public Affairs, 20(4), e2548. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2548.
Zarzycka, E., Krasodomska, J., Mazurczak-Mąka, A., Turek-Radwan, M., & Jin, H. (2021) Distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: students’ communication and collaboration and the role of social media. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 8(1), 1953228. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2021.1953228.
Varghese, N. E., Sabat, I., Neumann-Böhme, S., Schreyögg, J., Stargardt, T., Torbica, A., van Exel, J., … & Brouwer, W. (2021). Risk communication during COVID-19: a descriptive study on familiarity with, adherence to and trust in the WHO preventive measures. PLoS ONE, 16(4), e0250872. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250872.
Ratzan, S. C., Sommariva, S., & Rauh, L. (2020). Enhancing global health communication during a crisis: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Public Health Research and Practice, 30(2), e3022010. https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp3022010.
Zarocostas, J. (2020). How to fight an infodemic. The Lancet, 395(10225), 676. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30461-X.
Tunçgenç, B., El Zein, M., Sulik, J., Newson, M., Zhao, Y., Dezecache, G., & Deroy, O. (2021). Social influence matters: we follow pandemic guidelines most when our close circle does. British Journal of Psychology, 112(3), 763–780. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12491.
Fetzer, T. R., Witte, M., Hensel, L., Jachimowicz, J., Haushofer, J., Ivchenko, A., Caria, S., … & Yoeli, E. (2020). Global behaviors and perceptions at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. NBER Working Paper No. 27082. Available at: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w27082/w27082.pdf.
Sjölander-Lindqvist, A., Simon Larsson, S., Fava, N., Gillberg, N., Marcianò, C., & Cinque, S. (2020). Communicating About COVID-19 in Four European Countries: Similarities and Differences in National Discourses in Germany, Italy, Spain, and Sweden. Frontiers in Communication, 5, 593325. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2020.593325.
Sjölander-Lindqvist, A., Risvoll, C., Kaarhus, R., Lundberg, A. K., & Sandström, C. (2020). Knowledge claims and struggles in decentralized large carnivore governance: insights from Norway and Sweden. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 8,120. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2020.00120.
Kharroubi, S., & Saleh, F. (2020). Are Lockdown Measures Effective Against COVID-19? Frontiers in Public Health, 8, 549692. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.549692.
Maserat, E., Jafari, F., Mohammadzadeh, Z., Alizadeh, M., & Torkamannia, A. (2020) COVID-19 & an NGO and university developed interactive portal: a perspective from Iran. Health Technology Assessment, 10, 1421–1426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553-020-00470-1.
Alizadeh, M., Abbasi, M., Bashirivand, N., Mojtahed, A., & Karimi, S. E. (2020). Nongovernmental organizations and social aspects of COVID-19 pandemic: a successful experience in health policy. Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 34(1), 1180–1183. https://doi.org/10.47176/mjiri.34.170.
Abd Samat, A. H., Abdul Rashid, A., Mohd Yunus, N. A., Salim, A. M. H., & Musa, H. A. (2021). Malaysian medical non-governmental organization’s (NGO) experience in the emergency response for COVID-19, using the whole-of-society collaborative concept. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 1–4. https:// doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2021.106
Md Shah, A. U., Safri, S. N. A., Thevadas, R., Noordin, N. K., Rahman, A. A., Sekawi, Z., Ideris, A., & Hameed Sultan, M. T. (2020). COVID-19 outbreak in Malaysia: actions taken by the Malaysian government. International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 97, 108–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.05.093.
Kucheriv, I. (2020). Civil society during the pandemic: how it affected civic activism. Available at: https://dif.org.ua/article/gromadyanske-suspilstvo-v-period-pandemii-yak-vona-vplinula-na-gromadsku-aktivnist.
Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine (2020). State Strategy of Regional Development for 2021–2027. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/695-2020-%D0%BF#Text.
Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine (2021). Draft “National Strategy for Civil Society Development for 2021–2026”. Available at: https://www.kmu.gov.ua/gromadskosti/gromadyanske-suspilstvo-i-vlada/spriyannya-rozvitku-gromadyanskogo-suspilstva/pidgotovka-proektu-nacionalnoyi-strategiyi-spriyannya-rozvitku-gromadyanskogo-suspilstva-v-ukrayini-na-2021-2025-roki.
The Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting (2020). Information on the results of the project “Public for Democratization”. Available at: http://www.ier.com.ua/ua/projects?pid=6437.
