IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v106y2025i5ne70073.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Democracy Save Lives? Modeling Effects of Political Institutions on COVID‐19 Mortality

Author

Listed:
  • Elvis H. Kim

Abstract

Objective The COVID‐19 pandemic has been a test and indicator of political systems. Grounded on theories of democratic governance, this study examines whether institutionalization, liberal democracy, and centripetalism have contributed to the variation in the effectiveness of pandemic response. Methods This study uses excess deaths per 100,000 population to measure government performance, addressing inconsistencies and underreporting in official data. It also assembles a global dataset of Adjusted Centripetal Scores to differentiate between decentralist and centripetal institutions in democracies. Spatial autoregressive models are employed to account for the geographic clustering of COVID‐19 mortality, offering more accurate estimates than nonspatial models. Results Political institutions have statistically significant effects on COVID‐19 mortality. Higher levels of institutionalization, greater degrees of liberal democracy, and higher levels of centripetalism are associated with lower excess mortality rates. Additionally, an increase in one country's excess mortality rate will lead to higher rates in its neighbors and its neighbors’ neighbors, producing a ripple effect. Conclusion Findings demonstrate the importance of political institutions to emergency response and global health, provide empirical support for the centripetal theory of democratic governance, and show the necessity of modeling spatial dynamics.

Suggested Citation

  • Elvis H. Kim, 2025. "Does Democracy Save Lives? Modeling Effects of Political Institutions on COVID‐19 Mortality," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 106(5), September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:106:y:2025:i:5:n:e70073
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.70073
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.70073
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.70073?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:106:y:2025:i:5:n:e70073. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.