IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0264293.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying political influence on COVID-19 fatality in Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Leandro de Almeida
  • Pedro V Carelli
  • Nara Gualberto Cavalcanti
  • José-Dias do Nascimento Jr.
  • Daniel Felinto

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic was severely aggravated in Brazil due to its politicization by the country’s federal government. However, the impact of diffuse political forces on the fatality of an epidemic is notoriously difficult to quantify. Here we introduce a method to measure this effect in the Brazilian case, based on the inhomogeneous distribution throughout the national territory of political support for the federal government. This political support is quantified by the voting rates in the last general election in Brazil. This data is correlated with the fatality rates by COVID-19 in each Brazilian state as the number of deaths grows over time. We show that the correlation between fatality rate and political support grows as the government’s misinformation campaign is developed. This led to the dominance of such political factor for the pandemic impact in Brazil in 2021. Once this dominance is established, this correlation allows for an estimation of the total number of deaths due to political influence as 350±70 thousand up to the end of 2021, corresponding to (57±11)% of the total number of deaths.

Suggested Citation

  • Leandro de Almeida & Pedro V Carelli & Nara Gualberto Cavalcanti & José-Dias do Nascimento Jr. & Daniel Felinto, 2022. "Quantifying political influence on COVID-19 fatality in Brazil," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(7), pages 1-11, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0264293
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0264293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0264293
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0264293&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0264293?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicolás Ajzenman & Tiago Cavalcanti & Daniel Da Mata, 2023. "More than Words: Leaders' Speech and Risky Behavior during a Pandemic," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 351-371, August.
    2. Allcott, Hunt & Boxell, Levi & Conway, Jacob & Gentzkow, Matthew & Thaler, Michael & Yang, David, 2020. "Polarization and public health: Partisan differences in social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    3. Luke Taylor, 2021. "‘We are being ignored’: Brazil’s researchers blame anti-science government for devastating COVID surge," Nature, Nature, vol. 593(7857), pages 15-16, May.
    4. Anton Gollwitzer & Cameron Martel & William J. Brady & Philip Pärnamets & Isaac G. Freedman & Eric D. Knowles & Jay J. Van Bavel, 2020. "Partisan differences in physical distancing are linked to health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(11), pages 1186-1197, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lucia Freira & Marco Sartorio & Cynthia Boruchowicz & Florencia Lopez Boo & Joaquin Navajas, 2021. "The interplay between partisanship, forecasted COVID-19 deaths, and support for preventive policies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Seres, Gyula & Balleyer, Anna Helen & Cerutti, Nicola & Danilov, Anastasia & Friedrichsen, Jana & Liu, Yiming & Süer, Müge, 2021. "Face masks increase compliance with physical distancing recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7(2), pages 139-158.
    3. Maxim Ananyev & Michael Poyker & Yuan Tian, 2021. "The safest time to fly: pandemic response in the era of Fox News," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(3), pages 775-802, July.
    4. James N. Druckman, 2022. "Threats to Science: Politicization, Misinformation, and Inequalities," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 8-24, March.
    5. Hensel, Lukas & Witte, Marc & Caria, A. Stefano & Fetzer, Thiemo & Fiorin, Stefano & Götz, Friedrich M. & Gomez, Margarita & Haushofer, Johannes & Ivchenko, Andriy & Kraft-Todd, Gordon & Reutskaja, El, 2022. "Global Behaviors, Perceptions, and the Emergence of Social Norms at the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 473-496.
    6. Federico N Daverio-Occhini & María Montoya-Aguirre & Máximo Ponce de León & L Guillermo Woo-Mora, 2024. "Moral Force: Leaders' Actions and Public Health Compliance in Crisis," PSE Working Papers halshs-04721932, HAL.
    7. Young, Dannagal G. & Rasheed, Huma & Bleakley, Amy & Langbaum, Jessica B., 2022. "The politics of mask-wearing: Political preferences, reactance, and conflict aversion during COVID," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    8. Rafkin, Charlie & Shreekumar, Advik & Vautrey, Pierre-Luc, 2021. "When guidance changes: Government stances and public beliefs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    9. Sandra H. Goff & John Ifcher & Homa Zarghamee & Alex Reents & Patrick Wade, 2023. "Support for bigger government: The principle‐implementation gap and COVID‐19," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(2), pages 243-261, April.
    10. Amy M. Wolaver & John A. Doces, 2021. "The impact of COVID‐19 and political identification on framing bias in an infectious disease experiment: The frame reigns supreme," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2459-2471, November.
    11. Floyd Jiuyun Zhang, 2023. "Political endorsement by Nature and trust in scientific expertise during COVID-19," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(5), pages 696-706, May.
    12. Khan, Adnan & Nasim, Sanval & Shaukat, Mahvish & Stegmann, Andreas, 2021. "Building trust in the state with information: Evidence from urban Punjab," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    13. Deiana, Claudio & Geraci, Andrea & Mazzarella, Gianluca & Sabatini, Fabio, 2022. "Can relief measures nudge compliance in a public health crisis? Evidence from a kinked fiscal policy rule," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 407-428.
    14. Lackner, Mario & Sunde, Uwe & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf, 2021. "Covid-19 and the Forces Behind Social Unrest," IHS Working Paper Series 37, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    15. Seres, Gyula & Balleyer, Anna & Cerutti, Nicola & Friedrichsen, Jana & Süer, Müge, 2021. "Face mask use and physical distancing before and after mandatory masking: No evidence on risk compensation in public waiting lines," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 765-781.
    16. Tian, Yuan & Caballero, Maria Esther & Kovak, Brian K., 2022. "Social learning along international migrant networks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 103-121.
    17. Andersson, Ola & Campos-Mercade, Pol & Meier, Armando N. & Wengström, Erik, 2021. "Anticipation of COVID-19 vaccines reduces willingness to socially distance," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    18. Fazio, Andrea & Reggiani, Tommaso & Sabatini, Fabio, 2022. "The political cost of sanctions: Evidence from COVID-19," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(9), pages 872-878.
    19. Chiara Natalie Focacci & Pak Hung Lam & Yu Bai, 2022. "Choosing the right COVID-19 indicator: crude mortality, case fatality, and infection fatality rates influence policy preferences, behaviour, and understanding," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, December.
    20. Antoci, Angelo & Sabatini, Fabio & Sacco, Pier Luigi & Sodini, Mauro, 2022. "Experts vs. policymakers in the COVID-19 policy response," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 22-39.

    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:plo:pone00:0264293. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.