COVID-19 as a Catalyst for Policy Change: The Role of Trigger Points and Spillover Effects

ABSTRACT

This article understands COVID-19 as an eruptive event with severe effects on many policy fields beyond (public) health. Based on this assumption, we consider the pandemic as a catalyst for policy change across policy fields. For that reason, we suggest a new approach for conceptualising eruptive events as triggers that provoke far-reaching change and spillover effects in fields of policymaking. These are characterised by a complex problem structure – conceived of as clusters of trigger points – in need of intersectoral policymaking. Our approach suggests a mechanism of multi-dimensional spillover that initiates new dynamics to gridlocked policy processes by acting with regard to the most pressing trigger points. To test the concept, we take an explorative look at public health, educational policy and food and agricultural policy in Germany. The examples demonstrate how the concept of problem-related trigger points and spillover effects can be applied to analyse policy change across policy areas in pandemic times and beyond.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary Data

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed via the authors’ researchgate pages.

Notes

1 These characteristics allow the formulation of theoretical expectations and hypotheses, which could be applied to as well to more quantitative studies as to empirical research in general.

2 This characteristic is highly relevant in the German federalist parliamentarian political system.

3 See Note 2.

4 In line with a broader concept of ‘biophysical and material conditions’ (Kiser and Ostrom 1982).

5 It would have to be tested how the concept could be applied to less demarcated fields. For empirical tests, it would be crucial in less demarcated fields to identify all relevant actors and keep an eye on defining the problem structure and trigger points (in overlapping fields) comprehensively and appropriately.

6 The category ‘not fulfilled’ (-) was used with regard to the questions (1) and (2) if there was absolutely (1) no link to health issues and (2) problem structure blurring. The category ‘fulfilled’ (+) was applied for cases with (1) strong linkages to health issues or cases stemming from the field of health policy and (2) cases which are clearly demarcated with regard to their problem structure. The category ‘neutral’ (o) covered all cases which can be characterised as (1) partly linked to health issues and (2) as being partly demarcated but somehow connected to other spheres.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Benjamin Ewert

Benjamin Ewert is a Professor of Health Policies and Health Professions at the Fulda University of Applied Science in Germany. His research focuses on behavioural insights, co-production, and social innovation in the realm of health policy. He is co-editor of the book Behavioural Policies for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention (Palgrave Pivot, 2019) and has published articles in academic outlets such as Public Administration, Public Policy & Administration and Policy & Politics.

Kathrin Loer

Kathrin Loer is a Professor for Political Science at the University of Applied Sciences Osnabrück. She specialises in policy analysis and public policy. Her current research focus is consumer policy, and she also works intensely on challenges in health policy. In recent years, she has developed concepts for behavioural public policy that can be applied in various fields of political analysis and practice. Current publications deal with the advancement of behavioural public policy, consumer research and the German health care system.