Comparative Federalism and Covid-19

Front matter

COMPARATIVE FEDERALISM AND COVID-19

This comprehensive scholarly book on comparative federalism and the Covid-19 pandemic is written by some of the world's leading federal scholars and national experts. The Covid-19 pandemic presented an unprecedented emergency for countries worldwide, including all those with a federal or hybrid-federal system of government, which account for more than 40 per cent of the world’s population. With case studies from 19 federal countries, this book explores the core elements of federalism that came to the fore in combatting the pandemic: the division of responsibilities (disaster management, health care, social welfare, and education), the need for centralisation, and intergovernmental relations and cooperation. As the pandemic struck federal countries at roughly the same time, it provided a unique opportunity for comparative research on the question of how the various federal systems responded. The authors adopt a multidisciplinary approach to question whether federalism has been a help or a hindrance in tackling the pandemic. The value of the book lies in understanding how the Covid-19 pandemic affected federal dynamics and how it may have changed them, as well as providing useful lessons for how to combat such pandemics in federal countries in the future. This book will be of great interest to students and scholars of politics and international relations, comparative federalism, health care, and disaster management.

Nico Steytler is Professor of Public Law at the Dullah Omar Institute for Constitutional Law, Governance and Human Rights at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa, and the South African Research Chair in Multilevel Government, Law and Development. He is a former Commissioner of the Financial and Fiscal Commission, and former President of the International Association of Centres for Federal Studies. He has published widely on federalism, including The Value of Comparative Federalism: The Legacy of Ronald L. Watts (2021, co-edited), Decentralization and Constitutionalism in Africa (2019, co-edited); Concurrent Powers in Federal Systems: Meaning, Making, Managing (2017, edited); Kenyan-South African Dialogue on Devolution (2016, co-edited); and Local Government Law of South Africa (2007, co-authored).

Preface

Introduction: How federations combat Covid-19 Nico Steytler

PART | Europe and Eurasia

1 Facing the pandemic: Italy’s functional ‘health federalism’ and dysfunctional cooperation Elisabeth Alber, Erika Arban, Paolo Colasante, Adriano Dirri and Francesco Palermo

2 Decentralisation and Covid-19: Stress-testing the Spanish territorial system Mikel Erkoreka, Mireia Grau Creus and Mario Kolling

3 Germany’s fight against Covid-19: The tension between central regulation and decentralised management Gisela Farber gl viii

Contents

Managing the Covid-19 pandemic in Austria: From national unity to a de facto unitary state?

Karl Kössler

Managing the Covid-19 crisis in a divided Belgian federation: Cooperation against all odds Patricia Popelier and Peter Bursens

Weak institutions, positive results: The European Union’s response to Covid-19

Beniamino Caravita, Simone Barbareschi, Francesco Severa, Sergio Spatola and Adriano Dirri

Managing the coronavirus pandemic in Switzerland:

How federalism went into emergency mode and struggled to get out of it

The Covid-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: A tale of convergence and divergence Paul Anderson

Russia’s fight against Covid-19: Dealing with a global threat under crisis and stagnation

Viacheslav Seliverstov, Ivan Leksin, Nataliya Kravchenko, Vladimir Klistorin and Almira Yusupova

PART II North America

American federalism and Covid-19: Party Trumps policy John Kincaid and J. Wesley Leckrone

Facing the coronavirus pandemic in the Canadian federation: Reinforced dualism and muted cooperation? Johanne Poirier and Jessica Michelin

Managing the coronavirus pandemic in a centralised federal system: The case of Mexico José Maria Serna de la Garza

PART III South America

13 Brazil and the fight against Covid-19: Strengthening state and municipal powers Gilberto M. A. Rodrigues, Vanessa Elias de Oliveira, Marcelo Labanca Corréa de Araújo and Sérgio Ferrari

14 Federalism and Covid-19 in Argentina: Centralisation and hyper-presidentialism Antonio María Hernández and Cristian Altavilla

PART IV Asia and Australia

15 Pandemic governance in India: The ongoing shift to ‘national federalism’

Ajay Kumar Singh

16 The Australian federal response to the Covid-19 crisis: Momentary success or enduring reform?

Nicholas Aroney and Michael Boyce

PART V Africa 17 Controlling public health emergencies in federal systems

The case of Ethiopia Zemelak Ayitenew Ayele and Yonatan Tesfaye Fessha

18 South Africa: Surfing towards centralisation on the Covid-19 wave Nico Steytler, Jaap de Visser and Tinashe Chigwata

19 Managing Covid-19 in a ‘facade federalism’: The case of Nigeria Lukman Abdulrauf

Contents ix x Contents

PART VI Conclusion

20 Grappling with the pandemic: Rich insights into intergovernmental relations Cheryl Saunders

21 Federalism under pressure: Federal ‘health’ factors and ‘co-morbidities’

Nico Steytler

Index

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Tables

0.1 Population and Covid-19 infections and deaths (31 October 2020), selected federations, ranked by cumulative deaths per 100,000 2.1 Spain: Congressional voting on extensions of the state of alarm 10.1 United States: selected Covid-19 statistics and dates, by state party control 11.1 Canada: Covid-19 cases and deaths by province/territory (31 October 2020)

Figures

0.1 Relationship between recorded infections and deaths per 100,000 (31 October 2020) selected federations 21 New Covid-19 cases in Spain per week, March-October 2020

CONTRIBUTORS

Lukman Abdulrauf is Senior Lecturer in Constitutional Law, Digital Rights, and Data Protection Law in the Department of Public Law at the University of Ilorin, Nigeria, and Fellow at the Institute for International and Comparative Law in Africa at the University of Pretoria, South Africa.

Elisabeth Alber is Senior Researcher at the Institute for Comparative Federalism at Eurac Research, Italy.

Cristian Altavilla is Director of the School of Law at University Siglo 21, and Professor of Constitutional and Public Law at University Siglo 21 and University Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina.

Paul Anderson is Lecturer in Politics and International Relations at Canterbury Christ Church University, United Kingdom.

Erika Arban is a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Laureate Program in Comparative Constitutional Law at the University of Melbourne, Australia, and Lecturer in Comparative Federalism at the University of Antwerp, Belgium.

Nicholas Aroney is Professor of Constitutional Law in the TC Beirne School of Law at the University of Queensland, Australia.

Zemelak Ayitenew Ayele is Director of the Center for Federal and Governance Studies at Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia, and extra-ordinary Associate Professor at Dullah Omar Institute for Constitutional Law, Governance and Human Rights at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa.

Contributors xiii

Simone Barbareschi is a Postdoctoral Researcher in Public Law at Roma Tre University, Italy.

Eva Maria Belser is Full Professor, Chair of Administrative and Constitutional Law, and Co-Director of the Institute of Federalism at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland.

Michael Boyce is a Law Student in the TC Beirne School of Law at the University of Queensland, Australia.

Peter Bursens is Full Professor of Political and Social Sciences and senior member of the GOVTRUST Centre of Excellence at the University of Antwerp, Belgium.

Beniamino Caravita is Professor of Public Law in the Department of Political Science at the University of Rome, Italy, and Director of Associazione Osservatorio Sul Federalismo e i Processi Di Governo, Italy.

Tinashe Chigwata is Associate Professor at the Dullah Omar Institute for Constitutional Law, Governance and Human Rights at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa.

Paolo Colasante is a Researcher in Constitutional Law at the Institute for the Study of Regionalism, Federalism and Self-Government (ISSiRFA) at the Italian National Research Council (CNR), Italy.

Marcelo Labanca Corréa de Araújo is Professor of Constitutional Law in the Graduate Program in Law at the Catholic University of Pernambuco (UNICAP), Brazil.

Mireia Grau Creus is Head of Research at the Institute of Self-Government Studies at the Government of Catalonia, Spain.

Jaap de Visser is Professor of Law and Director of the Dullah Omar Institute for Constitutional Law, Governance and Human Rights at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa.

Adriano Dirri is a Lecturer in Public Law at the University of Rome, La Sapienza, Italy.

Mikel Erkoreka is a Lecturer of Public Policy and Economic History and Researcher at the Ituna Center for Basque Economic Agreement and Fiscal Federalism Studies at the University of the Basque Country, Spain.

xiv Contributors

Gisela Fárber is Senior Fellow at the German Research Institute for Public Administration and held the Chair for Public Finance at the German University of Administrative Sciences, Germany.

Sérgio Ferrari is Professor of Constitutional Law at Rio de Janeiro State University, Brazil.

Yonatan Tesfaye Fessha is Professor of Public Law and Jurisprudence at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa.

Antonio María Hernández is Director of the Institute of Federalism of the National Academy of Law and Social Sciences of Cordoba; Professor of Constitutional Law and State Constitutional and Municipal Law at the National University of Córdoba, Argentina; and Postdoctoral Senior Fellow of the State University of New York at Buffalo Law School, USA.

John Kincaid is Robert B. and Helen S. Meyner Professor of Government and Public Service and Director of the Meyner Center for the Study of State and Local Government at Lafayette College, USA.

Vladimir Klistorin is Professor of Economics, and Leading Research Fellow at the Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering in the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences at Novosibirsk State University, Russia.

Mario Kölling is Professor of Political Science at the Spanish National Distance University (UNED) and Senior Researcher at the Manuel Giménez Abad Foundation, Spain.

Karl Kóssler is Senior Researcher at the Institute for Comparative Federalism at Eurac Research, Italy.

Nataliya Kravchenko is Professor of Economics, and Acting Head of Department, in the Department of Industrial Enterprises Management at the Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering in the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences at Novosibirsk State University, Russia.

J. Wesley Leckrone is Professor of Political Science and Department Chair at Widener University, USA.

Ivan Leksin is Professor of Law, and Head of Department of Legal Foundations of Administration, in the School of Public Administration at Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia.

Contributors xv

Jessica Michelin graduated with a degree in Law from McGill University, Canada, and is Clerk to the Québec Court of Appeal, Canada.

Vanessa Elias de Oliveira is Associate Professor and Head of the Graduate Program in Public Policies at the Federal University of ABC (UFABO), Brazil.

Francesco Palermo is Professor of Comparative Public Law in the Faculty of Law at the University of Verona, and Director of the Institute for Comparative Federalism at Eurac Research, Italy.

Johanne Poirier is Full Professor of Law and holder of the Peter MacKell Chair in Federalism at McGill University, Canada.

Patricia Popelier is Full Professor of Law at the University of Antwerp; Director of the Research Group on Government and Law at the University of Antwerp, Belgium; Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Federal Studies at the University of Kent, UK; and co-promoter of the GOVTRUST Centre of Excellence at the University of Antwerp, Belgium.

Gilberto M. A. Rodrigues is Associate Professor and Head of the Graduate Program in International Relations at the Federal University of ABC (UFABO), Brazil.

Cheryl Saunders AO is Laureate Professor Emeritus of the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Law at the University of Melbourne, Australia.

Viacheslav Seliverstov is Professor of Economics and Head of the Centre for Strategic Analysis and Planning, at the Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering, and Director of the International Research Centre for Cross- Border Interactions in North and North-East Asia, in the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences at Novosibirsk State University, Russia.

José María Serna de la Garza is a Researcher at the Institute of Legal Research at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico.

Francesco Severa is a PhD Candidate in Public, Comparative and International Law at Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.

Ajay Kumar Singh is Professor and Director at the Centre for Federal Studies at Hamdard University, India.

Sergio Spatola is a PhD Candidate in Public, Comparative and International Law at Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.

xvi Contributors

Nico Steytler is Professor of Public Law and the South African Research Chair in Multilevel Government, Law and Development at the Dullah Omar Institute for Constitutional Law, Governance and Human Rights, at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa.

Almira Yusupova is Professor of Economics and Leading Researcher at the Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering in the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences at Novosibirsk State University, Russia.

Foreword

One of the areas more severely affected by emergencies in general, and by the Covid-19 pandemic in particular, is that of the vertical division of powers and the idea of federalism more broadly. Fighting a pandemic requires quick and coordinated action, for which national governments are better suited. The consequence is often both a horizontal (from parliaments to governments) and a vertical centralisation of powers, from subnational (and local) to the central level. However, the way this happens deeply differs from country to country and is most likely one of the indicators for the rootedness of the federal principle in societies and institutions.

Federalism has no doubt been subject to a stress test by the Covid-19 pandemic. Criticism has been voiced not only in countries where the ‘federal spirit’ (Burgess) is lacking, that is, a rooted culture, tradition, and acceptance of federalism, but also where this is undoubtedly present. The existence of separate health-care systems with different authorities introducing potentially different regulations is easy to be seen as an obstacle rather than an asset. Similarly, potential differences in solutions that might impact on the very fundamental right to life are likely to be met with scepticism. And the very essence of federalism — negotiation and dialogue — is often portrayed as a factor slowing the adoption of decisions rather than improving their quality.

A closer look at the comparative practice, however, shows a different picture. This is what this book is doing. By analysing in depth a wide range of multi-tiered systems in managing the pandemic, highlighting the different responses, their different effectiveness, and their different reasons, it provides a unique opportunity to learn and reflect on the very essence of federalism and what it is for: a better, more nuanced, more pondered, and more democratic way to make decisions. Not infrequently, a multi-level structure helps correct fatal mistakes made by national governments and as a matter of fact, during the Covid-19 xviii Foreword pandemic, federal countries resorted to states of emergency and derogations from the constitutional order less frequently than non-federal states did, which could provide evidence of more resilience of federal structures. Importantly, federal decision-making does not mean that decisions must be different. It means that they might be different when and where this proves meaningful: tailoring solutions to the different needs of different territories might be conducive to more efficient responses.

Be that as it may, this book offers a nuanced, informed, and data-based insight on what the virus did to federalism and what federalism did and can do to tackle emergencies such as a pandemic. It is not by chance that the idea of the book has originated within the framework of the worldwide network of federal scholars, most of whom are members of the International Association of Centres for Federal Studies (IACFS), and is edited by one of its most distinguished members and former president, Professor Nico Steytler. The book is not only a valuable academic exercise. It also testifies of the possible contribution that a community of experts can offer to decision-makers and opinion leaders when addressing dramatic challenges: the provision of informed analysis.

Francesco Palermo, President of the LACFS

PREFACE

In mid-March 2020 as the Covid-19 pandemic rapidly swallowed the world, universities, like other public institutions, closed and we, members of the International Association of Centres for Federal Studies (IACFS), stayed at home, trying to work. We all watched how the pandemic spread throughout our respective federal countries. It then struck me that we should take a collective look at how the governments in federal systems were dealing with the pandemic. It provided a unique opportunity for true comparative research to analyse how very different types of federal systems dealt with exactly the same issue at the same time, and in real time as the pandemic unfolded in each country. It also compelled us to make sense, not only of how governments have responded to the pandemic but also of our daily lives in isolation. The planned research would give us an insight into the workings of federal systems under stress and how they could/should respond to similar disasters in the future.

The project received an overwhelmingly favourable response and academics from 19 IACFS member centres participated. It was a truly collective effort, and in this regard the contributions of Cheryl Saunders and John Kincaid to the development of the template are gratefully acknowledged.

To cover all the major federations in the world, 19 case studies were commissioned. As the country studies covered the many aspects of federalism, teams of researchers were assembled and 45 persons eventually participated in the production of the text. The collaboration of experienced professors with young researchers is a gratifying feature of this volume. The assembled 19 case studies provided us with a truly global picture of the working of federalism in times of stress.

The first milestone was the presentation of draft papers at TACFS's annual conference, which was virtually hosted from 14 to 16 October 2020; the conference scheduled to be held in Ethiopia on that date being another casualty of the pandemic.

xx Preface

This book would not have been possible without the strong support of the IACFS Executive Committee, and, in particular, of Francesco Palermo, the IACFS president, and the enthusiastic participation of the IACFS family. The contributors responded readily to endless requests to keep to the template in presenting the material. To them I owe a great debt of gratitude.

I would also like to acknowledge the support provided by the South African Research Chairs Initiative of the Department of Science and Technology and the National Research Foundation through the South African Research Chair in Multilevel Government, Law and Development (SARCHI Chair). As part of the SARCHI Chair Team at the Dullah Omar Institute, University of the Western Cape, I thank Curtly Stevens and Dr Shehaam Johnstone for their research assistance and Mandy Cupido for administrative support. A particular word of thanks goes to Dr Michelle Maziwisa, a SARChI post-doctoral fellow for acting as the managing editor — ensuring in her efficient and gracious manner that the manuscript met all the requirements of Routledge. I would also like to mention the support staff at the Dullah Omar Institute — Virginia Brookes, Kirsty Wakefield, and Kay Sapto — for their assistance in the project. Andre Wiesner is thanked for his excellent editing which was done mostly over the festive season.

The book is published in Open Access, thanks to the ‘crowd funding’ by the financial contributions of the following persons and institutions: IACFS, Eva Maria Belser (Institute of Federalism, University of Fribourg), Mikel Erkoreka (Ituna Center for Basque Economic Agreement and Fiscal Federalism Studies), Mario Kolling (Manuel Giménez Abad Foundation), Francesco Palermo (Institute for Comparative Federalism, Eurac Research), Patricia Popelier (Research Group on Government and Law, University of Antwerp), and the SARCHI Chair in Multilevel Government, Law and Development.

Lastly, I owe a word of gratitude to John Kincaid, one of the series editors of the Routledge Studies on Federalism and Decentralisation who brought me in contact with Emily Ross, senior editor at Routledge. With great expedition she ensured the timely contracting and publication of this volume. I thank you for that.

Nico Steytler March 2021 Cape Town

Introduction

How federations combat Covid-19'

1 The pandemic

On 31 December 2019, the first cases of the coronavirus, Covid-19, were identified in Wuhan City, China. Its dramatic rate of transmission and deadly effects soon led to the city's shutdown, but not before it took wing and, borne by travellers, began alighting in other countries. Very quickly it spread throughout Asia and Europe and then further afield to North America, South America, Africa, and Australasia. By the beginning of March 2020, nearly every country in the world had recorded cases of infection, and on 11 March 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) declared Covid-19 a pandemic.

Major initiatives were taken globally to treat the infected and curb further infection. After a first wave of infections and mortalities during March and April, infection rates eased off as well as containment measures. However, in the latter half of the year, the ‘second wave’ of infections grew in size to exceed in most cases the numbers of the first wave. By the end of October 2020, the number of infections reached 44 million, with more than 1 million deaths attributed to Covid-19 (WHO 20200).

To prevent the spread of the virus, most countries imposed lockdown measures, including the cessation of international travel and, with that, tourism; domestically, stay-at-home orders resulted in the closure of factories, shops, and offices. As a result, all economies showed a dramatic downturn, leading to a world recession — the World Bank (2020) forecasted a 5.2 per cent contraction in global gross domestic product (GDP) in 2020.

As a pandemic, the Covid-19 outbreak of 2020 differed both in nature from other national disasters typically experienced over the past decades, such as flooding, earthquakes and tsunamis, and in magnitude from previous pandemics: the SARS coronavirus (2002-2003) and the swine flu (H1N1) (2009-2010) were contained eftectively internationally and locally (Hassan et al. 2020). It was both a threat of a disaster, requiring preventative measures, and a disaster in actuality, requiring emergency health care. Moreover, due to the preventative measures taken, innumerable people were indirectly affected by the virus through the curtailment of social and economic activity and limitations on rights to movement, education, religion, democratic governance, and so forth.

Governments thus battled on several fronts. First, preventative measures were put in place to prevent or minimise the spread of the virus — limiting or cancelling international travel, testing, tracing and quarantining suspected carriers of the virus, and eventually imposing internal movement restrictions, the so-called lockdowns. Secondly, emergency curative measures were instituted to treat the seriously ill, many of whom required hospitalisation. Accepting the spread of the disease as inevitable, governments aimed to slow down the infection rate in order not to overburden their health-care systems to a point of collapse. Thirdly, governments instituted ameliorative economic measures to shield businesses and the population from the worst eftects of the lockdown measures. In developing countries, the latter had a devastating effect on a large sector of the population already living below the poverty line. Governments had to juggle two competing concerns: containing the virus through preventative lockdown measures, while at the same time easing restrictions to bring economic activity back to life. The early lifting of restrictions inevitably led to renewed escalation of the pandemic.

Small in number, but home to 40 per cent of the world’s population, the federations or hybrid federations of the world (in this volume, referred to collectively as federations) were also impacted on by the pandemic. By 31 October 2020 (the end date of the period covered in this study), the Covid-19 pandemic had hit hard the federations selected for this study; among the top 15 countries ranked according to mortalities recorded, are 11 federations, and when mortality rates are compared the numbers are the same (WHO 2020a). However, the selected federations exhibited very different trends in the spread of infection and mortality associated with the virus (see Table 0.1).

Plotting the infection and death trends in Table 0.1 reveals the wide variation in extent of infections officially reported, and also in associated deaths recorded (see Figure 0.1). Furthermore, the relationship between recorded infections and deaths shows that the number of known Covid-19 infections does not perfectly predict the number of known Covid-19 deaths — the more infections the more death — suggesting other factors are at play. While some of the variation in the trends in the data can be ascribed to factors such as the age and health structure of the population, the timing of the arrival of the epidemic, and the nature and extent of recording of infections and deaths, a government's response may also have played a role in the observed trends.

The management of the pandemic in federations brought to the fore key elements of their federal systems: federal governments’ responsibility over national emergencies and coordination; the autonomy of states over critical areas such as disaster management and health-care services; and at grassroots

TABLE 0.1 Population and Covid-19 infections and deaths (31 October 2020), selected federations, ranked by cumulative deaths per 100,000?

Per cent Population population Infections Deaths (millions) >65 Fatality per per

Rank Country (2020) (2019) Infections Deaths rate (%) 100,000 100,000

Source: WHO (2020a, 2020b), World Bank (2019), UN Population Dynamics (2019).

level, municipalities’ responsibilities for public hygiene and the provision of certain health-care services, as well as for the continued delivery of public utilities such as water, sanitation, waste removal, and control of public spaces. The multilevel structure of government also places emphasis both on coordination and cooperation between governments vertically and horizontally and on the democratic accountability of each of them individually. Finally, the intergovernmental fiscal system became critical: how is the cost caused by the pandemic covered?

While the role of subnational governments — that is, the collective of states and local governments — is, of course, much dependent on the character of a specific federal system, there may be common patterns in and approaches to managing pandemics. The literature on comparative federalism has, however, given scant attention to this form of disaster or the impact it can have on the functioning of federal systems.

The situation was thus: at the beginning of 2020, the federations were functioning according to their own dynamics, which are forever changing. Out of the blue came a virus with no cure, one which spreads rapidly and has deadly consequences, and suddenly federations — unsuspecting and mostly unprepared — found

120 Belgium 100 - + + Spain aad o S 80 | UK o . Brazil 2 Mexico 4 + = 16 a 60 4! — + a Italy Argentina = 40 © Canad  praca % South Africa ‘6 + A 4 Switzerland 7 | Russia Germany # india @ Austria o MW Australia Ethiopia Nigeria 0

0 50

FIGURE 0.1 Relationship between recorded infections and deaths per 100,000 (31 October 2020) selected federations

Source: Table 0.1 themselves confronting a major crisis. This gave rise to critical questions of how federal systems, with decentralised decision-making at their core, responded.

2 Research questions

The immediate question is: how did federal systems respond to the Covid- 19 pandemic during the first critical period of 2020, when quick, concerted, and effective action was required to limit and eliminate the virus and the dire socio-economic consequences it caused? What were the modalities of action of each level of government? How did they affect the constitutional distribution of powers — did they lead to an increase in centralisation or decentralisation? Did intergovernmental relations (IGR), the lifeblood of federal systems, work efficiently or at all? What happened to intergovernmental fiscal relations?

A second, more evaluative question then follows: how well (or badly) did federal systems perform in combating a pandemic of this scale? What do the individual experiences tell us generally about how federalism fared as a system of governance in the modern age, when confronted unexpectedly with such a global crisis? Were the federal systems resilient governance systems that could manage the fight against Covid-19? Were good health results attributable to a well-functioning federal system and poor results to failures in another one? For example, with the dispersal of powers between the levels of government, were there sufficient and effective coordination and cooperation?

Having answered these two questions, a third question arises: are the particular federal dynamics — a movement towards decentralisation or centralisation — that may have emerged in each country likely to have long-term consequences for the federal system itself? Will the system return to its old pattern of functioning, or did the management of the pandemic trigger longer-lasting reform? Will the pandemic provide a policy window where more fundamental change may be forthcoming?

It is also important to point out the issues that the study does not engage with, as intriguing as they may be. This is not a comparison between federal and unitary systems to see which of them did better. The study is not designed for such a purpose, and at any rate, it would be extremely difficult to tease out the explanatory value that the ‘federalism factor’ may have had. Moreover, ‘federations’ is an umbrella term encompassing many variations of federalism: for example, some in effect are close to unitary states for the purpose of combating the pandemic, while many unitary states exhibit strong features of decentralisation.

Our interest is in what combating the pandemic in federal systems revealed about the nature of federalism in a particular country in a particular period. The aim is to reflect on how the federal system functioned between the time in early 2020 that the coronavirus first broke out in a country and the latter part of the year (October). It covers the period prior to the introduction of vaccines and the dynamics that that triggered. Although the full significance ofthe pandemic and its management will become apparent only in years to come, the first 10 months of 2020 were highly revealing.

In most countries, the first wave of Covid-19 came and went during that period, with many of the preventative measures being eased; a second wave emerged in the second half of the year, putting a new set of dynamics in motion and typically seeing federations adopt a more differentiated response to the pandemic that brought subnational governments to the fore. During the window of time under review, the essential federal dynamics of each country manifested themselves and became visible for analysis and comparison.

During this pre-vaccine period, the studies revealed a number of failures in federal systems that had dire consequences in the battle against Covid-19. Without having to wait for closure of the pandemic, remedial action could be taken to address these failures.

3 Research methodology 3.1 Selecting federal systems for case study

These questions above have been addressed in 19 case studies that cover 6 continents and represent all the main federations in the world. While ‘federations’ is used as a term of convenience to refer to the group collectively, not many call themselves federations. What they have in common, and what is critical for this study, is the decentralisation (in a broad sense) of decision-making between two or more levels of government.