WOMEN LEADERS IN COVID-19

Author: Aditi Srivastava, student at GD Goenka University

ABSTRACT

It was observed that countries with women leaders were doing a remarkable job in their handling of the pandemic. This paper explores the various policies and measures adopted, enacted and introduced by various women leaders all across the globe during COVID-19 pandemic. There is also a comparative study between the success of male leaders and female leaders in containing and minimising the effect of Covid-19 in their respective countries. This paper discovers the question what global women leaders' leadership actions and responses are and how they address their nations. This paper shines a light on the critical role of women’s leadership in responding to COVID-19 and preparing for a more equitable recovery.

KEYWORDS:- COVID-19, pandemic, women leaders.

WOMEN AS A LEADER

The pandemic has confirmed the ability of women when a very serious situation arises. Studies propose that women leaders have handled the pandemic differently and better than men.

A study shown that men uses fear-based devices often, compared to Women leaders such as Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand, Angela Merkel in Germany, and other female leaders in Finland, Iceland, Denmark, Norway, and Taiwan fixated on families, children, and exposed groups with ways of compassion and social unity. An analysis indicates that States with female governors had fewer Covid-related deaths than the ones with male governors. 

Many media sources have reported that woman leaders have performed better than men in handling the coronavirus disease 2019. It was observed that women leaders were responding faster and communicating better about pandemic policies, women leaders were quicker to restrict the movement of citizens or simply better at communicating about the seriousness of the virus and responsibility of citizens to follow pandemic protocols. For example, the decision to restrict movement in really close economies was undoubtedly one that balanced the risk of viral spread of the disease in the economy. Women are considered more risk hostile as compared to men, especially under stress or while making political decisions , which makes them less eager to take health risks and more prepared to act quickly.

Countries led by women had methodically and meaningfully better Covid-19 outcomes, locking down earlier was able to reduce the average deaths as compared to those led by men. 

The analysis of 194 countries, published by the Centre for Economic Policy Research and the World Economic Forum, suggests the difference is real and “proactive and synchronized policy responses” adopted by female leaders.

“Our results clearly indicate that women leaders reacted more quickly and authoritatively at times of potential mortalities,” said Supriya Garikipati, a developmental economist at Liverpool University.

Silveria Jacobs, the prime minister of Sint Maarten knew that the small island which welcomes thousands of tourists every year was at great risk. She never desired to impose a firm lockdown, but she wanted physical distancing among the people. So, she said: “Simply. Stop. Moving. If you don’t have the bread you like in your house, eat crackers. Eat cereal. Eat oats.” Her unsharpened message showed firm actions and exposed another female leader fulfilling her task.

From Germany, New Zealand, Denmark, women have managed the coronavirus crisis with self-confidence. Plenty of countries with male leaders like Vietnam, the Czech Republic, Greece, have also done well, but few countries with female leaders have performed poorly.

Jacinda Ardern held Kiwis’ hands through the lockdown, sending empathetic “stay home, save lives” video messages from her home and interacting daily through non-argumentative press conferences or Facebook Live. Her firmness on “saving lives” along with “kindness-first” approach motivated her people into taking care of the weak, and into making sacrifices for the greater good while her stress on “collective responsibility” was able to keep the country united even in those tough times. She imposed a 14-day quarantine on anyone entering the country on 14 March and implemented a strict lockdown two weeks later, when fewer than 150 people had been infected and none had died. New Zealand has recorded just 18 deaths.

In Germany, Angela Merkel has been addressed for direct but unexpectedly personal public involvements, warning that up to 70% of people would contract the virus.

Thanks to wide-ranging testing from the beginning along with plenty of care beds and the chancellor’s reminders that Covid-19 was to be taken seriously, Germany had recorded fewer than 5,000 deaths, a far lower figure than most EU countries.  She explained the scientific reason behind the government’s lockdown policy which was shared thousands of times online have also helped boost public approval of the fourth-term leader’s handling of the crisis above 70%.

In Denmark, the prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, acted determinedly by closing the Scandinavian country’s borders from 13 March, following up by shutting all kindergartens, schools and universities and prohibiting gatherings of more than 10 people.

This secured Denmark from the worst effect of the pandemic. Her speeches and instructions were praised widely. She even managed to show a sense of fun, posting a clip on Facebook of herself doing the dishes.

Tsai Ing-wen responded similarly fast by introducing travel restrictions and quarantine measures. Mass public hygiene measures were adopted which included disinfection of public areas and buildings. Taiwan implemented 124 control and contain measures within weeks, and hence full lockdown pointless and recorded only 8 deaths in total, Tsai’s confident administrative style has won her recognitions, even from her political opponents.

Meanwhile, Iceland, under the leadership of their prime minister, Katrín Jakobsdóttir’s, gave a splendid performance. She provided free testing to all citizens and recorded 1,800 cases and 10 deaths. With an in-depth tracing system led to a partial lockdown only.

Finland’s prime minister, Sanna Marin also moved authoritatively and impose a strict lockdown which included a ban on all non-essential travel. This helped her country in containing the spread of the virus. Finland is said to record 4,000 cases and 140 deaths, a per-million toll which was 10 times lower than that of Sweden.

Jeong, a former rural doctor dubbed “the world’s best virus hunter”, has delivered no-nonsense daily press conferences, including demonstrating the ideal way to cough. While these have won praise, her work ethic – she has left emergency operations bunker only for quick visits to a food truck – has prompted concern for her health.

CONCLUSION

Whatever conclusions we may draw from these leaders’ performances during the pandemic, experts caution that while women are “disproportionately represented to a rather startling degree” among countries managing the crisis well, dividing men and women heads of state and government into homogenous categories is not necessarily useful.

Complicating factors may be at play. Kathleen Gerson, a professor of sociology at New York University, notes, for example, that women leaders are more likely to be elected in “a political culture in which there’s a relative support and trust in the government – and that doesn’t make stark distinctions between women and men. So, you’ve already got a head start”.

In addition, it may be harder for men to escape “the way they are expected to behave” as leaders, Gerson told The Hill website. And since the very best leaders are both strong and decisive and capable of displaying feeling, women could, perhaps, “lead the way in showing that these are not competing and conflicting attributes, but complementary – and necessary for good leadership”, she said.

Hence it can be concluded that many countries led by male leaders were performing poorly, there were fewer countries with female leaders performing poorly. 

REFFRENCES

1. National institute of health

2. The Guardian 

3. New York times