The COVID-19 Global Response Index
From FP Analytics: A country-by-country assessment of government responses to the pandemic.
Updated: March 29, 2021 | Published: Aug. 5, 2020
As governments around the world continue to grapple with the pandemic, FP Analytics has developed the COVID-19 Global Response Index to track countries’ responses to the novel coronavirus according to key metrics. While country rankings have been published by other organizations and publications, the Index is the first effort to track national leaders’ responses in critical policy areas, including public health directives, financial responses, and fact-based public communications—and is doing so on an ongoing basis. Initially released on August 5th, 2020, the Index has been updated periodically. The latest update reflects country-level and vaccine data as of March 15, 2021.
FPA’s COVID-19 Global Response Index covers a set of 36 countries, including G20 nations as well as several other developing and middle-income countries that experts and epidemiologists have identified as having notable experiences with respect to COVID-19. This group represents a set of countries for which there is reasonably robust data availability as well as global geographic distribution and socio-economic and political diversity. While notable gaps in data and reporting remain, this Index endeavors to provide a framework to track government responses across multiple categories and will continue to be refined and expanded as more consistently tracked and disaggregated datasets become available and understanding of the virus can inform further Index weighting.
The Index and associated country profiles are based on global data tracked from December 31, 2019 through March 15, 2021. They are intended to illuminate major actions taken by governments to contain the spread of the virus, identify areas for improvement, and highlight promising practices to inform countries’ ongoing responses. The Index includes policy choices and actions across three (3) categories and produces a composite score that reflects more than containment of the virus, but also financial support for domestic economies amid the global economic shock and commitment to fact-based communication among leaders. Data availability and reporting continues to be a challenge; nonetheless, this project seeks to provide a more holistic view of countries’ responses to the pandemic across variables and inclusive of contextual information. FPA’s COVID-19 Global Response Index supplements The Global Race to Vaccinate report and FP’s international COVID-19 coverage, expert dialogues, and special events that are convening pre-eminent leaders in global health, policy, and security from around the world.
The Index was developed with insights from social scientists, public health experts, and leading epidemiologists working at the forefront of the pandemic response, including those from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the University of Oxford, the University of Michigan, the University of Maryland, the University of Massachusetts, UC-Irvine, and UC-Davis’ collaboration with USAID’s Emerging Pandemic Threats project, among others. We are grateful for their contributions.
Countries Combating Another Wave Of COVID-19 As Case Numbers Rise And Variants Spread
The latest round of data on COVID-19 cases and reopening of some economies illustrates a key point: the world is still facing challenges with COVID-19, and many countries have had to re-impose restrictions to contain further spread. As expected, cases rose in many of the pandemic’s worst-hit countries throughout the winter months as more people stayed indoors. Many countries, particularly in Europe, may have entered a third wave of the pandemic, as the new variants of the virus spread globally. While countries with higher Index scores continue to have generally managed cases more effectively, even they have seen increases in the virus within their borders. Several mutations of the virus—the three most prominent ones having emerged from the U.K. (B.1.1.7), South Africa (B.1.351), and Brazil (P.1)—have been complicating COVID-19 management just as vaccines are rolling out. And though more testing is needed, several of the vaccines appear to be less effective against these variants. The COVID-19 Global Response Index country scores do not incorporate vaccine rollout data as it is too preliminary; FPA’s analysis and comparative data on the vaccine rollout can be found here. While still in the early stages of vaccine deployments, the last year of COVID-19 has taught us that countries whose leaders take rapid action, target policies, and advance science-based communications are among those most effectively managing spread. This responsiveness remains critical as more contagious variants spread across the globe and push many healthcare systems closer to the brink.
Vaccine Rollout of Countries in the COVID-19 Index
(Colors are associated with each country's overall Index score)
Key Takeaways 1 Year Into The COVID-19 Pandemic
Findings from the Index and supplementary research indicate:
Crisis Preparation and Planning Enabled Rapid Response, Notably in Africa & Asia
Planning and preparation for health-related crises have enabled rapid response and COVID-19 containment. Notably, lessons learned from H1N1 and Ebola have informed crisis planning and preparedness in Australia, Ghana, Kenya, Senegal, and Taiwan, among the highest performers in the Index.
Early Investment in Emergency Healthcare Cushioned Impact
Early investment and strategic stockpiles of medical supplies and personal protective equipment have helped enable healthcare response, notably in Iceland, New Zealand, and Russia.
Targeted & Comprehensive Policies Produced Better Outcomes
Strong health-care capacity pre-pandemic was not necessarily indicative of outcomes, but preparation, targeted testing, and quick action have had impacts. For example, Sweden and neighboring Denmark both have extremely strong health capacity, but Denmark’s public health and financial policies related to the pandemic resulted in COVID-19 having a much lower impact there than Sweden. Taken further, Senegal, with much weaker capacity, but much stronger policies in terms of health directives, financial support, and communication, as compared with Sweden, performed even better in limiting COVID-19’s impact in-country. Contextual information contained in each of the Index’s country profiles enriches our understanding of each of these countries and will continue to inform and augment our analysis as additional data becomes available.
Testing and Contact Tracing Have Been Game Changers
Contact tracing has been key to managing the crisis, notably in Taiwan and South Korea, though data regarding the degree of tracing and efficacy is not yet sufficient or differentiated to reflect the importance and positive impact of these measures. In the case of Taiwan, utilization of data and analytics has enabled the country to effectively manage the crisis and avoid strict lockdowns. Widespread availability of testing has also enabled countries to quickly identify new outbreak clusters and effectively implement quarantine protocols to prevent spread.
*Given data limitations with respect to contact tracing, Taiwan’s and South Korea’s successes are not adequately captured in the Index, but both are notable leaders in this regard and in overall management of the pandemic. Several countries that employed advanced and aggressive contact tracing or other measures mitigated their need to implement other major COVID-19-specific policies, as seen in their low case rates. The Index adjusts for these outliers. Please refer to the methodology for further detail.
Clear Policy Directives Matter
Countries’ socio-economic and health security—and investment to those ends—strengthen capacity to respond but are insufficient to manage the crisis. Clear healthcare and financial directives and early, targeted actions seem to have significantly impacted outcomes in many of the highest-scoring countries—notably Denmark, Iceland, New Zealand, Taiwan, Finland and Australia. Restrictions on gatherings have helped mitigate coronavirus spread. Seen notably in Belgium, Denmark, Japan, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United Kingdom, serious restrictions helped all these countries reverse skyrocketing case rates.
Close Coordination with State and Regional Governments Is Key
Smaller countries, notably island nations, have some natural advantages managing spread as compared with larger, more populous nations – and those with decentralized forms of government face exceptional challenges of policy coordination and execution. In these latter cases, close coordination and clear communication among federal, state, and regional entities have been critical to resource allocation and policy directive implementation, notably in Australia and Canada.
Overall Funding and the Structure of Financial Support Mechanisms Matter
Financial support to companies—enabling them to keep workers on the payroll—and relatively strong worker wage support have helped to mitigate COVID-19’s economic fallout, notably in Denmark, Iceland, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, and Switzerland. These countries took both assertive action on the public health response and also passed considerable economic support to mitigate economic shocks, elevating their scores overall.
Misinformation and Press Limitations are Associated with Poor COVID-19-related Outcomes
While not causal, the majority of countries whose leaders have engaged in the spread of misinformation and have limited press freedom with respect to COVID-19 were among those with the highest case rates, notably the U.S., Iran, Hungary, Brazil, Mexico, and the U.K.
Challenges with Data from China
While China scores near the top in terms of COVID-19 status, having relatively low case and death rates, as reported by the Central Government, it scores near the bottom in the Index in terms of policy. Failure of Chinese authorities to consistently report data on key metrics, such as testing, as compared with other countries, as well as limited transparency on other metrics, results in data gaps contributing to a low overall policy score. The gap is exacerbated by China scoring particularly low on the fact-based communications measure, which includes measuring press limitations on covering the pandemic. The Index policy score aims to evaluate a country’s range of policies. While that is often tied closely to the current status of COVID-19 in a country (the number of cases), it is not always so, as policy and capacity and other factors, including proximity to countries with major COVID-19 outbreaks, all impact the state of coronavirus in a country.
Disproportionate Socio-economic Impacts Warrant Further Study
Countries with significant shares of migrant workers and large informal economies—including India, Brazil, and Kenya—face unique challenges, due to workers’ limited access to healthcare and mechanisms for extending financial support, putting these populations at exceptional risk.
Acknowledgements
FPA would like to thank and acknowledge those working on the front lines of the pandemic and the public health and policy experts who contributed to this study. We would also like to thank all of those working to systematically track and report COVID-19-related data, including the University of Oxford, the Johns Hopkins University, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and a range of international institutions, such as the IMF, the World Bank, and the United Nations. FPA’s COVID-19 Global Response Index will continue to be updated with the help of these and other globally available databases.
Be the source of actionable insight.
Select one of the subscription options below to read the full Covid-19 Global Response Index. Unlock even more global intelligence with a subscription to FP Insider.
Already an FP Insider? Log In
Best Value
One-Year All Access
FP Insider
$450
1-year of full access to FP Insider exclusive content and subscription benefits
See benefits ▾
- All FP Analytics Special Reports, including the COVID-19 Global Response Index
- FP Analytics Power Maps
- Editorial conference calls
- Unlimited articles on ForeignPolicy.com
- Digital and print editions of FP’s award-winning magazine
- Print archive, containing 50 years of FP journalism
- Subscriber-only newsletters
- Security and defense news alerts
- Bonus episodes of FP podcasts
- FP mobile app
Hide benefits
One-Month
COVID-19 Report Bundle
$150
30-day Access to the COVID-19 Global Response Index and Global Race to Vaccinate report
Looking for group access? Contact us directly
Statistics and government response factors available on each country profile include:
Pre-COVID Conditions:
- Debt to GDP ratio
- Infant mortality rates
- Hospital beds per 1,000 people
- Gini coefficients measuring inequality
- Health access and quality
COVID-19 Public Health Directives:
- Stay-at home orders
- School-closing policy
- Public-gathering restrictions
- Cancellation of public events
- Testing policy and rates per 1,000 people
- Emergency healthcare spending per capita
- Travel restrictions
- Contact tracing
COVID-19 Financial Response:
- Stimulus package as a share of GDP
- Income support
- Debt-forbearance
Public Communications:
- Instances of misinformation by leadership
- Limitations on press freedom, censorship
Current/Historic In-Country COVID-19 Status:
- Death rates per 1 million
- Case rates per 1 million