Project Description

This project investigated the key decision-makers during the pandemic, focusing on leaders, health ministers, and finance ministers, and the narratives they employed. The inclusion of health and finance ministers is crucial, as much of the political and public debate during the pandemic centred around the tension between preserving life and sustaining livelihoods. The project examined the extent to which these decision-makers can be considered “experts” in their respective policy areas, assessing this through their educational background and occupational experience. Additionally, the study explored how frequently leaders and ministers referred to scientific expertise, identifying the specific disciplines they cited in their decision-making processes.

Research Questions

This project measured the degree of engagement with the liberal script in expert rhetoric surrounding decision-making. It addressed the following questions:

• Are political leaders, finance and health ministers more or less likely to engage with evidence in their decision-making and public communication during the pandemic? Does this tendency reinforce liberal norms?

• To what extent does populist, evidence-free rhetoric challenge liberal norms?

• Do ministers from authoritarian populist parties rely on evidence and engage with the liberal script differently compared to those from mainstream parties?

• Is there significant variation among autocracies, with some relying solely on experts while others appoint cronies to key positions?