Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 23 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | BMC PUBLIC HEALTH |
| Volume | 24 |
| Publication status | Published - 2 Jan 2024 |
Abstract
Background: While solidarity practices were important in mitigating the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, their limits became evident as the pandemic progressed. Taking a longitudinal approach, this study analyses German residents’ changing perceptions of solidarity practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and examines potential reasons for these changes. Methods: Adults living in Germany were interviewed in April 2020 (n = 46), October 2020 (n = 43) and October 2021 (n = 40) as part of the SolPan Research Commons, a large-scale, international, qualitative, longitudinal study uniquely situated in a major global public health crisis. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results: While solidarity practices were prominently discussed and positively evaluated in April 2020, this initial enthusiasm waned in October 2020 and October 2021. Yet, participants still perceived solidarity as important for managing the pandemic and called for institutionalized forms of solidarity in October 2020 and October 2021. Reasons for these changing perceptions of solidarity included (i) increasing personal and societal costs to act in solidarity, (ii) COVID-19 policies hindering solidarity practices, and (iii) a perceived lack of reciprocity as participants felt that solidarity practices from the state were not matching their individual efforts. Conclusions: Maintaining solidarity contributes to maximizing public health during a pandemic. Institutionalized forms of solidarity to support those most in need contribute to perceived reciprocity among individuals, which might increase their motivation to act in solidarity. Thus, rather than calling for individual solidarity during times of crisis, authorities should consider implementing sustaining solidarity-based social support systems that go beyond immediate crisis management.
Keywords
- Ethics, Reciprocity, SARS-Coronavirus-2, Social cohesion, Solidarity
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Medicine(all)
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Sustainable Development Goals
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, Vol. 24, 23, 02.01.2024.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Solidarity and reciprocity during the COVID-19 pandemic
T2 - a longitudinal qualitative interview study from Germany
AU - Schönweitz, Franziska B.
AU - Zimmermann, Bettina M.
AU - Hangel, Nora
AU - Fiske, Amelia
AU - McLennan, Stuart
AU - Sierawska, Anna
AU - Buyx, Alena
N1 - Funding Information: Funding for this study was received from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research in Germany: Global Health Research in the Wake of the Sars-CoV-2 Outbreak Grant [ 01KI20510 ]. BZ received additional funding from the University of Bern’s MCID Early Career Research Grant for Women ( ECRG-W_003 ).
PY - 2024/1/2
Y1 - 2024/1/2
N2 - Background: While solidarity practices were important in mitigating the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, their limits became evident as the pandemic progressed. Taking a longitudinal approach, this study analyses German residents’ changing perceptions of solidarity practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and examines potential reasons for these changes. Methods: Adults living in Germany were interviewed in April 2020 (n = 46), October 2020 (n = 43) and October 2021 (n = 40) as part of the SolPan Research Commons, a large-scale, international, qualitative, longitudinal study uniquely situated in a major global public health crisis. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results: While solidarity practices were prominently discussed and positively evaluated in April 2020, this initial enthusiasm waned in October 2020 and October 2021. Yet, participants still perceived solidarity as important for managing the pandemic and called for institutionalized forms of solidarity in October 2020 and October 2021. Reasons for these changing perceptions of solidarity included (i) increasing personal and societal costs to act in solidarity, (ii) COVID-19 policies hindering solidarity practices, and (iii) a perceived lack of reciprocity as participants felt that solidarity practices from the state were not matching their individual efforts. Conclusions: Maintaining solidarity contributes to maximizing public health during a pandemic. Institutionalized forms of solidarity to support those most in need contribute to perceived reciprocity among individuals, which might increase their motivation to act in solidarity. Thus, rather than calling for individual solidarity during times of crisis, authorities should consider implementing sustaining solidarity-based social support systems that go beyond immediate crisis management.
AB - Background: While solidarity practices were important in mitigating the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, their limits became evident as the pandemic progressed. Taking a longitudinal approach, this study analyses German residents’ changing perceptions of solidarity practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and examines potential reasons for these changes. Methods: Adults living in Germany were interviewed in April 2020 (n = 46), October 2020 (n = 43) and October 2021 (n = 40) as part of the SolPan Research Commons, a large-scale, international, qualitative, longitudinal study uniquely situated in a major global public health crisis. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results: While solidarity practices were prominently discussed and positively evaluated in April 2020, this initial enthusiasm waned in October 2020 and October 2021. Yet, participants still perceived solidarity as important for managing the pandemic and called for institutionalized forms of solidarity in October 2020 and October 2021. Reasons for these changing perceptions of solidarity included (i) increasing personal and societal costs to act in solidarity, (ii) COVID-19 policies hindering solidarity practices, and (iii) a perceived lack of reciprocity as participants felt that solidarity practices from the state were not matching their individual efforts. Conclusions: Maintaining solidarity contributes to maximizing public health during a pandemic. Institutionalized forms of solidarity to support those most in need contribute to perceived reciprocity among individuals, which might increase their motivation to act in solidarity. Thus, rather than calling for individual solidarity during times of crisis, authorities should consider implementing sustaining solidarity-based social support systems that go beyond immediate crisis management.
KW - Ethics
KW - Reciprocity
KW - SARS-Coronavirus-2
KW - Social cohesion
KW - Solidarity
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85181248820&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12889-023-17521-7
DO - 10.1186/s12889-023-17521-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 38166737
AN - SCOPUS:85181248820
VL - 24
JO - BMC PUBLIC HEALTH
JF - BMC PUBLIC HEALTH
SN - 1471-2458
M1 - 23
ER -