Abstract:Introduction: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, from March 1 to April 15, 2020, significant variations emerged among countries regarding the implementation of lockdown policies. During this period, viewed strictly from an epidemiological perspective, lockdown measures are considered the most effective means of containing a pandemic. However, the adoption of such measures varied, raising questions about whether the reluctance or failure of countries to implement lockdown policies reflected a disregard for epidemiological knowledge or stemmed from an inability to enforce these measures. Methods: This article employs Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) with 26 European countries as case studies to investigate under what combination of conditions a country would implement lockdown policies. Results: The QCA results identify three distinct combinations of conditions that lead countries to implement lockdown measures. First, countries with relatively concentrated political power are more likely to implement lockdown policies. Among the 10 countries governed by a majority party or majority coalition within a two-party or moderate multi-party system, seven implemented lockdown policies. Second, in cases of relatively dispersed political power, countries facing state fragility risks are more likely to implement lockdown policies. Among the eight countries that meet both conditions, five implemented lockdown policies. Finally, factors such as political heritage, severity of the pandemic, demographic composition, healthcare access, quality standards, and the ruling party's ideology play a lesser role in the decision to enact lockdown measures. Discussion: This article offers a novel perspective on the dynamics of party politics and state capacity in the context of decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic. It contributes to a deeper understanding of the intricate relationship between political systems and public health crisis management, highlighting how various political and governance factors influence the adoption of public health interventions during crises.

Comparative Public Policy Analysis of COVID-19 As a Naturally Occurring Experiment

Quantifying Policy Responses to a Global Emergency: Insights from the COVID-19 Pandemic

Characterizing the Patterns of China's Policies Against COVID-19: A Bibliometric Study.

Culture, Institution, and COVID-19 First-Response Policy: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Thirty-One Countries

A Comparative Analysis of Government Responses to COVID-19 in the United States, China, and South Korea: Lessons from the Early Stage of the Pandemic

Policy evaluation during a pandemic

Comparative health policy goes qualitative: Broadening the focus of research after COVID-19

Ecological comparison of six countries in two waves of COVID-19

Learning from COVID-19: a Systems Approach for Public Health Governance

Joining Hands to Manage Transboundary Crises: A Comparative Evaluation of Policy Collaboration for Epidemic Prevention in China during SARS and COVID-19

Same Pandemic But Different Studies: An Exploration Of Covid-19 Research A The Early Stage

“The Tragedy of the Commons”: How Individualism and Collectivism Affected the Spread of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Researching COVID-19: A research agenda for public policy and administration scholars

Social Policy Responses to the Covid-19 Crisis in China in 2020

Culture and political regimes: How have they influenced the effectiveness of COVID-19 response policy?

Comparative analysis of epidemic public opinion and policies in two regions of China based on big data

Qualitative comparative analysis of policies implemented by 26 European countries during the 2020 great lockdown

Epidemic Control and Resource Allocation: Approaches and Implications for the Management of COVID-19

Coevolution of COVID-19 Research and China’s Policies

Social Preferences and Economic Decision-Making in the Wake of COVID-19: Experimental Evidence from China