Read on Twitter
these two articles on women leaders have been widely shared, but perhaps omit a key point...
these leaders have been risk-averse. they forced early closures & thereby helped flatten the curve.
women tend to be more risk-averse.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/avivahwittenbergcox/2020/04/13/what-do-countries-with-the-best-coronavirus-reponses-have-in-common-women-leaders/#40b676373dec
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/04/coronavirus-san-francisco-london-breed/609808/
these leaders have been risk-averse. they forced early closures & thereby helped flatten the curve.
women tend to be more risk-averse.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/avivahwittenbergcox/2020/04/13/what-do-countries-with-the-best-coronavirus-reponses-have-in-common-women-leaders/#40b676373dec
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/04/coronavirus-san-francisco-london-breed/609808/
individual leadership is given far too much attention, relative to structure - generally
structure matters: wealth, state capacity, health systems, experience of sars
controlling for that, indiv leadership matters in terms of early closures (which have reduced the death count).
structure matters: wealth, state capacity, health systems, experience of sars
controlling for that, indiv leadership matters in terms of early closures (which have reduced the death count).
the funny (perhaps not 'haha') thing is that we've often treated women's aversion to risk as a problem to be fixed
but now we see that if you live in a jurisdiction with a risk-averse leader, you have a much higher chance of survival*.
*controlling for all the structural stuff.
but now we see that if you live in a jurisdiction with a risk-averse leader, you have a much higher chance of survival*.
*controlling for all the structural stuff.
Curious?
Follow @ruthcarlitz, as she's now investigating the relationship between gender & early closures across the USA.
Follow @ruthcarlitz, as she's now investigating the relationship between gender & early closures across the USA.
