While Twitter has grown popular among political leaders as a means of computer-mediated mass media communication alternative, the COVID-19 pandemic required new strategies for socio-political communication to handle such a crisis. Using the case of India, which was one of the worst-hit countries and is also the world’s largest democracy, this research explicates how political leaders responded to the COVID-19 crisis on Twitter during the first wave as it was the first time such a crisis occurred. Theoretical frameworks of discursive leadership and situational crisis communication theory have been used to analyze interactions based on the usage patterns, the content of communication, the extent of usage in relation to the severity of the crisis, and the possible role of leaders’ position along with the status of their political party. The sample consisted of tweets posted by six prominent political leaders in India across the four consecutive lockdown periods from 25th March to 31st May 2020. A total of 4,158 tweets were scrapped and after filtering for retweets, the final dataset consisted of 2,809 original tweets. Exploratory data analysis, sentiment analysis, and content analysis were conducted. It was found that the tweets had an overall positive sentiment, an important crisis management strategy. Four main themes emerged: crisis management information, strengthening followers’ resilience and trust, reputation management, and leaders’ proactiveness. By focusing on such discursive aspects of crisis management, the study comprehensively highlights how political interactions on twitter integrated with politics and governance to handle COVID-19 in India. The study has implications for the fields of digital media interaction, political communication, public relations, and crisis leadership.

Text corpus and Big Five leadership traits as demonstrated in Brown, Horvath, and Stevens (2021) "Moonshots or a Cautious Take-Off? How the Big Five Leadership Traits Predict Covid Policy Response" (working paper).

According to a global survey conducted in 2020, ** percent of respondents from the Sub-Saharan Africa region trusted the religious leaders had made a lot of COVID-related decisions based on scientific advice, the highest share across all regions globally. This statistic presents the distribution of public opinion on whether religious leaders based COVID-related decisions on scientific advice worldwide in 2020, by region.

Changelog:

Update September 20, 2021: Data and overview updated to reflect data used in the September 15 story Over Half of States Have Rolled Back Public Health Powers in Pandemic. It includes 303 state or local public health leaders who resigned, retired or were fired between April 1, 2020 and Sept. 12, 2021. Previous versions of this dataset reflected data used in the Dec. 2020 and April 2021 stories.

Overview

Across the U.S., state and local public health officials have found themselves at the center of a political storm as they combat the worst pandemic in a century. Amid a fractured federal response, the usually invisible army of workers charged with preventing the spread of infectious disease has become a public punching bag.

In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, at least 303 state or local public health leaders in 41 states have resigned, retired or been fired since April 1, 2020, according to an ongoing investigation by The Associated Press and KHN.

According to experts, that is the largest exodus of public health leaders in American history.

Many left due to political blowback or pandemic pressure, as they became the target of groups that have coalesced around a common goal — fighting and even threatening officials over mask orders and well-established public health activities like quarantines and contact tracing. Some left to take higher profile positions, or due to health concerns. Others were fired for poor performance. Dozens retired. An untold number of lower level staffers have also left.

The result is a further erosion of the nation’s already fragile public health infrastructure, which KHN and the AP documented beginning in 2020 in the Underfunded and Under Threat project.

Findings

The AP and KHN found that:

• One in five Americans live in a community that has lost its local public health department leader during the pandemic
• Top public health officials in 28 states have left state-level departments ## Using this data To filter for data specific to your state, use this query

To get total numbers of exits by state, broken down by state and local departments, use this query

Methodology

KHN and AP counted how many state and local public health leaders have left their jobs between April 1, 2020 and Sept. 12, 2021.

The government tasks public health workers with improving the health of the general population, through their work to encourage healthy living and prevent infectious disease. To that end, public health officials do everything from inspecting water and food safety to testing the nation’s babies for metabolic diseases and contact tracing cases of syphilis.

Many parts of the country have a health officer and a health director/administrator by statute. The analysis counted both of those positions if they existed. For state-level departments, the count tracks people in the top and second-highest-ranking job.

The analysis includes exits of top department officials regardless of reason, because no matter the reason, each left a vacancy at the top of a health agency during the pandemic. Reasons for departures include political pressure, health concerns and poor performance. Others left to take higher profile positions or to retire. Some departments had multiple top officials exit over the course of the pandemic; each is included in the analysis.

Reporters compiled the exit list by reaching out to public health associations and experts in every state and interviewing hundreds of public health employees. They also received information from the National Association of City and County Health Officials, and combed news reports and records.

Public health departments can be found at multiple levels of government. Each state has a department that handles these tasks, but most states also have local departments that either operate under local or state control. The population served by each local health department is calculated using the U.S. Census Bureau 2019 Population Estimates based on each department’s jurisdiction.

KHN and the AP have worked since the spring on a series of stories documenting the funding, staffing and problems around public health. A previous data distribution detailed a decade's worth of cuts to state and local spending and staffing on public health. That data can be found here.

Attribution

Findings and the data should be cited as: "According to a KHN and Associated Press report."

Is Data Missing?

If you know of a public health official in your state or area who has left that position between April 1, 2020 and Sept. 12, 2021 and isn't currently in our dataset, please contact authors Anna Maria Barry-Jester annab@kff.org, Hannah Recht hrecht@kff.org, Michelle Smith mrsmith@ap.org and Lauren Weber laurenw@kff.org.

This statistic is based on a survey conducted in January 2023. It displays U.S. adults' opinions on which country would be the number one world leader in science and technology in the year 2030. Some 20 percent of respondents believed that China would be the leader in science and technology in 2030.

World leaders in science

Among American adults, 52 percent believe that the United States would be considered the world leader in science and technology in 2030. Back in 2010, the United States was viewed by many as the leader in life science technologies. For medical implants, 81 percent considered the country at the top, while 10 percent of people considered Germany to be the leader in pharmaceutical developments. In 2021, the United States had a total employment in bioscience sectors of roughly 2.1 million, of which the largest single part worked in research, testing, and laboratories.

Biotech shows its potentials

Biotechnology is a good example for a very science and technology driven sector, as was seen recently during the COVID-19 pandemic, when biotech companies like BioNTech and Moderna managed to develop and manufacture vaccines in record-time. The U.S. is still the global leader in life sciences, especially driven by its strong science and technology hubs in the San Francisco Bay Area and the Greater Boston Area.

As of May 2, 2023, the outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) had spread to almost every country in the world, and more than 6.86 million people had died after contracting the respiratory virus. Over 1.16 million of these deaths occurred in the United States.

Waves of infections Almost every country and territory worldwide have been affected by the COVID-19 disease. At the end of 2021 the virus was once again circulating at very high rates, even in countries with relatively high vaccination rates such as the United States and Germany. As rates of new infections increased, some countries in Europe, like Germany and Austria, tightened restrictions once again, specifically targeting those who were not yet vaccinated. However, by spring 2022, rates of new infections had decreased in many countries and restrictions were once again lifted.

What are the symptoms of the virus? It can take up to 14 days for symptoms of the illness to start being noticed. The most commonly reported symptoms are a fever and a dry cough, leading to shortness of breath. The early symptoms are similar to other common viruses such as the common cold and flu. These illnesses spread more during cold months, but there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that temperature impacts the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Medical advice should be sought if you are experiencing any of these symptoms.

Context

• Does a central/fedral government have the power/authority to completely isolate a province/state?
• How quickly can a government react to the situation?
• Is the government able to effectively allocate and move the resources to where they are needed the most in a timely manner?
• What is the risk appetite of the leader?
• What is the risk appetite of the goverment?

The spread of COVID-19 is more than just a technical and scientific question. How and how well can a country contain the spread of the virus also depends on its leader and regime characteristics.

Content

This dataset contains 5 leader characteristics to profile the leader of a country. - whether the leader is elected - tenure - age - gender - military experience

This dataset also contains 1 regime characteristic that outlines the political structure. Notably, - presidential democracy: Democracy in which the executive is distinct from the legislative branch and considerable decision-making authority is granted to the executive. - parliamentary Democracy: Democracy in which legislatures are more powerful and executives are less autonomous. - single-party systems: Power is held by the head of a party. Executive power is effectively checked by the party or ruling committee.

Additionally, this dataset contains other politial factors that may affect how the leader and government react to the situation, including anticipated election in the near term and whether there were previous civil conflicts.

Acknowledgements

The source of the dataset is updated by Bell, Curtis at OEFRESESARCH.ORG (citation below) and is altered for the COVID-19 forcasting challenge.

Bell, Curtis. 2016. The Rulers, Elections, and Irregular Governance Dataset (REIGN). Broomfield, CO: OEF Research. Available at oefresearch.org

Detailed variable descriptions can be found at https://oefresearch.org/sites/default/files/REIGN_descriptions.pdf

BackgroundSelf-leadership has proven to adjust individual psychological states and promote active behaviors to mitigate stress perception and negative lifestyle. This study aims to investigate the relationship between self-leadership, epidemic risk perception, and quality of life among the general public in post-pandemic mainland of China.MethodsTwo online self-reported questionnaire surveys were carried out with 3,098 and 469 people in the Chinese mainland in February 2021 and December 2022, respectively. The univariate analysis, structural equation modeling, and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis were used to analyze the data which was collected by Revised Self-Leadership Questionnaire, Perceived Risk of COVID-19 Pandemic Scale and World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief Scale.ResultsThe Self-leadership was directly, moderately, and positively correlated with quality of life (Standardized path coefficients: 0.383 and 0.491, respectively; p

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a global societal, economic, and social upheaval unseen in living memory. There have been substantial cross-national differences in the kinds of policies implemented by political decision-makers to prevent the spread of the virus, to test the population, and to manage infected patients. Among other factors, these policies vary with politicians’ sex: early findings indicate that, on average, female leaders seem more focused on minimizing direct human suffering caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, while male leaders implement riskier short-term decisions, possibly aiming to minimize economic disruptions. These sex differences are consistent with broader findings in psychology, reflecting women’s stronger empathy, higher pathogen disgust, health concern, care-taking orientation, and dislike for the suffering of other people—as well as men’s higher risk-taking, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, narcissism, and focus on financial indicators of success and status. This review article contextualizes sex differences in pandemic leadership in an evolutionary framework. Evolution by natural selection is the only known process in nature that organizes organisms into higher degrees of functional order, or counteracts the unavoidable disorder that would otherwise ensue, and is therefore essential for explaining the origins of human sex differences. Differential sexual selection and parental investment between males and females, together with the sexual differentiation of the mammalian brain, drive sex differences in cognition and behavioral dispositions, underlying men’s and women’s leadership styles and decision-making during a global pandemic. According to the sexually dimorphic leadership specialization hypothesis, general psychobehavioral sex differences have been exapted during human evolution to create sexually dimorphic leadership styles. They may be facultatively co-opted by societies and/or followers when facing different kinds of ecological and/or sociopolitical threats, such as disease outbreaks or intergroup aggression. Early evidence indicates that against the invisible viral foe that can bring nations to their knees, the strategic circumspection of empathic feminine health “worriers” may bring more effective and humanitarian outcomes than the devil-may-care incaution of masculine risk-taking “warriors”.

Infectious disease experts have predicted a pandemic, saying it was not a question of if but when. Drawing on experiences with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), avian influenza (H5N1), and novel influenza A (H1N1), the World Health Organization (WHO) and other health authorities, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), urged nations and local governments to prepare pandemic response plans. Many ministries of health and subnational departments of health around the world have activated those plans in response to coronavirus and are sharing data as required by the updated International Health Regulations.Esri's work with health organizations and government leaders has proven location intelligence from geographic information system (GIS) technology and data to be critical for the following:Assessing risk and evaluating threatsMonitoring and tracking outbreaksMaintaining situational awarenessEnsuring resource allocationNotifying agencies and communitiesThe current coronavirus disease pandemic presents an opportunity to build on the experience and readiness of Esri's existing global user community in health and human services. Through real-time maps, apps, and dashboards, GIS will also facilitate a seamless flow of relevant data as a component of the response from local to global levels. A compelling case exists for building on top of the public health GIS foundation that is already in place both in the United States and around the world.After reading this paper, leadership and senior staff should understand the following:The necessity to apply location intelligence to public health processes in coronavirus responseHow GIS can support immediate and long-term actionWhat resources Esri provides its customers

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a globally spread—but differently timed—implementation of school closures and other disruptive containment measures as governments worldwide intervened to curb transmission of disease. This study argues that the timing of such disruptive interventions reflects how governments balance the principles of precaution and proportionality in their pandemic decision-making. A theory is proposed of how their trade-off is impacted by two interacting institutional factors: electoral democratic institutions, which incentivize political leaders to increasingly favor precaution, and high state administrative capacity, which instead makes a proportional strategy involving later containment measures more administratively and politically feasible. Global patterns consistent with this theory are documented among 170 countries in early 2020, using Cox models of school closures and other non-pharmaceutical interventions. Corroborating the theorized mechanisms, additional results indicate that electoral competition prompts democratic leaders’ faster response, and that this mechanism is weaker where professional state agencies have more influence over policy-making.

From 15/08/2020, I am no longer updating these files. Instead, I am directly reading data files from the Covid-19 Repository at John Hopkins University.

Context

I have created these datasets specifically for my analysis notebooks:

https://www.kaggle.com/aiaiaidavid/how-spain-became-leader-in-covid-19-infections

And others I am working on.

Content

These datasets contain covid-19 confirmed, recovered and detah cases time series for the following 10 world countries:

Europe: Spain, Italy, France, Germany and UK
Rest of the world: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Iran and USA

Note the files for 27072020 had two countries (Iran and Australia) removed.

Full data is obtained from the COVID-19 Data Repository by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University:

https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19

Acknowledgements

Thank you to the community of AI Saturdays Spain, which introduced me into Jupyter Notebooks and Kaggle, which has open up a new world of opportunities for me.

How did Brazil become a global epicenter of the outbreak? After seeming to ease, is the virus making a comeback?

A world leader in infections and deaths.

Latin America became an epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic in May, driven by Brazil’s ballooning caseload. Ten months after its first known case, Brazil has had more than 7.9 million cases and over 200,000 deaths.

In early June, Brazil began averaging about 1,000 deaths per day from Covid-19, joining the United States — and later India — as the countries with the world’s largest death tolls.

This dataset contains information about COVID-19 in Brazil extracted on the date 16/06/2021. It is the most updated dataset available about Covid in Brazil

Features:

🔍 date: date that the data was collected. format YYYY-MM-DD.
🔍 state: Abbreviation for States. Example: SP
🔍 city: Name of the city (if the value is NaN, they are referring to the State, not the city)
🔍 place_type: Can be City or State
🔍 order_for_place: Number that identifies the registering order for this location. The line that refers to the first log is going to be shown as 1, and the following information will start the count as an index.
🔍 is_last: Show if the line was the last update from that place, can be True or False
🔍 city_ibge_code: IBGE Code from the location
🔍confirmed: Number of confirmed cases.
🔍deaths: Number of deaths.
🔍estimated_population: Estimated population for this city/state in 2020. Data from IBGE
🔍estimated_population_2019: Estimated population for this city/state in 2019. Data from IBGE.
🔍confirmed_per_100k_inhabitants: Number of confirmed cases per 100.000 habitants (based on estimated_population).
🔍death_rate: Death rate (deaths / confirmed cases).

Acknowledgements

This dataset was downloaded from the URL bello. Thanks, Brasil.IO! Their main goal is to make all Brazilian data available to the public DATASET URL: https://brasil.io/dataset/covid19/files/ Cities map file https://geoftp.ibge.gov.br/organizacao_do_territorio/malhas_territoriais/malhas_municipais/municipio_2020/Brasil/BR/

Similar Datasets

COVID-19 - https://www.kaggle.com/rafaelherrero/covid19-brazil-full-cases-17062021 COVID-19 - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/corona-virus-report MERS - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/mers-outbreak-dataset-20122019 Ebola Western Africa 2014 Outbreak - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/ebola-outbreak-20142016-complete-dataset H1N1 | Swine Flu 2009 Pandemic Dataset - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/h1n1-swine-flu-2009-pandemic-dataset SARS 2003 Pandemic - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/sars-outbreak-2003-complete-dataset HIV AIDS - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/hiv-aids-dataset

Context

United States 45th President Donald Trump has used Twitter as no one else. He primarily ran his government from a twitter firehose. Twitter has officially banned his account on January 8th 2021 after a deadly riot at Capitol on January 6th 2021. Twitter cites its World Leaders on Twitter: Principles and Approach as a guide to adhere to for public leaders.

Trump tweets and policies have far reaching effects that one can realize or he would accept to realize himself. Since, twitter is suspended there is no public way to read his past tweets and analyze it for public policy outcome or link it with global issues.

Here we are presenting the complete treasure trove of President Trump's tweet, all 56,572 for the public, data scientists and researchers.

Content

The dataset contains 56,572 tweets, tweet IDs, Tweet Date, How many liked and retweeted it.

Acknowledgements

I like to acknowledge Twitter and Trump's Tweet Archives on the Internet that have helped me create this dataset

Inspiration

I’d like to call the attention of my fellow Kagglers and Data Scientists to use Machine Learning and Data Sciences to help me explore these ideas:

• How many times Trump discussed a particular country in his tweets and if we can label the sentiments? (North Korea, India, Pakistan, Mexico?) • How many times Trump talks about immigrants and border wall? • How many times and ways he has insulted? • Can you find a link between his tweets and stock market prices? • How many times he has downplayed Corona/Covid? • How many times he has called the election fraud? • How many tweets about Hillary Clinton, Obama or Joe Biden? • Anything else you can find that surprises us?

The G7 is a forum designed for frank and open discussion between leaders, ministers and policy-makers. As a member of the G7, Canada plays a leading role on the international stage and is able to advance domestic and international priorities. The G7 provides global leadership and serves as a powerful catalyst on issues that are later taken up by other fora with broader global and regional membership. The G7 brings together the world’s advanced economies to influence global trends and tackle pervasive and crosscutting issues, as well as emergent global crises. The G7 has strengthened international economic and security policies, advanced discussion of global issues including climate change and gender equality, brought donors together and supported disarmament programs. Most recently, the G7 has worked to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic and respond to Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. At the G7, Canada has advanced its domestic and international priorities, including gender equality, peace and security, climate change and building a sustainable global economy. Transparent and inclusive engagement with Canadian and international stakeholders has helped Canada to deliver on priorities that are important to Canadians.

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic emerged in a context that lacked adequate prevention, preparedness, and response (PPR) activities, and global, regional, and national leadership. South American countries were among world’s hardest hit by the pandemic, accounting for 10.1% of total cases and 20.1% of global deaths.MethodsThis study explores how pandemic PPR were affected by political, socioeconomic, and health system contexts as well as how PPR may have shaped pandemic outcomes in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Peru. We then identify lessons learned and advance an agenda for improving PPR capacity at regional and national levels. We do this through a mixed-methods sequential explanatory study in four South American countries based on structured interviews and focus groups with elite policy makers.ResultsThe results of our study demonstrate that structural and contextual barriers limited PPR activities at political, social, and economic levels in each country, as well as through the structure of the health care system. Respondents believe that top-level government officials had insufficient political will for prioritizing pandemic PPR and post-COVID-19 recovery programs within their countries’ health agendas.DiscussionWe recommend a regional COVID-19 task force, post-pandemic recovery, social and economic protection for vulnerable groups, improved primary health care and surveillance systems, risk communication strategies, and community engagement to place pandemic PPR on Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Peru and other South American countries’ national public health agendas.

Boris Johnson - United Kingdom: Boris Johnson has been Prime Minister since July 24, 2019. He is the leader of the Conservative Party. Johnson's tenure has been marked by significant events such as Brexit, the COVID-19 pandemic, and efforts to revitalize the UK economy.

Imran Khan - Pakistan: Imran Khan became Prime Minister on August 18, 2018. He leads the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party. Khan, a former cricketer turned politician, has focused on anti-corruption measures, economic reforms, and diplomacy with neighboring countries.

Sheikh Hasina - Bangladesh: Sheikh Hasina has served as Prime Minister since January 6, 2009. She leads the Awami League party. Hasina's leadership has emphasized economic development, infrastructure projects, and social welfare programs in Bangladesh.

Joe Biden - United States: Joe Biden is the President of the United States, not a Prime Minister. He assumed office on January 20, 2021, leading the Democratic Party. Biden's presidency has prioritized issues such as the COVID-19 pandemic response, climate change, racial equity, and infrastructure reform.

Justin Trudeau - Canada: Justin Trudeau has been Prime Minister since November 4, 2015. He leads the Liberal Party. Trudeau is known for his progressive policies on climate change, immigration, and social issues, as well as his efforts to strengthen Canada's international relations.

Narendra Modi - India: Narendra Modi has been Prime Minister since May 26, 2014. He leads the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Modi's tenure has been marked by economic reforms, infrastructure development, digital initiatives, and a proactive foreign policy approach.

Notes:

1.**Boris Johnson - United Kingdom**

2.**Imran Khan - Pakistan**

3.**Sheikh Hasina - Bangladesh**

4.**Joe Biden - United States** (Note: Joe Biden is not a Prime Minister; he is the President of the United States)

5.**Justin Trudeau - Canada**

6.**Narendra Modi - India**

The G7 is a forum designed for frank and open discussion between leaders, ministers and policy-makers. As a member of the G7, Canada plays a leading role on the international stage and is able to advance domestic and international priorities. The G7 provides global leadership and serves as a powerful catalyst on issues that are later taken up by other fora with broader global and regional membership. The G7 brings together the world’s advanced economies to influence global trends and tackle pervasive and crosscutting issues, as well as emergent global crises. The G7 has strengthened international economic and security policies, advanced discussion of global issues including climate change and gender equality, brought donors together and supported disarmament programs. Most recently, the G7 has worked to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic and respond to Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. At the G7, Canada has advanced its domestic and international priorities, including gender equality, peace and security, climate change and building a sustainable global economy. Transparent and inclusive engagement with Canadian and international stakeholders has helped Canada to deliver on priorities that are important to Canadians.

The G7 is a forum designed for frank and open discussion between leaders, ministers and policy-makers. As a member of the G7, Canada plays a leading role on the international stage and is able to advance domestic and international priorities. The G7 provides global leadership and serves as a powerful catalyst on issues that are later taken up by other fora with broader global and regional membership. The G7 brings together the world’s advanced economies to influence global trends and tackle pervasive and crosscutting issues, as well as emergent global crises. The G7 has strengthened international economic and security policies, advanced discussion of global issues including climate change and gender equality, brought donors together and supported disarmament programs. Most recently, the G7 has worked to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic and respond to Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. At the G7, Canada has advanced its domestic and international priorities, including gender equality, peace and security, climate change and building a sustainable global economy. Transparent and inclusive engagement with Canadian and international stakeholders has helped Canada to deliver on priorities that are important to Canadians.

The G7 is a forum designed for frank and open discussion between leaders, ministers and policy-makers. As a member of the G7, Canada plays a leading role on the international stage and is able to advance domestic and international priorities. The G7 provides global leadership and serves as a powerful catalyst on issues that are later taken up by other fora with broader global and regional membership. The G7 brings together the world’s advanced economies to influence global trends and tackle pervasive and crosscutting issues, as well as emergent global crises. The G7 has strengthened international economic and security policies, advanced discussion of global issues including climate change and gender equality, brought donors together and supported disarmament programs. Most recently, the G7 has worked to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic and respond to Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. At the G7, Canada has advanced its domestic and international priorities, including gender equality, peace and security, climate change and building a sustainable global economy. Transparent and inclusive engagement with Canadian and international stakeholders has helped Canada to deliver on priorities that are important to Canadians.