Evaluation of Luxembourg's COVID-19 Response
As countries seek to learn from the COVID-19 crisis and increase their resilience for the future, evaluations are important tools to understand what worked or not, why and for whom. This report is the first of its kind. It evaluates Luxembourg's responses to the COVID-19 crisis in terms of risk...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Autor Corporativo: | |
| Formato: | Libro electrónico |
| Idioma: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Paris :
Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development
2022.
|
| Edición: | 1st ed |
| Materias: | |
| Ver en Biblioteca Universitat Ramon Llull: | https://discovery.url.edu/permalink/34CSUC_URL/1im36ta/alma991009704587906719 |
Tabla de Contenidos:
- Intro
- Preface
- Foreword
- Acknowledgements
- Executive summary
- Factors affecting Luxembourg's response to the COVID-19 pandemic
- Emergency anticipation and preparedness in Luxembourg
- The management of the COVID-19 crisis
- The resilience of the health system to COVID-19
- The education system during the pandemic
- Emergency economic and fiscal measures
- Social and employment policies put to the test by the crisis
- 1 Evaluating the response to the COVID-19 crisis in Luxembourg
- 1.1. Introduction
- 1.2. How can the response to the COVID-19 crisis be evaluated?
- 1.2.1. This report is part of the OECD's work on evaluations of COVID-19 responses
- 1.2.2. This evaluation is based on robust qualitative and quantitative data
- 1.2.3. The evaluation analyses the measures adopted by Luxembourg, their implementation processes and the results obtained
- 1.3. Understanding the context: What were Luxembourg's strengths and challenges in responding to the crisis?
- 1.3.1. Luxembourg is a small, multilingual and very open country
- 1.3.2. The population of Luxembourg is growing and remains young overall
- 1.3.3. Luxembourg's political system is stable and enjoys a high level of public confidence
- Luxembourg's political system has been stable for several decades
- Legislative power is concentrated in one parliamentary chamber
- Luxembourg citizens have trust in the institutions and public authorities
- 1.3.4. Public governance in Luxembourg is highly centralised
- 1.3.5. Luxembourg's healthcare system is robust, but faces some structural inequality and risk factors
- An effective and efficient health system supported by strong infrastructure
- However, some structural weaknesses in the health system may have presented challenges in the run-up to the crisis
- Health inequalities that affect the less affluent and educated.
- 1.3.6. Luxembourg has a unique and very autonomous education system
- Luxembourg's unique education system has enjoyed high levels of investment but faces challenges when it comes to equity
- The education sector has a high degree of autonomy in Luxembourg
- 1.3.7. Luxembourg had budgetary room for manoeuvre before the crisis, even if the long-term sustainability of public finances was not certain
- Luxembourg's public finances were sound before the crisis
- This pre-crisis situation allowed the government to provide huge levels of support to the economy with a limited impact on public balances
- However, the long-term sustainability of public finances in the face of an ageing population remains uncertain
- 1.3.8. Luxembourg's economy is open and highly service-based
- Luxembourg's economy is dynamic, open and highly dependent on the service sector
- This has been a strength in the face of the shock caused by the pandemic
- 1.3.9. The Luxembourg labour market is relatively dynamic but highly dependant on cross-border workers
- The unemployment rate is low in Luxembourg but hides a contrasting reality
- Heavy reliance on cross-border workers could have been a risk factor
- 1.3.10. In Luxembourg, the risk of poverty and social exclusion is relatively low, but growing
- 1.4. How has Luxembourg responded to the crisis?
- References
- Note
- 2 Emergency anticipation and preparedness in Luxembourg
- 2.1. Introduction
- 2.2. The anticipation capacities of the Luxembourg Government before the arrival of the pandemic in Luxembourg
- 2.2.1. Anticipation capacities depend on a comprehensive understanding of the risks
- 2.2.2. Luxembourg's national risk assessment had identified the risk of an influenza pandemic before the COVID-19 pandemic.
- 2.2.3. Luxembourg should keep its risk assessment up to date and ensure that it is used in preparedness and response plans
- 2.2.4. The role of the crisis management system and its links with the government's influenza pandemic plan
- 2.2.5. Luxembourg was able to use its national crisis management framework to monitor the evolution of the COVID-19 situation before the government's influenza pandemic plan was triggered
- 2.2.6. The epidemic management and infection control measures set out in the national Ebola ERP also complemented the government's influenza pandemic plan
- 2.3. Preparation of essential services and critical infrastructure operators in Luxembourg
- 2.3.1. The national influenza pandemic response plan provided a good starting point for preparedness discussions with essential services and critical infrastructure operators
- 2.3.2. Critical infrastructure operators put pandemic response plans in place following the outbreak of COVID-19 and successfully avoided large-scale disruptions
- 2.3.3. Luxembourg was able to leverage relationships with the private sector to ensure the supply of essential goods
- 2.4. Managing the cross-border effects of the pandemic in Luxembourg
- 2.4.1. Luxembourg was able to draw on its extensive experience in international co-operation when responding to the crisis
- 2.5. Summary of recommendations
- 2.5.1. Strengthen the risk assessment process and use it to increase national resilience.
- 2.5.2. Ensure that emergency plans reflect current knowledge of potential crises
- 2.5.3. Improve the preparedness of essential services
- 2.5.4. Share what the country has learned
- 2.5.5. Strengthen international co-operation to respond to future crises
- References
- Annex 2.A. Timeline of the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic
- 3 The management of the COVID-19 crisis in Luxembourg.
- 3.1. Introduction
- 3.2. The interministerial management of the COVID-19 crisis in Luxembourg
- 3.2.1. Crisis leadership was provided at the highest level of government
- 3.2.2. The governance of the crisis unit allowed for great agility in the government's response
- 3.2.3. This structure may have reduced the clarity and transparency of decision making
- 3.2.4. Although no information system existed for this purpose before the crisis, Luxembourg very quickly put in place a reliable system for real-time monitoring
- 3.2.5. The role of scientific expertise in public decision making should be strengthened more generally outside of crisis periods to increase its legitimacy
- The creation of the COVID-19 Task Force gave Luxembourg a unified voice with specialist expertise
- Some challenges may have arisen in relation to governance of this scientific expertise
- The transparency of scientific expertise could be increased
- 3.3. External crisis communication in Luxembourg
- 3.3.1. Luxembourg used a wide variety of channels, which allowed it to reach a large audience and to be attentive to citizens' expectations
- 3.3.2. Luxembourg's crisis communication benefited from messaging adapted to different audiences but may have suffered from a lack of coherence
- 3.4. The involvement of society as a whole in crisis management in Luxembourg
- 3.4.1. Central government co-ordination with local stakeholders was generally effective, although sometimes late
- 3.4.2. The active involvement of parliament ensured the continuity of democratic life, but other forms of citizen participation could have been used better
- 3.4.3. Luxembourg must strive to evaluate the measures adopted during the crisis more systematically in order to draw lessons for the future
- 3.5. Summary of recommendations
- 3.5.1. Strengthen transparency in crisis management.
- 3.5.2. Clarify and strengthen the role of scientific expertise and evidence in public decision making
- 3.5.3. Prepare for future crises
- References
- Note
- 4 The resilience of the Luxembourg health system to COVID-19
- 4.1. Introduction
- 4.2. The direct health impact of COVID-19 in Luxembourg
- 4.2.1. Although the prevalence of COVID-19 infections has been high in Luxembourg, the death toll has been much lower than in other OECD member countries
- 4.2.2. The pandemic disproportionately affected older and vulnerable populations
- 4.2.3. While the effectiveness of the vaccination campaign in Luxembourg is undeniable, vaccination coverage is slightly lower than the average in OECD member countries
- 4.2.4. Approximately 60% of patients with COVID-19 report at least one symptom more than one year after the acute phase of infection
- 4.3. The indirect consequences of the pandemic in Luxembourg
- 4.3.1. Luxembourg recorded a decline in consultations with health professionals
- 4.3.2. Hospital activity decreased and the number of non-urgent operations reduced in most hospitals
- 4.3.3. Cancer screening and treatment were delayed in 2020
- 4.3.4. The health crisis has had a significant impact on the mental health of the population, particularly among younger people and those in employment
- 4.4. How resilient was pandemic management in Luxembourg?
- 4.4.1. Luxembourg anticipated the pandemic risk very early on
- Luxembourg has an influenza pandemic ERP that has only partially met the needs of managing the crisis
- Interministerial meetings were held at the end of January 2020, with the crisis unit set to work on 1 March 2020
- 4.4.2. Structural difficulties weakened the level of operational preparedness for the pandemic
- National stocks of PPE were initially insufficient, but the logistics unit quickly placed several orders.
- No information system existed at the beginning of the pandemic to manage the crisis.
