Solidarity and reciprocity during the COVID-19 pandemic

a longitudinal qualitative interview study from Germany

verfasst von

Franziska B. Schönweitz, Bettina M. Zimmermann, Nora Hangel, Amelia Fiske, Stuart McLennan, Anna Sierawska, Alena Buyx

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.

Organisationseinheit(en)

Leibniz Forschungszentrum Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft (LCSS)

Externe Organisation(en)

Technische Universität München (TUM)
University of Bern
Technische Universität Dresden

Typ

Artikel

Journal

BMC PUBLIC HEALTH

Band

24

Anzahl der Seiten

14

ISSN

1471-2458

Publikationsdatum

02.01.2024

Publikationsstatus

Veröffentlicht

Peer-reviewed

Ja

ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete

Öffentliche Gesundheit, Umwelt- und Arbeitsmedizin

Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung

SDG 3 – Gute Gesundheit und Wohlergehen

Elektronische Version(en)

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-17521-7 (Zugang: Offen)