WE’RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER? INDIVIDUALISM, COLLECTIVISM, AND COVID-19 PUBLIC HEALTH RESPONSE

When the Coronavirus rapidly shut down the world in March of 2020, the question of how best to handle the pandemic was initially left largely up to individual countries to figure out for themselves. What became abundantly clear with the different approaches was that some COVID mitigation policies were heavily individualistic and others more collectivist. Individualism revolves around the idea of self-reliance and independence over the collective. Whereas, collectivism values cohesiveness and prioritizes the group over the self. The various policies adopted by these countries have fallen under the microscope and, in some cases, this scrutiny has exposed some major cracks in public health policymaking, communication, and the functioning of health care systems around the world - particularly in the United States. This thesis focuses on the lessons learned from cultural variation in approaches to COVID-19 that can be applied to other public health crises, by examining individualism and collectivism as theories, conducting case studies on COVID-19 response policies in the United States, and Japan, and developing informed policy recommendations. By the end of this research, I hope it is clear to the reader that taking into account cultural mindsets in the development of policy and public health initiatives is crucial in mitigating the effects of major public health emergencies. Successful public health practices are often inherently collectivist, and the acknowledgment of collective measures when making public health policy is necessary to make sure that what is being implemented will be effective in the present and for the future