This article contributes to understanding how inexperience and lack of commitment to evidence-based decision making may undermine an otherwise broadly functional framework for constitutional risk management. As part of a focus on the “Visegrád Four” countries, it also helps understand regional dynamics since the COVID-19 pandemic as the most visible emergency after 1989. The article starts with a brief elucidation of the political contexts that have shaped Slovakia’s constitutional risk management, focusing on the developments from 2020 through early 2025. An analysis of mechanisms of emergency risk management in the constitutional framework follows, that helps identify key state authorities attempting to make decisions under serious time pressures. The implementation of the constitutional framework during the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates the creation of new avenues for restricting rights and bolstering executive competence, with the formally powerful constitutional review mechanisms struggling to challenge these decisions. Ultimately, political context emerges as key: Slovakia entered the COVID-19 pandemic with a governing coalition enjoying constitutional majority and an aura of reform and hope. The emergency mismanagement not only facilitated the breakup of this coalition and early elections, but also a rise in emergency conspiracies openly hostile to institutions and actors committed to evidence-based decision making.

We examine the impact of decentralisation on COVID-19 mortality and various health outcomes. Specifically, we investigate whether decentralised health systems, which facilitated greater regional participation and information sharing, were more effective in saving lives. Our analysis makes three contributions. First, we draw on evidence from several European countries to assess whether the decentralisation of health systems influenced COVID-19 mortality rates. Second, we explore the regional disparities in one of the most decentralised health systems, Spain, to untangle some of the determinants shaping health outcomes. Third, we estimate the regional loss of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) due to COVID-19 mortality, broken down by the wave of the pandemic. Our findings suggest that coordinated decentralisation played a critical role in saving lives throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Internationally, the home is legally protected as a bastion of private life, where one may retreat to and recollect oneself after a day’s work and enjoy family life. With the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, working from home – facilitated by new collaborative information and communications technology (ICT) platforms and tools – became mandatory in several countries. For many, the workplace was brought into the home. This article examines how working from home on a mandatory basis during the pandemic affected employees’ perceptions and practices of privacy, and its implications for the legal understanding of privacy. With Norway as a case, it investigates the measures taken by employees and employers to safeguard privacy during this period. The data collection and method combine an interpretation of legal sources with qualitative interviews. The analysis shows experiences and practices that suggest a blurring of roles and physical spaces, and the adoption of boundary-setting measures to safeguard privacy.

How do different regime types execute a security response during a pandemic? We interrogate the politics of monopolistic securitization which we argue to have significantly directed and influenced the COVID-19 policy strategies adopted in the ‘democratic’ United Kingdom (UK) and ‘authoritarian’ Thailand. Despite their stark political differences, we contend that the British and Thai states’ parallel resort to monopolistic securitization as an overarching pandemic approach effectively made them ‘functionally similar’ by producing security responses that differed only in magnitude and scale but not in kind. Integrating securitization and democratic standards violations frameworks, we find out that the British and Thai authorities’ monopolistic securitization of COVID-19 initially constrained the intersubjective process required to socially construct the pandemic as a primary existential threat endangering both countries. This significantly diminished their public audiences’ individual/agential and collective/institutional capacity to deliberate the immediate emergency measures they unilaterally deployed, particularly during the pandemic’s early stages. Consequently, whether it was in the UK with a supposedly robust democracy or in Thailand with at best a hybrid regime if not outright authoritarian, the security responses that emerged constituted varying types and degrees of violations within the illiberal-authoritarian spectrum. Nevertheless, as the pandemic progressed, the fundamental deliberative-iterative mechanism underpinning securitization enabled the British and Thai public audiences to gradually reclaim their role and space, allowing them to challenge the appropriateness and legitimacy of the existing emergency measures, thereby weakening the states’ monopolistic control over the process.

Young people with childhood adversity (CA) were at increased risk to experience mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pre-pandemic research identified high-quality friendship support as a protective factor that can buffer against the emergence of mental health problems in young people with CA. This longitudinal study investigated friendship buffering effects on mental health symptoms before and at three timepoints during the pandemic in 102 young people (aged 16–26) with low to moderate CA. Multilevel analyses revealed a continuous increase in depression symptoms following the outbreak. Friendship quality was perceived as elevated during lockdowns and returned to pre-pandemic baseline levels during reopening. A stress-sensitizing effect of CA on social functioning was evident, as social thinning occurred following the outbreak. Bivariate latent change score modeling revealed that before and during the pandemic, young people with greater friendship quality self-reported lower depression symptoms and vice versa. Furthermore, sequential mediation analysis showed that high-quality friendships before the pandemic buffered depression symptoms during the pandemic through reducing perceived stress. These findings highlight the importance of fostering stable and supportive friendships in young people with CA and suggest that through reducing stress perceptions high-quality friendships can mitigate mental health problems during times of multidimensional stress.

This article analyses the constitutional framework regulating states of emergency in Poland and addresses key issues related to their interpretation and implementation. The first part discusses the conditions for declaring martial law, a state of an extraordinary situation, and a state of natural disaster, as well as the specific rules for the operation of public authorities in such emergencies. The next part analyses the practice, revealing the consistent reluctance of Polish authorities to invoke states of emergency, even in circumstances that seem to justify such measures. Consequently, a state of emergency under the 1997 Constitution was declared in Poland only once – in 2021, in response to a migration crisis on the border with Belarus. No constitutional emergency was declared during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the introduction of far-reaching restrictions on individual rights and freedoms. The article argues that state authorities can abuse emergency regulations, either through their unjustified application or by deliberately circumventing them.

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented multifaceted challenges globally, impacting adolescent health. Among these, food security and nutrition are intertwined closely with mental health outcomes. In Indonesia, with its diverse socio-economic landscape, these interconnections may have been exacerbated by the pandemic. This study investigated the relationship between food security, nutrition and adolescent mental health in Indonesia during COVID-19. Longitudinal data were collected from 511 adolescent boys and girls in 2021–2022 in Gunungkidul district, Yogyakarta. Food security was measured using the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS), and the validated Kessler-10 Psychological Distress Scale (K10) was used to measure adolescent depression. Multivariate linear regression and linear mixed-effects regression were employed to explore associations between these variables, while adjusting for sex, age, pubertal status and household income. Overall, food insecurity score was positively associated with depressive symptoms (β: 0·72, 95 % CI 0·52, 0·92), while BMI z-score was inversely associated (β: −0·31, 95 % CI 0·68, −0·03). We found an increase in strength of association between food insecurity and depressive symptoms over time (moderately food-insecure: β: 1·36 (95 % CI −0·10, 2·83) to 4·63 (95 % CI 2·17, 7·09); severely food-insecure: β: 1·89 (95 % CI 0·36, 3·41) to 3·30 (95 % CI 1·50, 5·10). Enhancing food access, improving nutritional status and providing mental health support are crucial components of adolescent health.

During the global COVID-19 pandemic, many countries have expanded the level and coverage of current social insurance and social assistance programs as well as implemented new programs. Based on three separate datasets, V-Dem V-Party dataset; fourteen structured expert interviews; and a dataset of 114 social security measures, we study the link between the welfare regime, pandemic-related social policy measures, and incumbents’ ideological stand. Does the pandemic-related social policy measures mirror the political attitudes of the incumbents? What role did the welfare regime play? We scrutinise eight OECD countries (Denmark, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, UK, and the US) representing three different welfare regimes: corporatist-conservative countries, liberal countries, and socio-democratic countries. The key findings of this article show that the pandemic-related social policy measures did not mirror the political attitudes of the incumbents.