Regulating wicked problems – the case of novel coronavirus
Wicked problems
A lot has been written about so-called “wicked problems”. Despite my misgivings about this moniker because of the evil connotations it might invoke, it is useful short-hand to refer to:
problems for which there is no solution (because, for example, the solution to the problem would cost too much, such as poverty),
cases where the response will only improve the situation, but not solve the problem (because the ideal is unattainable, such as inequality),
issues where there is significant resistance to solving the problem (this may occur if there is an ideological or political basis for rejecting the solution, as in the case of climate change), and
problems that involve a “one-shot” response (there is no room for trial and error because the consequences of not getting it right could be dire, as in the case of the response to global pandemics ).
The wickedness of global pandemics, like novel coronavirus
A coronavirus is a family of viruses that can cause symptoms ranging from the common cold to acute respiratory symptoms, like the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).
An outbreak of a novel coronavirus - not previously identified in humans - was first detected in Wuhan, the capital of China’s Hubei province, in late 2019. Since then, the virus has spread to various countries in Europe, North America and the Asia Pacific region, with many fatalities so far and an apparent acceleration in the rate of progression of the disease.
On 30 January 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the outbreak of novel coronavirus as a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern” (PHEIC). The PHEIC declaration has triggered a global regulatory response to the virus, which will no doubt have regulatory implications at a national level in many countries throughout the world.
Pandemics, like novel coronavirus, are an example of a wicked problem. Pandemics of this kind involve large-scale outbreaks of infectious disease, over wide geographical areas, that can result in mortality as well as significant social and economic disruption. They are typically characterised by:
institutional complexity given the numerous bodies involved in trying to combat the pandemic,
scientific uncertainty regarding the source, transmission and treatment of the disease, and
social ambiguity about how to respond to the problem resulting from complexity and uncertainty, but also because of the multitude of stakeholders responsible for or affected by the pandemic and a corresponding diversity of values and interests.
These characteristics are shared by many other wicked problems, including climate change, international terrorism, and poverty.
The triumvirate of factors to address wicked problems
Wicked problems, including pandemics such as novel coronavirus, will, by definition, be difficult to solve. Nevertheless, addressing the three core characteristics of wicked problems - complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity - will help to break down and refine the problem and advance the response to the problem.
The PHEIC and associated WHO advice to national governments bear the hallmarks of this strategy. For example:
To help deal with institutional complexity, emphasis has been placed by the WHO on a global, coordinated effort, involving solidarity and cooperation, particularly with respect to sharing relevant data with the WHO, which is required under the International Health Regulations.
In relation to addressing scientific uncertainty, the WHO has stressed the importance of studying and understanding the virus, particularly to inform global measures that may be required to contain the outbreak. The WHO has announced a multidisciplinary technical mission to China to investigate, among other things, the source of the outbreak, the nature of the disease including human-to-human transmission, and efforts to control the outbreak.
Regarding resolving social ambiguity, the WHO has noted the importance of sharing information with the international community to aid in understanding the situation and its impact and of sharing experience, particularly in relation to measures that have been successful.
Capitulate or conquer?
Even though there are, by definition, no solutions to wicked problems, this does not mean that society must capitulate. Given the grave consequences that are normally associated with wicked problems, such defeatism is not an option. On a positive note, there are ways to break down and, therefore, better respond to wicked problems. The WHO’s response to novel coronavirus demonstrates that systemically addressing complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity is a way forward to help craft a response to this deadly virus.
References
Versluis, E., van Asselt, M. and Kim, J. (2019) “The Multilevel Regulation of Complex Policy Problems: Uncertainty and the Swine Flu Pandemic”, European Policy Analysis, Vol. 5, No. 1, 80 - 98
https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/30-01-2020-statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)
https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/q-a-coronaviruses