Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Institutional Relations between Local Government and Philanthropic Movements in COVID-19 Pandemic Disaster Management The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the limitations of state-led disaster governance, thereby increasing the significance of non-state actors, particularly philanthropic organizations, in supporting the government’s response. This study analyzes the patterns of relationships between formal and informal institutions in pandemic disaster governance by examining the interactions between local governments and philanthropic organizations. Using a qualitative case study design, data were collected through in-depth interviews with local government officials and philanthropic actors directly involved in the pandemic response, supplemented by a review of relevant literature. Data were analyzed thematically using Helmke and Levitsky’s framework of formal–informal institutional relations, which emphasizes the effectiveness of formal institutions and the convergence of objectives among actors. The findings reveal a complementary relationship: local governments maintain authority over regulation, coordination, and policy legitimacy, while philanthropic organizations contribute through operational flexibility, logistical capacity, and community reach. No substitutive or competitive relationships were found, although accommodative elements emerged due to the lack of long-term, institutionalized cooperation. This study extends institutional relational analysis to the context of the pandemic, contributes to the literature on disaster governance, and offers policy implications for designing more systematic government–philanthropy collaborations in addressing future crises.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haidar Baskara (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: