Millions of human beings are affected COVID-19 worldwide, but the constellation of health and socioeconomic effects of the pandemic varies between developed and developing countries. While the crisis has drawn attention in media as life and livelihood hazard, the differences in human perceptions between developed and developing worlds remain under-documented. The authors explain how different human perceptions are embodied in Australia and Bangladesh in the pandemic by examining the countries' health measures and community initiatives. The rates of COVID-19 infections and deaths were consistently higher in Bangladesh than in Australia. While the Australian government and the Australians showed maturity in managing effects of COVID-19, erratic lockdown measures and imprudent policy decisions by the Bangladesh government together with its inadequate acute care services and income concerns influenced the people's psychosocial perceptions. The study highlights the importance of strengthening the health system and food and income security and investing in community programs in Bangladesh.
TopIntroduction
This chapter is a comparative review of Australians’ and Bangladeshis’ perceptions/approaches and associated community initiatives during the COVID-19. Australia – 14th largest economy – is the second livable country because of its excellent quality of life, whereas Bangladesh ranked 35th in the global economy with high population density and health disparities (Faasse & Newby, 2020). Despite the stagnant economy and job losses during the COVID-19 pandemic, Australians have seen remarkable achievement in health and wellbeing outcomes and financial support for the people. This has earned the country a distinction in the pandemic management success story. On the other side of the coin, the people of Bangladesh see a health catastrophe because of the fragile healthcare system and financial vulnerability due to a lack of capacity of the government (Bodrud-Doza et al., 2020; Hamiduzzaman & Islam, 2020; Islam et al., 2020). This pandemic becomes a major setback to the growth and sustainability of both countries, but Australia is moving towards stabilizing with prudent policy decisions, health system and community initiatives while Bangladesh is experiencing challenges to return to normal life because of its fragile healthcare systems and financial vulnerability.
The COVID-19 infection, mortality and recovery trends are different in Australia and Bangladesh. The first case in Australia was identified in January 2020 and Bangladesh has the first case reported in March 2020 (WHO 2020a; 2020b). Since the World Health Organization (2020a) declared the virus outbreak as a public health emergency in April 2020, the infection rate in Australia remains significantly lower than in Bangladesh [12.08%]. As of today 22 September 2021, a total number of cases in Australia and Bangladesh is 88,710 [Recovered: 63,378; Deaths: 1,178] and 154,5800 [Recovered: 150,4709; Deaths: 27,277]. respectively (Australian Department of Health, 2021; CoronaInfo, 2021). Bangladesh has many deaths and Australia has managed to reduce the COVID-related fatality. The recovery rate is also better in Australia (WHO 2020a; 2020b). Age becomes a risk factor for COVID-19, with a disproportionate number of deaths and serious illnesses occurring in the ‘60 years and above age group (Paul, Chatterjee, & Bairagi, 2020; Rahman et al., 2020; Rahman et al., 2021). The higher prevalence of infections and deaths in Bangladesh than Australia is because of differences in peoples’ perceptions and approaches, and according to the literature, the gaps in community initiatives between the countries persist and continue to widen the health and socioeconomic effects (Kassam 2020; Mamun & Griffiths 2020).
The existing literature reports that human responses and community initiatives to COVID-19 are developing differently among the people (Faasse & Newby, 2020; Islam et al., 2020). Initial public health policy measures by Australia and Bangladesh were similar, swift and all-encompassing, with rapid response actions, e.g., closing international borders, stopping domestic air travel, lockdowns, quarantine protocols on people’s inter-country travel and supporting people. But the situation with COVID-19 was volatile several times in both countries. The assumption is that the Government of Bangladesh has limited capacity to correctly predict the impact of the pandemic on people and the community efforts result in an underestimation of their needs and expectations (Hanif et al., 2020). People with a low income in the country are at risk of not prioritizing their lives or putting their lives on the line to earn a living in this newly regulated atmosphere (Anwar, Nasrullah, & Hosen, 2020). In contrast, having a strong health system and a strong commitment from the community organizations encourage Australians to adhere to public health messages from the government and lockdown measures (Losada-Baltar et al., 2020). Such adherence helps the government to identify the challenging areas and vulnerable population groups to support. Most community initiatives are funded by the government and designed with expected outcomes, therefore, the Australians’ approaches to the pandemic protocols show more maturity than Bangladeshis.
This chapter compares the perception and approaches of Australians and Bangladeshis towards COVID-19 particularly about their concerns and governments’ lockdown and public health measures and health systems. It also examines how the perceptions and approaches are embodied in people of the countries, shows the impact of such perceptions and approaches in the management of the pandemic and identifies the similarities and differences in community initiatives.