Who Is the Master of Disasters? A Comparative Analysis of COVID-19 Crisis Response and Resilience in Democracies, Hybrid Regimes, and Autocratic States

In an era of escalating global crises, understanding how political regimes shape disaster resilience is increasingly critical. This study examines the relationship of democratic, hybrid, and authoritarian governance on their influence on disaster management and long-term recovery. Using data from The Economist's Democracy Index, Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Index, and the State Resilience Index (SRI) across 150 countries, it reveals that democracies—marked by transparency, accountability, and public participation—demonstrate greater resilience and possess a higher adaptive capacity for recovery and forward progress. Hybrid regimes demonstrate centralized efficiency in initial responses but are undermined by corruption and institutional weaknesses during recovery. Autocratic regimes, while capable of swift resource mobilization, struggle with transparency and public trust, which can undermine their long-term resilience. Economic resilience emerges as a cornerstone of “bouncing back” following a disaster. The findings emphasize that while democratic governance underpins effective long-term disaster management, achieving holistic resilience requires integrated strategies that prioritize both economic stability and sustainability. In addition, this study also highlights how democratic governance contributes to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), such as SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) by fostering inclusive, accountable, and resilient disaster management systems.