Public health prioritization, innovation

Governance, familiar dichotomy and

Vulnerability in the new normal state

The Coronavirus disease (Covid-19) is an infectious disease caused by a new strain of

coronavirus. This new virus and disease were unknown before the outbreak began in
Wuhan, china, in December 2019. The name "Corona virus" is derived from Latin
corona which means "Crown" or "Wreath". Itself borrowing from the Greek word
korone. The named was coined by June Almeida and David Tyrrell who first observed
and studied human corona virus. The earliest reports of corona virus infection in
animals occurred in the late 1920's, when an acute respiratory infection of domesticated
emerged in north America. The virus was then known as infectious bronchitis virus. The
virus that causes covid-19 is mainly transmitted through droplets generated when an
infected person coughs, sneezes, or exhales. These droplets are too heavy to hang in
the air, and quickly fall on floors or surfaces.

You can be infected by breathing in the virus if you are within close proximity of
someone who has the virus, or by touching a contaminated surface and then your eyes,
nose or mouth. As per the researcher's corona virus was discovered in December 2019
and still a threat until now, a lot of rules and regulations was applied and implemented
by the government. But why is the Philippines still in this situation? Thousands of cases
every day. The whole world is involved in this problem, this would have been easier if
we had unity and alertness. The Philippine government should have closed the country
in February but they did not. As the outcome cases raised up quickly.
Background of the study - Manabat

Earlier this march 2020: following the confirmation of the first localized transmission on
7th of march 2020, the department of health raised its alert to code red sub-level 1.
President Rodrigo Duterte later issued proclamation no. 922 on 9th of march 2020,
formally announcing a public health emergency, authorizing local government units and
personnel to employ their local disaster risk reduction management funds.

As of April 29, a total of 8,212 verified covid-19 cases including 558 deaths have been
reported in the Philippines. According to the corona virus tracker eight thousand cases
have been confirmed in April. Another thing that the government did in April was
extending the home quarantine/lockdown. To prevent the rising up of the cases.

As the cases rise up every-day, the government seems to be not worried about it and
can-do other projects at the same time. As time passes by this problem is getting
bigger and is causing side problems.

As of May: among the 11,618 confirmed cases, 6,274 are male (54%) and 5,344 are
female (46%). The most affected age groups are 30-39 years (21.2%) followed by 20-
29 (16.9%). This percentages shows that 30+ men are getting the virus more often
than women.

The number of coronavirus disease cases in the Philippines has surpassed 29,000 with
the validation of 943 new cases, the Department of Health (DOH) said, the cases are
rising up even though the government extended the home quarantine. So, the
government's response is not enough and cannot solve the main problem.
The Philippines now has 83,673 covid-19 cases as the Department of Health (DOH)
reported 1,687 new cases on the 28th of July 2020.The latest figures indicate that the
country is likely to surpass the 85,000 cases that university of the Philippines
researchers had earlier projected the country to reach by the 31st of July. As per the
researchers the Philippines is 15,000 cases away from 100,000 in July.

Philippines corona virus cases has increased to 217,000, new recoveries exceed to
22,000. The number of confirmed corona virus cases in the Philippines continued to
rise, with over 4,000 more cases reported on Sunday, 30th of August. In a span of a
month the cases tallied up to 120,000+ cases. With at least 27,000+ cases every week.

As of September 2020: The streak of more than 3,000 covid-19 cases daily continued
on Sunday, September 20, as the Philippines' tally breached 286,000.

The country's coronavirus caseload rose to 286,743, after the department of health
(DOH) announced 3,311 new cases from all except 7 testing laboratories.

This is the 13th straight day since September 8 that the country has reported over
3,000 new cases.

As of October 5, 2020: Philippines has entered the top 20 countries with highest corona
virus cases
Corona virus was spreading all over the world in January. The Philippine government
should have closed the country in January but they did not. They applied it two months
after January. When the country was already infected. When the country was already in
danger.

The united states of America immediately implemented a home quarantine/lockdown.

While the Philippines is still accepting tourists and still not aware about the virus.
America's sports, universities, and many more was cancelled and suspended
immediately. This is what the Philippine government was supposed to do. But they
reacted so late.

-(Department of Health [DOH], 2020)

Statement of the problem - Valdecañas

The statement of the problem answers the following questions:

1.What are the reasons of the seemingly failed response of the government to the
covid-19 pandemic?

2.Why is there a rampant increase in the cases of covid-19 despite of the

implementation of rules and regulations?

3.How should the government manage the intricate balance between the economy and
public health?

4. What other strategies could the government provide to reduce the risk of infection
during the covid-19 outbreak?

Theoretical framework - Relator

Normative economic theory

Normative mainstream theory says that governments ought to give key public product
and enhance individual or non-public capabilities. Specifically, public finance theory
views the government as conducting 2 basic activities: those who offset market failures
and people that are redistributive. It assumes that government interventions will below
sure conditions improve potency once market failures result in suboptimal financial aid
outcomes, and improve equity when market allocations lead to outcomes perspective to
be unfair. The principle for state involvement within the health in health sector stems
from a number of these same considerations. Jack in (1999), for example, summarizes
arguments for the role of governments interventions based on the "Merit good" nature
of health, with the perspective that health outcomes and consumption of medical
services ought to be related to some concept of need and not to one's ability to pay as
well as the presence of three broad forms of market failure prominent in the sector: (a)
externalities; (b) the public benefit of certain health interventions; (c) large information
asymmetries.

In addition to economic theory arguments, the human rights perspective is commonly

accustomed justify public funding for health from a normative perspective. This angle
underlies recent policy commitments to UHC in many countries. The constitutions of the
many countries guarantee access to health or to health care services to any or all their
citizens. This can be often taken to imply that governments have the lawful basic to
guarantee that the naturally ordered right to health is realized for all by guaranteeing
satisfactory open assets are accessible.

Unfortunately, an equivalent economic theory that justify public funding of health

additionally apply to government interventions in different sectors comparable to
defense, education, food, housing, water, sanitation, and infrastructure. Indeed,
theories justify military expenditures on the grounds that national defense could be a
public smart and can't be provided privately; also, that it's non-rivalrous (that is, use by
one doesn't scale back use by others) and non-excludable (that is, consumption cannot
be restricted to bound population groups), creating it not possible to supply and
consume privately. The education sector is another example. While education, in
contrast to national defense, is basically a non-public good, theoretical arguments
underpinning public funding for education are robust and relate to the presence of huge
human capital and productivity enhancing externalities which will result in social edges
not taken under consideration by people once creating choices. The normative human
rights perspective conjointly doesn't imply that the health sector is by any suggests that
exceptional during this regard: different sectors akin to food, housing, and education
can and do also build plausible cases for public financing from a person's rights angle.
Given competing and similarly commendable priorities across several sectors, what
quantity should total government expenditure be in an economy and the way should
public resources be allotted across sectors? Again, mainstream public finance theory
argues for public expenditure levels to extend as long as social edges from additional
expenditures exceed the value of raising revenues for funding the extra outlays. With
relevancy allocations across sectors, the implications are that public resources should be
used up to the purpose wherever the marginal advantage of an extra dollar of spending
is equalized across sectors. The operational implications of this aren't simple to derive
given the difficulties of estimating the prices and social edges of public expenditure.
Nevertheless, this means that — to benefit reprioritization — the health sector would
wish to demonstrate that the social benefits of additional public defrayment outlays
exceed the costs of funding this increase in spending, each in terms of the extra costs
of raising revenues and additionally in terms of by past public spending in different
sectors (something that ministries of health are typically unable to articulate
persuasively to ministries of finance and planning). - (A. Tandon, et al., January 2014)

Purpose of the Study - Relator

The purpose of our study is to let people be aware of what is happening in the world
with regard to Public Health Prioritization, Innovation Governance, Familiar Dichotomy
and Vulnerability in the New Normal State of Risks: An Analysis on the Philippine
Government Capacity of Response on the Unprecedented Challenges Brought by
COVID-19 as Perceived by Selected Alumni of Sto. Niño Montessori of Academic
Excellence. The study also focuses on how the Philippine government is trying to solve
the problem as best and fast as they can and what they are doing to solve the crisis
and to also how to make our country better.
Significance of the study - Valdecañas

This study hopes to establish an understanding to readers and future researchers who
wants to analyze the Philippine Government Capacity of Response on the
Unprecedented Challenges Brought by COVID-19 as Perceived by Selected Alumni of
Sto. Niño Montessori of Academic Excellence as basis for recommendations on Public
Health Prioritization, Innovation Governance, Familiar Dichotomy and Vulnerability in
the New Normal State of Risks

The study will be of great benefit to the following:

 Citizens - for the citizens to further understand government crisis management.

 Teenagers - for the teenagers to learn something about governance before they
transition into adult life.
 Future Researchers - this study will serve as a good source of useful information
for them.

Scope and Delimitations of the Study- Manabat

The research paper entitled: “(WRITE YOUR FULL TITLE)” will exclusively focus on
the Philippine government's response with the pandemic, what solutions they did, and
what is really happening in the country about the Coronavirus. The respondents will be
selected 15 alumni of Sto. Nino Montessori of Academic Excellence ranging from 15-19
years old.

Definition of Terms – Manabat

 Corona Virus - In mammals and birds, coronaviruses are a group of RNA

viruses that cause diseases. They trigger respiratory tract infections in humans
and birds that can range from mild to lethal. Some cases of common cold (which
 is often caused by other viruses, mainly rhinoviruses) include mild illnesses in
humans, whereas more lethal variants can cause SARS, MERS, and COVID-19.

 Public Health - Public health has been described as the science and art of
disease prevention, prolonging life and improving the quality of life through
concerted initiatives and informed decisions by community, organizations (public
and private), communities and individuals. The foundation for public health is the
study of the determinants of a population's health and the threats it faces.

 Innovation Governance - Innovation Governance can be seen as a set of

processes within the organization and with external parties to coordinate
priorities, distribute resources and delegate decision-making authority for
innovation.

 New Normal - A new normal is the condition to which an economy, and culture,
settles after a crisis, as it varies from the situation that existed before the crisis
started.

 Quarantine - A quarantine is a restriction on the movement of people and

products designed to prevent diseases or pests from spreading. It is also used to
discourage the movement of someone who may have been exposed to a
communicable disease but do not have a confirmed medical diagnosis in relation
to illness and disease. It is distinct from medical isolation, in which the stable
population isolates those confirmed to be infected with a communicable disease.