Analysis Paper
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Guelph *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
3250
Subject
Political Science
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
Pages
15
Uploaded by DeaconOwl2706
1
Masking and Vaccine Mandates in Ontario and Alberta
Ethan Meyer
University of Guelph
POLS*3250 - Public policy: Challenges and Pr
Professor Nanita Mohan
November 17, 2023
2
Introduction:
Across Canada, 4,795,000 people have been infected with COVID-19 and the virus has
contributed to 55,000 deaths over the course of the pandemic (Public Health Agency of Canada,
2023). If not for public health measures imposed on citizens across Canada, the number of
people infected and the death toll would be noticeably higher. Public health measures taken
effectively helped curb the spread of COVID-19 and were beneficial in saving lives. In Ontario
and Alberta, public health measures such as mask and vaccine mandates were imposed to reduce
the spread of COVID-19. Through multiple streams theory and framing theory, a more in-depth
examination can be taken into these policy processes with regard to their formulation and
implementation. These theories will measure the issues of COVID-19 and explain the response
taken by the government. The following paper indicates through multiple streams theory and
framing theory why masking and vaccine mandates were imposed in Ontario and Alberta to
reduce the spread of COVID-19.
Province 1:
Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, Ontario imposed masking and vaccine mandates to
help curb the spread of COVID-19. Early on in the pandemic, personal protective equipment
such as masks were widely used to help mitigate the transmission of COVID-19. Essentially
masks became required in all indoor settings across Ontario through mandates (Wu et al., 2020).
The masking mandate was issued as a response to the drastic increase in the number of
COVID-19 cases. Masks proved to be effective in reducing the spread of the illness and
protecting individuals coming into contact with others (Wu et al., 2020). To impose this mandate,
it was introduced by the 34 individual public health regions in the province from June 2020 to
September 2020 (Peng et al., 2023). When the Ontario government imposed a masking mandate,
3
there was some backlash from a portion of the public who did not think the mandate was
necessary. Since COVID-19 was so new to many, masking was seen as unnecessary as the
impacts and consequences were not yet realized by the majority of the public. When the public
was made aware of the dangers of COVID-19 masks became widely accepted in society. To test
the effectiveness of the masking mandate, weekly reported case counts were observed for either
an increase or decrease (Peng et al., 2023). However later on, observing weekly case counts did
end up becoming an ineffective method to determine the effectiveness of the masking mandate
when increased public health measures were imposed such as physical distancing, sanitizing of
hands and vaccines, etc. Masking in Ontario was a very quick response by the government,
where the masking policy was formulated effectively and introduced to the public appropriately.
Weeks after the masking mandate was put into effect newly diagnosed infections decreased by
25% - 31%, (Ju, Boisvert & Zou, 2021 ). Ultimately, the Ontario government's masking mandate
was an appropriate and effective policy that helped reduce the transmission of COVID-19.
In Ontario vaccination efforts also began at the start of the pandemic after the approval of
the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines by Canada. The provincial government did a
respectable job distributing vaccines to the public and adopting a vaccine mandate. First doses
were given to the most vulnerable populations and then distributed to other categories in the
population (Gerretsen et al., 2021). As doses were readily more available and offered to the
public, there were still groups of the population who were refusing to be vaccinated. This created
a public health issue in Ontario as the province was begging to return to in-person activities and
gatherings. To help solve this problem, so that in-person activities could return and businesses
open without significantly increasing COVID-19 cases, the Ontario government implemented
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
mandatory vaccination requirements in September 2021 (AlShurman et al., 2023). This vaccine
mandate required an individual to show proof of vaccination to be allowed to enter most
businesses and settings, be able to work in certain jobs, and travel. Imposing a vaccine mandate
caused a lot of uproar and rift amongst citizens in Ontario and all of Canada, leading to the
truckers' convoys that converged on Ottawa to protest. Some Ontarians viewed the vaccine
mandates as an infringement on their rights by the government, although the objective of the
vaccine mandate in Ontario was to prevent the spread of COVID-19 as the province began to
reopen. Imposing a vaccine mandate helped fast-track the process of re-opening, but also caused
a shift in public attitudes towards COVID-19 (Gerretsen et al., 2021). To effectively measure the
vaccine mandate the number of COVID-19 cases was used. ICU patients who were vaccinated
and not vaccinated were tracked and compared. As well, the total number of cases per week was
examined for increases and decreases from weeks prior. Evidence that showed COVID-19 cases
were decreasing meant that vaccine mandates were effectively stopping the spread of COVID-19
since only vaccinated people were able to attend social settings in public (Grewal et al., 2023). In
summary, the strict mandating of vaccines in the province was a needed feature but should have
been implemented more appropriately in order to avoid unintended consequences and poor
public attitudes.
Province 2:
Much like most of Canada, Alberta adopted masking and vaccine mandates throughout the
course of the pandemic to control COVID-19. Based on certain parts of the province and their
public health sectors, mandatory indoor masking depended on the location. Alberta became the
only province in November 2020, without a provincial masking mandate as in only certain areas
it was mandated by public health regions. Public health regions across the province were tasked
5
with creating their own COVID-19 safety measures (Waldner et al., 2021). This made many
regions have mandatory masking before other regions, but eventually, in December 2020, a
provincial masking mandate was announced. When the provincial masking mandate was
announced many Albertans opposed the directives of the provincial government. This led to
anti-mask protests and rallies held to oppose the new mandate. Many Albertans did not
understand that masks are indeed important to help prevent the transmission of COVID-19. The
main objective of Alberta's mask mandate was to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and was a
way for individuals to protect themselves. During the beginning of the pandemic, Alberta had
one of the lowest compliances when it came to public health recommendations like masking at
37% (Waldner et al., 2021). With such low compliance with public health measures COVID-19
cases and outbreaks dramatically increased. As the pandemic worsened, compliance with public
health measures were then taken more seriously. In summary, masking in Alberta was first
implemented in certain areas of the province by public health regions for all indoor areas or
spaces where people were not able to safely physically distance themselves from one another.
The masking mandate proved to be necessary and was effective in preventing COVID-19 cases.
To protect many Albertas and reduce the spread of COVID-19, vaccine mandates were
instituted in Alberta for indoor activities, jobs that dealt with vulnerable populations, and kids
going back to school. Alberta's vaccine-mandated response was very lackluster with certain
public health regions having indoor vaccination policies before other regions (Maquiling,
Jeevakanthan & Fane, 2023). Depending on where an individual lived there were different
vaccine mandates, until Alberta announced that it was going to have a provincial proof of
vaccination mandate in September 2021. To help increase those vaccinated in the province, a
6
100-dollar incentive was included for those who received doses and a 1 million dollar lottery
draw for the vaccinated. After the mandate announcement, a study in Alberta found a 300%
increase in those being vaccinated (Karaivanov et al., 2022). Staggering rates of vaccination
were found to be from the vaccine mandate as well as the incentive that helped push COVID-19
vaccination. After the mandate was announced vaccination increased significantly but over the
course of the pandemic Alberta would have one of the lowest vaccination rates (Faye, Perrin &
Trumpy, 2022). Vaccine mandates in Alberta were among the least strict in the country in terms
of restrictions. Although restrictions were lower than in other provinces, the vaccine mandate
still effectively interfered with people's everyday lives causing protests all over the province. The
southern border crossing in Coutts, Alberta was blockaded by protestors during the early months
of 2022. These protestors were a part of the freedom convoy movement across Canada
demanding the end of the Vaccine mandates. The vaccine mandate's objective was to reduce viral
transmission and also increase vaccine uptake among Albertans (Karaivanov et al., 2022). If an
individual was vaccinated they could participate in most forms of ‘normal life’, but someone
who was not vaccinated was limited to what they were able to do in public. Over the course of
the pandemic, vaccine mandates proved to be successful in Alberta by increasing uptake and
reducing the spread of COVID-19.
Theory 1:
Multiple streams theory is an optimal theory to help explain why mask and vaccine
mandates were imposed in the provinces of Ontario and Alberta during the COVID-19
pandemic. In Ontario and Alberta, masking mandates were very similar in the restrictions
imposed on the general public. Most indoor spaces in the two provinces required that an
individual wear a mask to be allowed entry. In terms of carrying out the mandate, Ontario left it
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
7
up to its public health regions to put the mandate into effect over a two-month period, before
declaring a province-wide masking mandate (Karaivanov et al., 2021). In Alberta, similarly,
public health regions first put mandates into effect, but these mandates were optional depending
on the public health region. In December 2020, Alberta was the last province to adopt a
provincial-wide masking mandate. In comparison, Ontario quickly and more efficiently
implemented a province-wide masking mandate, whereas Alberta was very delayed in its
response and the implementation process displayed flaws. To explain masking mandates in
Ontario and Alberta it is important to use multiple streams theory to help understand the policy
process. This theory explains that when the three streams of problem, politics, and policy merge
they produce a policy output (Howlett, McConnell & Perl, 2017 ). A window of opportunity is
created when these three streams merge together leading to issues reaching the policy agenda. In
this case, the problem stream was the rapid spread of COVID-19 causing many to become ill and
in some instances causing death. The politics stream consisted of formal policy decision-makers
in the government who saw it was in Ontario and Alberta’s best interest to take necessary action.
In the policy stream, different ways to protect citizens against COVID-19 were being examined.
The best policy produced was provincial mandates on face masks when physical distancing can
not be done or when indoors. In this rapidly occurring event, the three streams converged to
produce masking mandates in Ontario and Alberta to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
Limitations identified by multiple streams theory is that during this focusing event of
COVID-19, policymakers had imperfect information and limited time to develop the best output
to stop transmission (Cairney & Jones, 2016). Another limitation, in this case, is that the multiple
streams theory does not take into account the roles that institutionalized norms and ideas play in
shaping policy agendas (Rüb, 2016). For example in Ontario and Alberta, the formation of
8
masking mandates was directed around businesses with the main goal of keeping them open, to
keep the economy running. Imposing a masking mandate allowed businesses to remain open, but
could only do so if customers wore a mask. In both Ontario and Alberta the masking mandates
were effective in their role of reducing the transmission of the virus and through multiple streams
theory it helps show how policy was able to be put into action.
Vaccine mandates in Ontario and Alberta throughout the pandemic were very similar but
like with the masking mandate the same theme was experienced with COVID-19 vaccination
mandates where Alberta was lackluster in their response and Ontario was more efficient.
Restrictions were essentially the same in both Ontario and Alberta in terms of where proof of
vaccination was required to be shown. To enter most facilities, work in certain occupations, and
travel, proof of vaccination was mandatory. Ontario implemented its vaccine mandate by
announcing a province-wide mandate that would be administered through regional public health
units. In Alberta, certain public health regions developed their own vaccination policies, while
others did not have any. Many bigger cities put in place their own requirements for vaccination
to enter certain settings, which showed a less efficient approach to vaccine mandates because
depending on the region a person was in, the requirement of the COVID-19 vaccination varied.
Alberta did end up imposing a province-wide vaccine mandate to help curb COVID-19 just as
Ontario did. Multiple streams theory as explained prior, requires the three streams of problem,
politics, and policy to converge in order for policy action to take place (Cairney & Jones, 2016).
The problem stream created in this instance was that to end the pandemic everyone needed to be
vaccinated but certain groups of the population were not being vaccinated. The politics stream
consisted of formal policy decision-makers looking for a solution to end the pandemic as quickly
9
as possible through the use of vaccines. In the policy stream, actors devised policies to combat
COVID-19 but ultimately landed on a vaccine mandate to increase the number of people
vaccinated. All three of these streams saw the window of opportunity and converged, making it
onto the agenda (Cairney & Jones, 2016). The multiple streams theory shows how a significant
event like the COVID-19 pandemic affected all three streams and allowed them to come together
to make a policy output. In Alberta and Ontario, the vaccine mandates did create problems of
their own as citizens saw the vaccine mandates as an infringement on their rights as Canadians
(Rana, 2022). This prompted the freedom convoy, which saw large protests in Ottawa and the
blocking of the Coutts border crossing in Alberta. A recommendation for how the vaccine
mandates in both provinces could have been improved is in the implementation stage where the
mandate needed to have more clear outlines on its purpose and impact. In Ontario and Alberta,
the vaccine mandate was not clearly outlined enough to the public which created distrust and
disruption. Many citizens believed they were being forced to become vaccinated but they were
not. The mandates in Ontario and Alberta were directed at protecting the public and slowing the
transmission of the virus to allow for the reopening of the two provinces. Multiple streams theory
shows how the three streams came together to produce the solution of vaccine mandates to
increase those vaccinated with the end goal of concluding the pandemic.
Theory 2:
Another theory to help understand Ontario and Alberta's policy formulation and
implementation of masking and vaccine mandates is framing theory. Framing theory is a
constitutive component of the agenda-setting process. Every part of the policy process is
virtually influenced by framing as how an issue is framed depicts the types of responses
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
10
administered (Sniderman & Theriault, 2004). In Ontario and Alberta, the framing of COVID-19
was essential for the government to create a masking policy to combat the virus. The media
played a major role in framing the epidemic that was leaving many very ill and causing the death
of others (Capurro et al., 2021). To frame COVID-19 as an issue it followed the six key
dimensions of issue framing consisting of causality, severity, proximity, incidence, novelty, and
problem populations (Rochefort, 2016). When news of COVID-19 first broke, blame for the
pandemic was an accidental cause. In the beginning, everyone did not know what to expect, but
the severity of the issues was made clear through the media from reports of the government.
Then a mobilization of political support was formed to take action (Rochefort, 2016). Next, the
prevalence of the problem was made aware that the issue was going to get worse. Later, the
COVID-19 pandemic was labeled as an unprecedented event causing major challenges
(Rochefort, 2016), and finally, a target population of elderly, children, and people with
compromised immune systems was identified to protect, being the most vulnerable. In order for
the Ontario and Alberta governments to develop a masking mandate for COVID-19, it was
crucial that the issue was framed in a severe context to warrant government action (Sniderman &
Theriault, 2004). The problem of COVID-19 went directly to the top of the agenda-setting list
and became the most important issue. Being priority number one, all focus was on finding a
solution to help reduce the spread of COVID-19. A masking mandate was the result of this
process and required people in Ontario and Alberta to wear a mask when indoors or if unable to
physically distance themselves. Once masking mandates were in place, framing was still done to
maintain public support for the mandate. Conclusively, framing COVID-19 as a serious issue
helped authorize masking mandates in Ontario and Alberta which sufficiently helped in limiting
the escalation of the epidemic.
11
In addition, framing theory can be used to explain vaccine mandates in Ontario and Alberta.
Framing is a very effective tool for directing attention to problems that need to be recognized
(Chong & Druckman, 2007). Framing helps create better perspective and understanding, only if
used correctly. The implementation of vaccine mandates in Ontario and Alberta differed a little
based on how COVID-19 was framed in the two provinces. In Ontario, the epidemic was framed
by the media and government as a severe issue that demanded government action immediately
(Chong & Druckman, 2007). In Alberta, the epidemic was not framed as seriously as it was in
Ontario, which can be attributed to the lackluster response to a province-wide vaccine mandate.
The different levels of framing on the issue of COVID-19 influenced the type of responses
displayed by both governments. Furthermore, once vaccines were implemented they were
framed as vital and people who were not vaccinated held the image that they were the problem.
People not vaccinated in Ontario and Alberta were seen as the spreaders of COVID-19 and as
people who were not doing their part to help. A weakness of framing theory is that everyone has
their own or different mind frames (Borah, 2011). Not all individuals perceive the framing of an
issue the same way, which can be examined through the complexity of the vaccine mandates and
how its intentions were not framed clearly enough to the public. Framing of the vaccine mandate
was done poorly in Ontario and Alberta which sparked unrest in the provinces (Fernandes,
2021). How the vaccine mandate would be implemented caused mass confusion and portions of
the population did not like that most settings required proof of vaccination. The idea of vaccine
mandates caused a lot of controversy regarding rights and freedoms which was an issue created
by this policy put forth by the Ontario and Alberta governments (Fernandes, 2021). Framing
theory is a good theory to help show that framing done by the media and government during the
12
COVID-19 pandemic was a crucial component of the vaccine mandates formulation and
implementation effort.
Conclusion:
In the following paper, through multiple streams theory and framing theory, vaccine and
masking mandates imposed in Ontario and Alberta significantly assisted in reducing the spread
of COVID-19. The COVID-19 responses administered in Alberta and Ontario were relatively the
same, with some differences in terms of implementation. Masking and Vaccine mandates in both
provinces had a huge impact on the overall outcome of the pandemic. Through the theories of
multiple streams and framing it showed how the policy processes produced these outputs and
many of the factors that led to the creation of these mandates. In multiple streams theory, it
identified that masking and vaccine mandates were created as the three streams of problem,
politics, and policy merged forming a window of opportunity resulting in COVID-19 policy
output. In terms of framing theory, how COVID-19 was framed proved to be a very important
part of the policy process with regard to formulation and implementation. In summary, Masking
and Vaccine mandates in Ontario and Alberta were essential in reducing transmission and
allowing the provinces to operate.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
13
Bibliography:
AlShurman, B. A., Tetui, M., Nanyonjo, A., Butt, Z. A., Waite, N. M., Vernon-Wilson, E., Wong,
G., et al. (2023). Understanding the COVID-19 Vaccine Policy Terrain in Ontario
Canada: A Policy Analysis of the Actors, Content, Processes, and Context.
Vaccines
,
11
(4), 782-813. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11040782
Borah, P. (2011). Conceptual issues in framing theory: A systematic examination of a decade's
literature.
Journal of communication
,
61
(2), 246-263.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01539.x
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory.
Annual Review of Political Science
,
10
,
103-126. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054
Capurro, G., Jardine, C. G., Tustin, J., & Driedger, M. (2021). Communicating scientific
uncertainty in a rapidly evolving situation: A framing analysis of Canadian coverage in
early days of COVID-19.
BMC Public Health
,
21
(1), 1-14.
https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-021-12246-x
Cairney, P., & Jones, M. D. (2016). Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Approach: What Is the
Empirical Impact of this Universal Theory?
Policy Studies Journal
,
44
(1), 37–58.
https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12111
Faye, B., Perrin, D., & Trumpy, C. (2022). COVID-19 lessons learned review: Final report.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/public-safety-and-emergency-services/emergency-preparedne
ss-response-recovery/embc/reports/covid-19_lessons_learned_report.pdf
Fernandes, E. J. (2021). Immunizing Canada from Pandemic Populism: How to Uphold Equality,
The Rule of Law, Trustworthy Institutions, and Civil Order.
https://eugenefernandes.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/FERNANDES-Eugene-JCCF-Essay.d
ocx.pdf
Gerretsen, P., Kim, J., Caravaggio, F., Quilty, L., Sanches, M., Wells, S., Brown, E. E., Agic, B.,
Pollock, B. G., & Graff-Guerrero, A. (2021). Individual determinants of COVID-19
vaccine hesitancy.
PloS One
,
16
(11), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258462
Grewal, R., Nguyen, L., Buchan, S. A., Wilson, S. E., Nasreen, S., Austin, P. C., Brown, K. A.,
Fell, D. B., Gubbay, J. B., Schwartz, K. L., Tadrous, M., Wilson, K., & Kwong, J. C.
(2023). Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine booster doses against Omicron
severe outcomes.
Nature Communications
,
14
(1), 1-10.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-36566-1
14
Howlett, M., McConnell, A. and Perl, A. (2017), Moving Policy Theory Forward: Connecting
Multiple Stream and Advocacy Coalition Frameworks to Policy Cycle Models of
Analysis.
Australian Journal of Public Administration
, 76, 65-79.
https://doi-org.subzero.lib.uoguelph.ca/10.1111/1467-8500.12191
Ju, J. T. J., Boisvert, L. N., & Zuo, Y. Y. (2021). Face masks against COVID-19: Standards,
efficacy, testing and decontamination methods.
Advances in Colloid and Interface
Science
,
292
, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2021.102435
Karaivanov, A., Kim, D., Lu, S. E., & Shigeoka, H. (2022). COVID-19 vaccination mandates
and vaccine uptake.
Nature Human Behaviour
,
6
(12), 1615-1624.
https://web.archive.org/web/20220404090721id_/https://www.nber.org/system/files/work
ing_papers/w29563/w29563.pdf
Karaivanov, A., Lu, S. E., Shigeoka, H., Chen, C., & Pamplona, S. (2021). Face masks, public
policies and slowing the spread of COVID-19: Evidence from Canada.
Journal of Health
Economics
,
78
, 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2021.102475
Katz, G. M., Born, K. B., de Wit, M., McKenzie, K., Flood, C. M., Bell, C., ... & Hopkins, J.
(2021). COVID-19 vaccine certificates: key considerations for the Ontario context.
Science briefs of the Ontario COVID-19 science advisory table
,
2
(39), 1-21.
https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Science-Brief_Vaccine-Certi
ficates_published_202107021-1.pdf
Maquiling, A., Jeevakanthan, A., & Ho Mi Fane, B. (2023). The effect of vaccine mandate
announcements on vaccine uptake in Canada: An interrupted time series analysis.
Vaccine
,
41
(18), 2932–2940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.03.040
Peng, A., Bosco, S., Tuite, A., Simmons, A., & Fisman, D. (2023). Impact of Community
Masking on SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in Ontario after Adjustment for Differential
Testing by Age and Sex.
medRxiv
, 1-29.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.07.26.23293155v1.full-text
Public Health Agency of Canada. (2023, May 9).
COVID-19 epidemiology update: Summary —
Canada.ca
. https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/
Rochefort, D. A. (2016). Agenda setting, problem definition, and their contributions to a political
policy analysis.
Handbook of public policy agenda setting
, 35-52.
15
https://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=n4EwDQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA35&d
q=categories+of+issues+framing+Rochefort+and+Cobb&ots=LJw64-Uj1j&sig=oICBZY
YXDC1rma7utm_vCw_smUA#v=onepage&q=categories%20of%20issues%20framing%
20Rochefort%20and%20Cobb&f=false
Rüb, F. (2016). Decision Making under Ambiguity and Time Constraints. Assessing the
Multiple
‐
Streams Framework [Review of
Decision Making under Ambiguity and Time
Constraints. Assessing the Multiple
‐
Streams Framework
].
European Policy Analysis
,
2
(1), 51-109. https://doi.org/10.18278/epa.2.1.12
Rana, R. (2022). Exploring Positive and Negative Liberty for COVID-19 Vaccination.
Doctoral
dissertation, University of Toronto, Canada
. 1-35.
https://www.proquest.com/openview/28739c4a619122f684cd6e56951afa00/1?pq-origsite
=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Sniderman, P. M., & Theriault, S. M. (2004). The structure of political argument and the logic of
issue framing.
Studies in public opinion: Attitudes, nonattitudes, measurement error, and
change
. 133-165.
https://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=-K5cDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA133&d
q=framing+theory+issue+framing&ots=nDE-ezxRxn&sig=D-r5rKrXrQ_8xI-ZM8LgCIK
znIw#v=onepage&q=framing%20theory%20issue%20framing&f=false
Waldner, D., Harrison, R., Johnstone, J., Saxinger, L., Webster, D., & Sligl, W. (2021).
COVID-19 epidemiology in Canada from January to December 2020: the pre-vaccine
era.
Facets
,
6
(1), 760–822. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2021-0029
Wu, J., Tang, B., Bragazzi, N. L., Nah, K., & McCarthy, Z. (2020). Quantifying the role of social
distancing, personal protection and case detection in mitigating COVID-19 outbreak in
Ontario, Canada.
Journal of Mathematics in Industry
,
10
(1), 1-12.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13362-020-00083-3
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help