This claim's been around a bit, e.g. The Hill, Scoop Whoop, NYT. The countries named are Germany, New Zealand, Iceland, Finland, Belgium, Taiwan, Norway.

I'm wondering if this claim cherry-picks the data. In particular, I'm aware of some countries with male leaders that've been successful (South Korea, Slovenia, Vietnam), as well as some with female leaders that have not been so successful (ironically, Belgium, as well as Bangladesh). One of the sources (the one written by Amanda Taub for the NYT) also uses the death rate to justify the claim, in which case Russia (which has a male leader) is doing very well.

Has there been any study using the entirety of the data that backs up this claim?

  • 9
    It would be better to wait until the pandemia is over before investigating which approach was most successful... May 19, 2020 at 12:45
  • 4
    Another data point would be Czechia: predominantly male government, very low infection rate as well as mortality. May 19, 2020 at 16:26
  • 8
    The reporting from many countries is also inconsistent. I sincerely doubt the veracity of the death count in Russia for instance, and sadly, even in the US. May 19, 2020 at 19:27
  • 6
    New Zealand, Iceland, and Taiwan are island countries that are somewhat isolated by distance (New Zealand and Iceland) or hatred by mainland China (Taiwan). Extremely isolated male-led island countries have fared even better against the disease, as have many isolated male-led African nations. May 19, 2020 at 23:30
  • 5
    This is a question for which it's probably good to emphasize that correlation does not imply causation. Even if it turns out that women-led governments have been more successful, that would not by itself be good evidence that women leaders are inherently better at handling pandemic, or that any given country with a male leader would be likely to improve its success by replacing him with a woman. May 21, 2020 at 14:37


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .