Differences in healthcare systems, public culture, and economic capacity led Indonesia and Japan to experience the Covid-19 pandemic in significantly different ways. The findings were revealed in a study conducted by Firmansyah, Edison C. Sembiring, and Soehatman Ramli from Sahid University. The study was published in the April 2026 edition of the Contemporary Journal of Applied Sciences (CJAS).
The research compared the governance of Covid-19 pandemic management in Indonesia and Japan, covering government policies, healthcare system readiness, public responses, and the economic impact caused by the pandemic.
According to the researchers, Covid-19 became one of the largest global health crises after the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared it a pandemic in March 2020. Indonesia and Japan both faced rising infection rates but adopted different strategies to control the spread of the virus.
Indonesia implemented Large-Scale Social Restrictions (PSBB) and later the Enforcement of Community Activity Restrictions (PPKM) to limit public mobility. These policies included restrictions on public activities, closures of public spaces, and reductions in transportation capacity. However, the implementation faced major challenges due to weak coordination between central and regional governments as well as economic pressures on society.
Meanwhile, Japan adopted a more awareness-based approach without imposing a total lockdown. The Japanese government relied heavily on public discipline and collective responsibility to suppress virus transmission. Japan’s main strategy became known as the “3Cs” approach: avoiding closed spaces, crowded spaces, and close-contact settings.
The study found that Japan had a more prepared healthcare system compared to Indonesia. Medical infrastructure, hospital capacity, ICU facilities, and the distribution of healthcare workers in Japan were considered more organized and evenly distributed. In contrast, Indonesia struggled with limited hospital facilities, shortages of medical oxygen, and unequal distribution of healthcare workers, particularly in remote regions.
Researchers used a qualitative descriptive method with a comparative study approach. Data was collected through in-depth interviews with government officials, healthcare workers, academics, business actors, and members of the public. The study also relied on government reports, academic journals, and data from WHO, UNICEF, and the IMF as supporting sources.
The research identified several important findings:
- Japan relied more on voluntary public participation than strict law enforcement.
- High levels of public discipline in Japan helped suppress virus transmission without a total lockdown.
- Indonesia experienced severe pressure on hospitals during Covid-19 patient surges.
- Indonesia’s informal sector and small businesses were among the hardest-hit economic groups.
- Japan managed to reduce economic damage through large fiscal stimulus programs and a more organized aid distribution system.
The study also found that cultural factors strongly influenced the effectiveness of pandemic policies. Japanese society was viewed as highly disciplined and compliant with public regulations, including mask-wearing and mobility restrictions. In Indonesia, meanwhile, economic pressures and social traditions such as religious gatherings and extended family events often became obstacles to implementing health protocols.
In addition, the research highlighted disparities in the fiscal capacities of the two countries. Japan was considered to have greater ability to provide economic stimulus to citizens and businesses during the pandemic. In Indonesia, the distribution of social assistance and economic aid still faced delays and targeting problems.
According to Firmansyah and the research team, Japan’s experience demonstrates the importance of long-term investment in healthcare systems, crisis preparedness, and public education. Indonesia was encouraged to strengthen policy coordination, improve hospital capacity, expand equitable healthcare worker distribution, and reinforce social protection for vulnerable communities.
The study is considered important because it provides insight into how cultural factors, governance systems, and healthcare preparedness influence the success of pandemic management. The findings could also serve as an evaluation tool for handling future global health crises.
Author Profiles
- Firmansyah - Sahid University
- Edison C. Sembiring - Sahid University
- Soehatman Ramli - Sahid University
Research Source
Firmansyah, Sembiring, Edison C., & Ramli, Soehatman. Management Impact Analysis of Governance in Handling the Covid 19 Pandemic in Indonesia and Japan. Contemporary Journal of Applied Sciences (CJAS), Vol. 4 No. 5, April 2026, pp. 377–394.
0 Komentar