Time-based comparison of the COVID-19 pandemic in OECD countries

Many epidemics have occurred throughout history. The epidemics that caused the deterioration of the health of the society and the death of people affected the people economically and socially. Some of the epidemics have transcended the boundaries of the place where they first emerged and turned into a pandemic, leading to greater negativities. It was tried to fight the pandemics that caused losses in the society, and every pandemic that emerged was a guide in the fight against the next pandemic. In addition to the use of experiences from past pandemics in the fight against pandemics, pandemic-specific measures have also been investigated. For this reason, pandemics, starting points, strategies to combat pandemics and application comparisons have always attracted the attention of researchers and have become one of the topics they examine. In this study, it was aimed to examine the struggles of OECD countries with the COVID-19 pandemic under the headings of success in creating a safe zone, success in taking precautions, success in treatment and success in using resources efficiently, to compare them with each other and to make suggestions for a possible pandemic. There are 37 OECD countries within the scope of the research. Twenty-two different variables were used to represent the criteria for the success of these countries in creating a safe zone, the success of taking precautions, the success of treatment and the success of using resources efficiently. OECD countries were discussed and compared with these variables under four main headings as monthly and one-year periods. The success of OECD countries in creating safe zones was carried out by rate analysis. As a result of the analyzes, in the first months of the pandemic, the US and Japan had the lowest case density; Iceland and Spain had the highest. In the comparison over the period, New Zealand, Australia, South Korea and Japan, which are mostly island countries, were the countries with the lowest case density. Lithuania and Colombia were the most successful in the success of the measure carried out by the GRA method; Mexico and England were the most unsuccessful countries. In the comparison covering the whole period, Chile is the most successful country and Estonia is the most unsuccessful country. In the comparison of treatment success with AHS and GRA methods, Turkey and Latvia were found to be the most successful and the Netherlands and Iceland were found to be the most unsuccessful countries in the first months. In the comparison, which covers the entire period, the USA is the most successful country with the most tests, while Iceland is the most unsuccessful country. Turkey was the most successful and Belgium and Norway were the most unsuccessful countries in the first months in the comparison of the success of using resources efficiently using the VZA method. In the comparison period, the USA was the most successful and Denmark was the most unsuccessful countries. 180 As a result of the research, the success of OECD countries in fighting the pandemic was determined and compared. In addition, the measures that ensure the success of the countries or the country characteristics have been revealed and the countries whose experiences will be benefited have been determined. For this reason, it has made significant contributions to the literature on the fight against pandemics. In subsequent studies, it is recommended to increase the variables, the number of countries and the time period.