Public acceptability of containment measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy: how institutional confidence and specific political support matter

Purpose: This article contributes to a better theoretical and empiric understanding of mixed results in the literature investigating the relationship between institutional confidence and adherence to recommended measures during a pandemic. Design/methodology/approach: The article relies on structural equation models (SEMs) based on data from ResPOnsE COVID-19, a rolling cross-section (RCS) survey carried out in Italy from April to June 2020. Findings: The authors’ findings show the existence of multiple pathways of confidence at the national and local level. Confidence in the institutions is positively associated with support for the performance of the Prime Minister and that of the regional institutions in the North West, which in turn, raises the likelihood of following the restrictive measures. However, in the same regions, a good appraisal of the regional system's performance also had a direct positive effect on the perception of being safe from the virus, decreasing adherence to the restrictive measures. Finally, the direct effect of confidence in the institutions on compliance is negative. Social implications: The result enlightens the crucial role both of national and local institutions in promoting or inhibiting adherence to restrictive measures during a pandemic and suggests that “one size fits all” measures for increasing overall institutional confidence might not be sufficient to reach the desired goal of achieving compliance in pandemic times. Originality/value: The authors theorize and test three cognitive mechanisms – (1) the “cascade of confidence”; (2) the “paradox of support” and (3) the “paradox of confidence” – to account for both the positive and negative links between measures of political support and public acceptability of COVID-19 containment measures.