What do Taiwan, Germany, Finland and New Zealand all have in common? They are run by women. Add in Iceland, Norway and Denmark and you could say that there is evidence that female leaders are tackling the ongoing coronavirus crisis better than their male counterparts. Since the beginning of the pandemic, there has been a lot of debate surrounding women leaders and their effectiveness at handling the crisis.

It is too simplistic to conclude that gender is the defining factor of success in managing global crises. Plenty of countries led by men have also done well in handling the virus – Australia, South Korea, Ghana, Greece, Vietnam and the Czech Republic are a few examples. The one thing that is certain is that the leaders who have done the best job at tackling the pandemic are those that have acted quickly, decisively and effectively with no nonsense approaches to managing the virus. That being said, it is interesting to note that very few countries with female leaders have done badly. Evidence shows that there is a correlation between women’s representation as key decision makers and an increased benefit to societies. So why is it that women make up less than 7 percent of world leaders globally?

Clare Wenham, Assistant Professor in Global Health Policy at the London School of Economics, suggests that while there is no conclusive answer as to why female leaders are doing so well, “Political research in spheres beyond global health shows that when you get more women at the top there’s more transparency, accountability and good governance practices, normally.” Women leaders appear to be listening more to advice given by the World Health Organisation and looking at what is working in other countries.

Under the Chancellor Angela Merkel, Germany has had noticeably less coronavirus cases in mainland Europe with 181,288 confirmed cases and 8,498 deaths to date. Merkel, who has a science background, began her March 18 address to the German people by first acknowledging their pain. “The coronavirus is currently dramatically changing our lives. Our understanding of normality, of public life, of social togetherness – all this is being tested as never before.” She followed this by calling on Germans to work together to keep each other safe. “I firmly believe that we will manage this task if all citizens see it as their task… This is serious. Take it seriously.”

Meanwhile, in the US, Trump’s version of reassuring Americans included accusing the media and Democrats of “over-hyping the situation”, promising that the problem would “go away” and applauding his own performance in managing the pandemic which he offensively referred to as the “Chinese Virus.” In his address, the self-proclaimed “wartime president” boasted, “I always treated the Chinese Virus very seriously, and have done a very good job from the beginning.”

Over in New Zealand, the prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, has been praised for her response to the crisis. Not only did she enforce a policy of strict and complete lockdown, which limited the country’s deaths to 21 people, she did so in a way that maintained the trust and respect of New Zealand. She moved swiftly and her communication was clear and to the point, leaving no room for confusion. In her address to the nation, her message was, “We go hard, we go early” whilst also assuring children that the Easter bunny and Tooth Fairy are key workers.

In stark contrast, Boris Johnson’s government delayed lockdown measures and other crucial safety protocols such as increased testing and safety equipment for NHS staff. The UK has one of the highest death tolls, alongside the U.S., Spain and Italy.

Taiwan, led by Tsai Ing-wen has been one of the least affected countries during the pandemic despite its proximity to China. Tsai Ing-wen’s government acted early while many other countries were still deciding whether to take action. Tsai-Ing wen listened to her vice president, a leading epidemiologist, about their response. Various safety measures were imposed including travel bans and country-wide testing. With a population of 24 million people, Taiwan has had 441 confirmed cases and 7 deaths at the time of writing.

Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro on the other hand, minimized the virus as “a little flu or a bit of a cold” and in April, he even attended an anti-lockdown protest. Bolsonaro’s disregard for safety measures during the pandemic has caused confusion for the country. Brazil currently has 394,507 confirmed cases and 24,593 deaths.

The prime minister of Iceland, Katrín Jakobsdóttir, has given all citizens the option to be tested for free. Thanks to a thorough tracing system, the country’s schools have been able to remain open. Iceland currently has 1,804 cases and 10 deaths. In Finland, Sanna Marin, the world’s youngest serving prime minister, promptly implemented a strict lockdown including a ban on all non-essential travel in and out of Helsinki. Finland currently has 6,628 cases and 312 deaths. Significantly lower than that of neighbouring Sweden.

Erna Solberg has led Norway through the crisis by imposing early lockdown measures, thorough testing and “letting scientists make the big medical decisions”. Solberg also addressed Norway’s children by holding two press conferences where adult journalists were banned. She assured children that it is okay to be “a little scared” and that she too missed being able to hug her friends.

Some explanations as to why women leaders are excelling have been based around the stereotype that women are more caring and empathetic. Professor Jennifer Tomlinson at Leeds University Business School, has suggested that women who are often still the primary caregivers in many societies, have a broader range of experiences to draw from in their governance.

The need for female leadership is further demonstrated in a crisis where women are more vulnerable in some cases. For example, one of the unintended consequences of lockdown measures taken to protect members of the public has been the increased risk of domestic violence. As stated by Mandu Reid, The Women’s Equality Party’s leader, “This is a gendered crisis, it affects men and women very differently, and women are used to looking out for those things. In a situation where those on the most peril on the front lines are often women, the fact that most people at the top haven’t had to consider the world through that lens does a disservice to all of us.” Many women who work are often still responsible for looking after their families. According to Reid, this gives them “a more rounded perspective, particularly in relation to vulnerable groups.”

Although women leaders are excelling, there is more to a politician’s leadership than their gender alone. One of the issues with placing too much emphasis on gender in response to the pandemic, is that it can lead to women being held to a disproportionately higher standard than their male counterparts. Kelly Dittmar, assistant professor of political science at the Center for American Women and Politics, suggests that holding women to a higher ethical standard than men means that they are “penalized more harshly when they face scandal.”

There are so few female heads of state that they are still viewed, unfortunately, as a novelty around the world. The lack of diversity in global leadership means that women leaders are seen as representatives for all women in ways that men are not. If a woman leader fails, she may be held as an example of why women are not fit to lead – something that male leaders don’t have to deal with.

Women are used to being scrutinized, particularly in leadership roles. In times like this, accepting criticism and adapting in response to it is a strength. In a report by The Telegraph, Reid has said “I think if you’ve been entitled your whole life, and you’ve expected and assumed and had it proved over and over that your voice will get heard, it’s possible that you will take power and influence for granted, and that is dangerous in a crisis of the severity we are facing here and now.” She adds that “Women are used to being scrutinized and having to justify themselves. They’ve had to work twice as hard to get half as far. And that will incubate perhaps a greater reverence for the job and responsibility… Men and many political establishments don’t have the same experience.”

Many who come from marginalized groups have faced barriers as they navigate the world – plenty of us have had to balance self-belief with self-awareness. This crisis not only shows the importance of self-awareness in leadership, it has also shown that there are too few obstacles in place for incompetent, mediocre men to rise to positions of power.

A huge issue for women in politics is that there is an expectation that a leader should be bold, assertive and domineering. This expectation is deeply rooted in stereotypes. When women exhibit these supposedly ‘masculine’ characteristics, they are seen as less feminine because it veers from the stereotypical ideal of what a woman ‘should’ be. According to Alice Evans, a sociologist at King’s College London, this “makes it very difficult for women to thrive as leaders.” The caring and empathetic actions of female leaders like Ardern could not be further from the traditional and outdated model of governance.

What we can take away from female leadership during this pandemic is that involving women leads to a wider perspective of any crisis. This results in stronger and more effective solutions to the world’s problems than if envisioned by a homogeneous group. Hopefully, these trying times will change stereotypical perceptions of what a powerful leader looks like. Perhaps in the future, more societies will learn to recognize and value empathy, collaboration, care and thoughtfulness in its leaders.

The shining examples of pioneering women amidst the ongoing crisis have proven that diversity of thought is important at the top. The challenges of the 21st century call for a new type of leadership – one that isn’t characterized by traditionally masculine ideas of power and control.