Majority of the nations across the globe are experimenting with different strategies to do the balancing act between health security and economic growth. All of them are handling this unprecedented situation first time. So would you kindly share your idea(s) on this?
For more than a year countries have been trying to balance the health safety issue with the economic growth issue. Some countries are doing well while some are struggling.
Regarding health hazard issue, it’s best to follow the guidelines of the experts on medical field, concerned scientists, and public health arena.
For survival if individuals need to take part voluntarily in economic activities, that’s acceptable and understandable.
However, these kinds of participations should not be mandatory, ie., people should be allowed to take their own decision to either work outside taking health risk or opting to stay safe at home if they can afford to do so.
Indeed some countries are struggling because of the strategies implemented the control the pandemic. The SOPs s should be flexible and vaccinating against covid should play a key role.
It is not possible to define a single strategy and apply it to several countries because each country has its own programs that it uses to promote economic growth, and on the other hand, health security is currently in most countries, its situation is confused and very worrisome.
A strange question, but typical for economists. In pandemics, growth is not important and for most countries illusionary. The aim must be to hold loss of welfare including health as low as possible. And one should use the crisis to transform the economy to a more sustainable one.
Consciously or unconsciously decisions re the preservation of life and the economic cost of doing so are made all the time, and not just during a pandemic. But the coronavirus pandemic introduces a special element that plays out publicly. Measures that restrict people's freedom of movement where and when they please, including whether they are allowed to work or not, needed to control the level of transmission and hospitalisation need. Restrictions of that kind reduce economic output and the income of individuals. The protection of life is a prime government responsibility. Governments, however, are vulnerable to criticism and would be inclined to avoid being to transparent about the life-or-death choices they make. So, they will talk about ICU capacity etc., the capacity of the health care system to cope with the COVID workload. I recommend literature on the 'value of a statistical life', e.g. for a start, https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-value-of-life/
For the most part of the concern about this always talk about med and so on, but i do believe government should strengthen the economy on food security instead of all fields
Good food, better price, better imun
This will solve the economic problem and still giv it growth
l’État doit tout d’abord continuer d'intensifier les mesures pour freiner la propagation de la maladie de peur que celle-ci n’engendre d’autres dommages. Cela passe par la sensibilisation sur le comportement d’évitements et par mise en place d'équipements médicaux idoines. Ainsi, contenir le virus du covid 19 est primordial pour limiter les conséquences sanitaires, mais aussi économiques.
De même, l’État doit continuer à toujours soutenir les entreprises en faillite et également adopter une politique budgétaire saine dans l’optique d’améliorer le revenu global des ménages, par la suite la demande globale et par conséquent une reprise de l’activité économique. Cela passe d'une part par d'outils de soutient à la production et par le maintient des emplois, et d’autre part, à apporter un soutien humanitaire aux populations en situation de détresse.
Dear Deepak, balanced approaches are certainly scarce. For good or for bad, most of the debate (locally and globally) has been driven by ideology and political partisan interests, even in presence of growing scientific evidence. I have been looking for alternative approaches to "mainstream consensus," in search of a wider scope. The "Focused Protection" approach developed at the end of 2020 by an international group of scientists and scholars is one of the alternative views that, from my perspective, offers a possible way for balancing strategies and policy actions towards a better quality of life. It has faced fierce debate and strong criticisms (as expected and needed). At the end, the more evidence we have and the more updated robust analysis we produce, the better understanding (and learning) we will achieve. Best regards.
Thank you very much Dr. Mubina Khondkar, Dr. Ronald Buye, Dr. Zienab Ali Dashoor, Dr. Anton Rainer, Dr. Jaap van der Straaten, Dr. Arif Z. DjunaedI, Dr. Pierre Claver Kouakou and Dr. Luis Ravera for your fascinating and insightful reply. Each one of you has stated your point(s) with convincing argument. Let this discussion continue. Let us listen from others.
The question at the moment is not balance, as securing the health of the people is the best economic policy. When we look back at this pandemic after a generation, we will not be proud to have maintained growth while millions have died. I would look to Taiwan and how it has responded to this pandemic without lockdown through harnessing the power of digital technology, pandemic preparedness(because of earlier SARS experience), universal health care, and robust manufacturing and export sectors (they manufacture masks, for instance). Their deputy head of country is an epidemiologist. Some studies point to the extent of social cohesion that has mitigated a subdued pandemic impact on the economy. We have to hold back on the economic metrics for health and well-being. New Zealand had some reduction of unemployment when it's primary sectors, eg fruit industry, were unable to import seasonal workers and had to rely on locals, some of whom were on benefit and those affected by sectors that closed (eg restaurants). Sectors that gained workers were those related to addressing climate change, like forestry and conservancy. Construction remains robust. There is an economic fall-out but not as bad as expected. If a country does the right thing for its people, the economics will right itself, with public institutions, private sectors and civil society getting together on this.
The vaccine is not only a remedy for this. Another problem is social distancing, unemployment, climate change, inflation, political situation, population ratio , food insecurity, health issues, pure drinking water and so many other factors involved
Dear Dr. Maria Cristina Bautista and Dr. Ravichandran K R P thank you very much for sharing your ideas.
- Badges
- Science topic