• COVID-19
• Other research productsclose
• DE close
• IE close
• LK close
• English close
• COVID-19 close

The present research conducts a formal analysis of the interactive decisions concerning the enterprise of COVID-19 vaccination on the part of governments and citizens. It specifically constructs a non-cooperative static game with complete information between the citizen and the government encompassing the strategies of vaccination and no vaccination with regard to the former and the strategies of direct imposition, subsistence restrictions, luxury restrictions and no imposition with regard to the latter. On account of its payoff structure the present analysis finds that the game in question presents one sole and strict pure strategy Nash equilibrium, being that of strategies no vaccination and no imposition, respectively. The core rationale is that the citizen accepts COVID-19 vaccination only if his survival is placed at risk, because of the inherent unlawfulness presented by COVID-19 vaccination, itself due to foetal exploitation and potentially adverse effects, thereby prompting the government not to impose it, lest individual integrity and societal rights be violated as well. It furthermore shows that the exogenous elimination of the no imposition strategy on the part of the government transforms the Nash equilibrium into that of strategies vaccination and direct imposition, respectively, as materially come to pass. It finally determines that the unlikely addition of the revolution strategy on the part of the citizen in the presence of the elimination of the no imposition strategy on the part of the government likewise admits one sole and strict pure strategy Nash equilibrium, either in strategies vaccination and direct imposition or in strategies revolution and direct imposition, respectively.

ackground: COVID-19 has heterogeneous manifestations, though one of the most common symptoms is a sudden loss of smell (anosmia or hyposmia). We investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19. Methods: This preregistered, cross-sectional study used a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified singular and cumulative predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Results: Both C19+ and C19- groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points; C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both single and cumulative feature models (ROC AUC=0.72), with additional features providing no significant model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms, such as fever or cough. Olfactory recovery within 40 days was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since illness onset. Conclusions: As smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19, we developed the ODoR-19 tool, a 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss. Numeric ratings <2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (10

Abstract The issue of coronavirus outbreak in the world, though new, is equally pervasive. It has posed a new and ambiguous challenge to the economic growth of countries around the world. Undoubtedly, the efforts of countries to curb the spread of this virus and reduce the number of deaths are necessary for other strategies that will be taken in other areas, especially in the economic field. Comparing countries only based on the statistics on virus spread and mortality without considering the contextual variables, can be misleading. Thus using dynamic data envelopment analysis, this study calculated the performance of 19 selected countries in two dimensions: inefficiency of preventing coronavirus spread and inefficiency of preventing deaths caused by a coronavirus from February 2 to April 12. According to the study, the inefficiency trend of preventing coronavirus spread in Singapore, South Korea, China, and Australia are decreasing during the period under review and the inefficiency trend of other countries, which of course differ in terms of inefficiency, are increasing with different slopes. Also, Australia, Finland, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand have experienced less inefficiency in preventing deaths caused by coronavirus compared to other countries. Stringency index and global health security (GHS) index have been used as well, to analyze the findings and in the end some suggestions have been presented.

O artigo apresenta um estudo a mercê das exportações brasileiras durante a pandemia do COVID-19. A forma mais eficiente que o governo encontrou para conter a contaminação e o número de mortes é o lockdown, que foi estabelecido no país. Entretanto, ocasionou fortes impactos na oferta e demanda de bens e produtos. A partir da paralisação do serviço industrial, induziu uma diminuição das manufaturas, e consequentemente, o seu consumo e suas exportações. O setor agropecuário cresceu nesse período, exportando cada vez mais produtos, atendendo a demanda por alimentos de vários países, mas a demanda interna ficou prejudicada, produzindo uma alta na maioria dos bens alimentícios. Um dos setores mais importante é o de serviços, que representa cerca de mais 70% no Produto Interno Bruto – PIB na qual caiu significativamente durante os dois primeiros trimestres do ano, somente no terceiro trimestre o PIB se valorizou frente ao período anterior. As expectativas para 2021, são de melhores resultados, a esperança é para que a vacina chegue no primeiro semestre e assim, aumente o consumo e encaminhando uma repercussão positiva para a economia brasileira, que tanto foi prejudicada.

Close proximity interactions facilitate the spread of COVID-19, which is predominantly transmitted via droplets. In this paper we study to what extend the transmission and mortality of the virus are related to social habits regarding physical interactions. Using regional data for a maximum of 8 European countries we find that a standard deviation increase in the percentage of people having daily face-to-face contacts raises COVID-19 cases by 10% but does not affect the number of fatalities. Analyzing the effects by type of contact, we observe that only the interactions with friends are relevant for the transmission and mortality of the virus. Additionally, our results show that this impact is reinforced by the presence of inter-generational families in the region. Finally, we find evidence of a negative relationship between civic habits and the growth rate of contagion between April and June 2020.

We study the economic effects generated by the proliferation of the Covid-19 epidemic and the implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions by developing a SEIRD-RBC model, where the outbreak and policy interventions shape the labor input dynamic. We microfoundan Epidemic-Macro model grounded on the RBC tradition, useful for epidemic and economic analysis at business cycle frequency, which is able to reproduce the highly debated health-output trade-off. Assuming a positive approach, we show the potential of our model by matching the epidemic and macroeconomic empirical evidence of the Italian case.

We elicited incentivized and stated measures of risk and time preferences from a sample of undergraduate students in Athens, Greece, as part of a battery of psychological, behavioral and economic measures and traits that could be later matched with data from laboratory experiments. Data collection for these measures was first initiated in 2017 and the exact same battery of measures was administered in 2019 and early 2020 to students of the university that had voluntarily enrolled to participate in surveys/experiments. About halfway through the 2020 wave, our study was re-designed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. We re-launched our study on March 23, 2020, coinciding with a general curfew imposed by the government, and invited back all subjects that had participated in the 2019 and the early 2020 wave. The exact same sets of incentivized and stated measures of risk and time preferences were administered to the invited subjects and the wave duration was extended until a few weeks after the opening up of the economy and restart of business activity that followed the curfew. We then estimated structural parameters for various theories of risk and time preferences from the incentivized tasks and find no effect between the different waves or other key events of the pandemic, despite the fact that we have about 1,000 responses across all waves. Similar conclusions come out of the stated preferences measures. Overall, our subjects exhibit intertemporal stability of risk and time preferences despite the very disruptive effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global economy.

The confinement caused by Covid-19, and the associated promotion of telework to reduce exposure of workers to the disease, have clear implications for worker daily behaviors and well-being. This paper empirically explores the differences between commuters’ and teleworkers’ time allocations during their workdays, and the instant enjoyment experienced while doing such activities, with a focus on gender differences. Using detailed information from the UK Time Use Survey for the years 2014-2015, the results show a statistically significant cut in female and male paid work time associated with teleworking. On the other hand, teleworkers spend more time than commuters in unpaid work and leisure activities. The results also reveal a cut in women’s experienced enjoyment while doing telework, while male teleworkers enjoy their leisure more than do commuters. These results suggest that confinement policies promoting teleworking may impact not only worker time allocations, but also individual well-being, and such an impact may differ between men and women, leading to intrahousehold imbalances.

What determines how a national government reacts in a crisis? The COVID-19 pandemic provides an opportunity to explore leadership behavior and crisis management, and this paper examines what drove the extent of the lockdown in countries around the world during the first wave of coronavirus. In particular, this paper posits that many of the policies undertaken were “extraordinary,” that is unlike those ever implemented or complemented by the leaders in charge at the start of the pandemic. Utilizing new and high-frequency data on government responses to COVID-19 and novel statistical techniques, the results of this analysis are that institutions and leadership attributes both matter, but for different policies; where the response called for more ‘normal” policies, it appeared that institutional mechanisms were adequate and played the largest role in influencing the extent of the lockdown. On the other hand, where the policies contemplated were very far from the ordinary (including stay-at-home orders or prohibitions on internal travel), the attributes of the leader determined the stringency of the lockdown more than institutions.

This book provides insights from research and practice in how organizations were able to sustain resilience in their global supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic and to advance the understanding of supply chain risk management. The chapters highlight the lessons learned, insist on new models for resilience, suggest improved supply chain risk methodologies and bridge the gap between research and practice. It helps readers acquire greater knowledge, strategic approaches, new methods, and practical tools for ensuring global supply chain resilience.