Financial Resilience Perspective on COVID‐19 Business Support: A Comparative Study of Four European Countries

Abacus Pub Date : 2024-08-13 DOI:10.1111/abac.12331
Jan van Helden, Tjerk Budding, Patricia Gomes, Mario Hesse, Carine Smolders
{"title":"Financial Resilience Perspective on COVID‐19 Business Support: A Comparative Study of Four European Countries","authors":"Jan van Helden, Tjerk Budding, Patricia Gomes, Mario Hesse, Carine Smolders","doi":"10.1111/abac.12331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper investigates COVID‐19 business support in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Portugal. Simple and generally applicable programs for wage and fixed‐cost support are predominant. From a financial resilience perspective, support programs can be seen as coping responses to the crisis through attempts at bouncing back to the situation before the virus outbreak. This also holds for the dynamics of the support during the pandemic, where governments balanced the desire to return to normal economic circumstances that called for stricter access conditions, and the need to provide support for a longer‐lasting pandemic that required the opposite. Bouncing‐forward responses, such as setting up new post‐shock configurations, were largely absent, which is likely to be due to the need for quick and adequate responses that gave limited time for critical reflection. The impacts of business support on the number of bankruptcies and employment figures were positive. Unemployment and fiscal impacts diverged among the four countries, and it is suggested that governmental structure was influential: unitary states performed better than federal states. The paper also reflects on the lessons learned from COVID‐19 for support in future crises, like the recent energy crisis, and points to an increasing attention to information‐sharing within the government system, but also notes limited progress in critical thinking.","PeriodicalId":501337,"journal":{"name":"Abacus","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Abacus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper investigates COVID‐19 business support in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Portugal. Simple and generally applicable programs for wage and fixed‐cost support are predominant. From a financial resilience perspective, support programs can be seen as coping responses to the crisis through attempts at bouncing back to the situation before the virus outbreak. This also holds for the dynamics of the support during the pandemic, where governments balanced the desire to return to normal economic circumstances that called for stricter access conditions, and the need to provide support for a longer‐lasting pandemic that required the opposite. Bouncing‐forward responses, such as setting up new post‐shock configurations, were largely absent, which is likely to be due to the need for quick and adequate responses that gave limited time for critical reflection. The impacts of business support on the number of bankruptcies and employment figures were positive. Unemployment and fiscal impacts diverged among the four countries, and it is suggested that governmental structure was influential: unitary states performed better than federal states. The paper also reflects on the lessons learned from COVID‐19 for support in future crises, like the recent energy crisis, and points to an increasing attention to information‐sharing within the government system, but also notes limited progress in critical thinking.
从财务复原力角度看 COVID-19 企业支持:欧洲四国比较研究
本文调查了比利时、德国、荷兰和葡萄牙的 COVID-19 企业支持。其中以简单且普遍适用的工资和固定成本支持计划为主。从财务复原力的角度来看,支持计划可被视为应对危机的措施,试图恢复到病毒爆发前的状况。这也适用于大流行病期间的支持动态,政府一方面希望恢复正常的经济状况,这就需要更严格的准入条件,另一方面又需要为持续时间更长的大流行病提供支持,这就需要反其道而行之。反弹式应对措施,如建立新的震后配置,在很大程度上是不存在的,这很可能是由于需要快速和充分的应对措施,给予批判性反思的时间有限。企业支持对破产数量和就业数字的影响是积极的。失业和财政影响在四个国家之间存在差异,这表明政府结构具有影响力:单一制国家的表现优于联邦制国家。本文还反思了从 COVID-19 中汲取的经验教训,以便在未来的危机(如最近的能源危机)中提供支持,并指出政府系统内部越来越重视信息共享,但也注意到批判性思维方面的进展有限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信