The COVID-19 Pandemic and Asia: Editors' Overview

IF 4.5 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Takatoshi Ito, Kazumasa Iwata, Colin McKenzie, Haruko Noguchi, Shujiro Urata
{"title":"The COVID-19 Pandemic and Asia: Editors' Overview","authors":"Takatoshi Ito,&nbsp;Kazumasa Iwata,&nbsp;Colin McKenzie,&nbsp;Haruko Noguchi,&nbsp;Shujiro Urata","doi":"10.1111/aepr.12375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The COVID-19 pandemic has been both a public health and a socio-economic crisis on a global scale. Asian countries have reported somewhat lower numbers of COVID cases and deaths than countries in other regions like the USA and Europe, which remains something of a puzzle. Several epidemiological and nonepidemiological hypotheses may explain Asian countries' lower levels of infection, such as previous exposure to a milder version of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 conferring herd immunity; the efficacy of the Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccine used in those countries; and the Asian inherent culture of social distancing and face mask use, as nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). As yet, there is insufficient information to solve this puzzle.</p><p>Macroeconomic studies find that the pandemic has produced both supply and demand shocks to the economy. For example, lower consumption and fewer foreign visitors reduce demand. Factory utilization has dropped in connection with efforts to lower the spread of infection. Economic vitality remained sluggish, as measured by bankruptcies and employment, over 2020. Furthermore, government policies such as lockdowns, emergency declarations, and vaccine policies have had a significant impact on the socio-economic activities of people and firms.</p><p>This issue of the <i>Asian Economic Policy Review</i> seeks to draw lessons from public and private sector responses in Asian countries to the COVID-19 pandemic on how to minimize the costs of uncontrolled public health epidemics while balancing them with the socio-economic costs of reduced production and consumption. The first two papers review the COVID-19 pandemic's impacts in Asian countries from public health and economic perspectives, respectively. The quantitative and qualitative surveys conducted by Miyawaki and Tsugawa (<span>2022</span>) suggest that the underlying factors in this difference between Asian and other countries would include the earlier and more stringent NPIs in Asia, the younger age distribution in Asia, and the geographical characteristics of Asia. Meanwhile, Tanaka (<span>2022</span>) claims that COVID-19 caused significant supply shocks due to NPIs such as lockdowns, while SARS and MERS mainly caused demand shocks. As a result, the economic damage from COVID-19 was far greater than the damage from the SARS and MERS pandemics. The third paper by Fukao and Shioji (<span>2022</span>) analyzes the interaction between NPIs and economic activity and finds a trade-off between economic activity and infection controls. In the fourth paper, Amul et al. (<span>2022</span>) analyze the developments and responses to COVID-19 up to March 2021 in the Southeast Asian region from a political economy and governance perspective, and draw several key lessons, such as the need for decisive and credible leadership; a pragmatic and conscientious approach to balancing risks; transparent risk communication; good governance; and the ability to reflect and take steps to prepare for future pandemics. The fifth paper by Bown (<span>2022</span>) examines international trade and policy involving personal protective equipment (PPE) during the crisis, with a focus on China, the European Union (EU), and the USA. Bown (<span>2022</span>) argues that an optimal policy mix for a major industrial economy like the USA should have involved three components: (1) incentivizing domestic industry to add capacity and surge production as quickly as possible; and for the period during which surge capacity is ramping up and not yet available, rely on the combination of (2) previously stockpiled PPE and (3) imports. In the final paper, Kwon and Kim (<span>2022</span>) focus on the lessons for the health sector that can be drawn from the preparedness and responses in Asia and the Pacific to the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p>This section summarizes the papers presented at the 33rd Asian Economic Policy Review Conference held on April 9 and 10, 2021, the comments by the assigned discussants, and the general discussion of each paper (including written comments from some participants). Owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, this conference was conducted via ZOOM.</p><p>At the time of the conference, we thought we had enough data and observations on the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the situation has evolved after the conference. In particular, the fifth wave of infections in Japan starting around August 2021 turned out to be much more severe than the earlier four waves. Some of the observations and comments in this issue may have become out of date by the time of publication, but this cannot be helped given that we are taking up evolving issues.</p>","PeriodicalId":45430,"journal":{"name":"Asian Economic Policy Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aepr.12375","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Economic Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aepr.12375","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has been both a public health and a socio-economic crisis on a global scale. Asian countries have reported somewhat lower numbers of COVID cases and deaths than countries in other regions like the USA and Europe, which remains something of a puzzle. Several epidemiological and nonepidemiological hypotheses may explain Asian countries' lower levels of infection, such as previous exposure to a milder version of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 conferring herd immunity; the efficacy of the Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccine used in those countries; and the Asian inherent culture of social distancing and face mask use, as nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). As yet, there is insufficient information to solve this puzzle.

Macroeconomic studies find that the pandemic has produced both supply and demand shocks to the economy. For example, lower consumption and fewer foreign visitors reduce demand. Factory utilization has dropped in connection with efforts to lower the spread of infection. Economic vitality remained sluggish, as measured by bankruptcies and employment, over 2020. Furthermore, government policies such as lockdowns, emergency declarations, and vaccine policies have had a significant impact on the socio-economic activities of people and firms.

This issue of the Asian Economic Policy Review seeks to draw lessons from public and private sector responses in Asian countries to the COVID-19 pandemic on how to minimize the costs of uncontrolled public health epidemics while balancing them with the socio-economic costs of reduced production and consumption. The first two papers review the COVID-19 pandemic's impacts in Asian countries from public health and economic perspectives, respectively. The quantitative and qualitative surveys conducted by Miyawaki and Tsugawa (2022) suggest that the underlying factors in this difference between Asian and other countries would include the earlier and more stringent NPIs in Asia, the younger age distribution in Asia, and the geographical characteristics of Asia. Meanwhile, Tanaka (2022) claims that COVID-19 caused significant supply shocks due to NPIs such as lockdowns, while SARS and MERS mainly caused demand shocks. As a result, the economic damage from COVID-19 was far greater than the damage from the SARS and MERS pandemics. The third paper by Fukao and Shioji (2022) analyzes the interaction between NPIs and economic activity and finds a trade-off between economic activity and infection controls. In the fourth paper, Amul et al. (2022) analyze the developments and responses to COVID-19 up to March 2021 in the Southeast Asian region from a political economy and governance perspective, and draw several key lessons, such as the need for decisive and credible leadership; a pragmatic and conscientious approach to balancing risks; transparent risk communication; good governance; and the ability to reflect and take steps to prepare for future pandemics. The fifth paper by Bown (2022) examines international trade and policy involving personal protective equipment (PPE) during the crisis, with a focus on China, the European Union (EU), and the USA. Bown (2022) argues that an optimal policy mix for a major industrial economy like the USA should have involved three components: (1) incentivizing domestic industry to add capacity and surge production as quickly as possible; and for the period during which surge capacity is ramping up and not yet available, rely on the combination of (2) previously stockpiled PPE and (3) imports. In the final paper, Kwon and Kim (2022) focus on the lessons for the health sector that can be drawn from the preparedness and responses in Asia and the Pacific to the COVID-19 pandemic.

This section summarizes the papers presented at the 33rd Asian Economic Policy Review Conference held on April 9 and 10, 2021, the comments by the assigned discussants, and the general discussion of each paper (including written comments from some participants). Owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, this conference was conducted via ZOOM.

At the time of the conference, we thought we had enough data and observations on the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the situation has evolved after the conference. In particular, the fifth wave of infections in Japan starting around August 2021 turned out to be much more severe than the earlier four waves. Some of the observations and comments in this issue may have become out of date by the time of publication, but this cannot be helped given that we are taking up evolving issues.

新冠肺炎疫情与亚洲:编辑综述
新冠肺炎大流行既是一场全球范围的公共卫生危机,也是一场社会经济危机。亚洲国家报告的新冠肺炎病例和死亡人数略低于美国和欧洲等其他地区的国家,这仍然是一个谜。一些流行病学和非流行病学假设可能解释了亚洲国家感染水平较低的原因,例如之前接触过较温和版本的严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2,具有群体免疫力;在这些国家使用的卡介苗的效力;以及亚洲固有的保持社交距离和使用口罩的文化,作为非药物干预措施。到目前为止,还没有足够的信息来解决这个难题。宏观经济研究发现,疫情对经济产生了供需冲击。例如,消费下降和外国游客减少减少了需求。工厂利用率下降与降低感染传播的努力有关。从破产和就业情况来看,2020年经济活力依然低迷。此外,封锁、紧急状态声明和疫苗政策等政府政策对人们和企业的社会经济活动产生了重大影响。本期《亚洲经济政策评论》旨在从亚洲国家公共和私营部门对新冠肺炎疫情的应对中汲取教训,了解如何最大限度地减少不受控制的公共卫生流行病的成本,同时平衡生产和消费减少的社会经济成本。前两篇论文分别从公共卫生和经济角度回顾了新冠肺炎疫情对亚洲国家的影响。Miyawaki和Tsugawa(2022)进行的定量和定性调查表明,亚洲与其他国家之间这种差异的根本因素包括亚洲较早且更严格的NPI、亚洲较年轻的年龄分布以及亚洲的地理特征。与此同时,Tanaka(2022)声称,由于封锁等NPI,新冠肺炎造成了严重的供应冲击,而SARS和MERS主要造成了需求冲击。因此,新冠肺炎造成的经济损失远大于SARS和MERS大流行造成的损失。Fukao和Shioji(2022)的第三篇论文分析了NPI与经济活动之间的相互作用,并发现了经济活动与感染控制之间的权衡。在第四篇论文中,Amul等人(2022)从政治经济和治理角度分析了截至2021年3月东南亚地区新冠肺炎的发展和应对措施,并得出了几个关键教训,如需要果断和可信的领导;采取务实和认真的方法来平衡风险;透明的风险沟通;善政;以及反思和采取措施为未来流行病做好准备的能力。Bown(2022)的第五篇论文探讨了危机期间涉及个人防护装备的国际贸易和政策,重点关注中国、欧盟和美国。Bown(2022)认为,像美国这样的主要工业经济体的最佳政策组合应该包括三个部分:(1)激励国内工业尽快增加产能和激增产量;在激增能力增加但尚未可用的时期,依靠(2)先前储存的个人防护装备和(3)进口的组合。在最后一篇论文中,Kwon和Kim(2022)重点介绍了从亚洲和太平洋地区对新冠肺炎大流行的准备和应对中可以为卫生部门吸取的教训。本节总结了在2021年4月9日和10日举行的第33届亚洲经济政策审查会议上提交的论文、指定讨论者的评论以及对每份论文的一般性讨论(包括一些与会者的书面评论)。由于新冠肺炎大流行,本次会议通过ZOOM进行。在会议召开时,我们认为我们对新冠肺炎大流行的过程有足够的数据和观察。然而,会议之后情况发生了变化。特别是,从2021年8月左右开始的日本第五波感染比前四波严重得多。本期文章中的一些观点和评论在出版时可能已经过时,但鉴于我们正在处理不断演变的问题,这一点毫无帮助。
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
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
2.60%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The goal of the Asian Economic Policy Review is to become an intellectual voice on the current issues of international economics and economic policy, based on comprehensive and in-depth analyses, with a primary focus on Asia. Emphasis is placed on identifying key issues at the time - spanning international trade, international finance, the environment, energy, the integration of regional economies and other issues - in order to furnish ideas and proposals to contribute positively to the policy debate in the region.
×
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