Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new user(Unintended) Consequences of export restrictions on medical goods during the Covid-19 pandemic
103
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
In the first half of 2020, several countries have responded to the challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic by restricting their export of medical supplies. Such measures are meant to increase the domestic availability of critical goods, and are commonly used in times of crisis. Yet, not much is known about their impact, especially on countries imposing them. Here we show that export bans are, by and large, counterproductive. Using a model of shock diffusion through the network of international trade, we simulate the impact of restrictions under different scenarios. We observe that while they would be beneficial to a country implementing them in isolation, their generalized use makes most countries worse off relative to a no-ban scenario. As a corollary, we estimate that prices increase in many countries imposing the restrictions. We also find that the cost of restraining from export bans is small, even when others continue to implement them. Finally, we document a change in countries position within the international trade network, suggesting that export bans have geopolitical implications.
rate research
Read More
The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted human activities, leading to unprecedented decreases in both global energy demand and GHG emissions. Yet a little known that there is also a low carbon shift of the global energy system in 2020. Here, using the near-real-time data on energy-related GHG emissions from 30 countries (about 70% of global power generation), we show that the pandemic caused an unprecedented de-carbonization of global power system, representing by a dramatic decrease in the carbon intensity of power sector that reached a historical low of 414.9 tCO2eq/GWh in 2020. Moreover, the share of energy derived from renewable and low-carbon sources (nuclear, hydro-energy, wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass) exceeded that from coal and oil for the first time in history in May of 2020. The decrease in global net energy demand (-1.3% in the first half of 2020 relative to the average of the period in 2016-2019) masks a large down-regulation of fossil-fuel-burning power plants supply (-6.1%) coincident with a surge of low-carbon sources (+6.2%). Concomitant changes in the diurnal cycle of electricity demand also favored low-carbon generators, including a flattening of the morning ramp, a lower midday peak, and delays in both the morning and midday load peaks in most countries. However, emission intensities in the power sector have since rebounded in many countries, and a key question for climate mitigation is thus to what extent countries can achieve and maintain lower, pandemic-level carbon intensities of electricity as part of a green recovery.
We study the disproportionate impact of the lockdown as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak on female and male academics research productivity in social science. The lockdown has caused substantial disruptions to academic activities, requiring people to work from home. How this disruption affects productivity and the related gender equity is an important operations and societal question. We collect data from the largest open-access preprint repository for social science on 41,858 research preprints in 18 disciplines produced by 76,832 authors across 25 countries over a span of two years. We use a difference-in-differences approach leveraging the exogenous pandemic shock. Our results indicate that, in the 10 weeks after the lockdown in the United States, although the total research productivity increased by 35%, female academics productivity dropped by 13.9% relative to that of male academics. We also show that several disciplines drive such gender inequality. Finally, we find that this intensified productivity gap is more pronounced for academics in top-ranked universities, and the effect exists in six other countries. Our work points out the fairness issue in productivity caused by the lockdown, a finding that universities will find helpful when evaluating faculty productivity. It also helps organizations realize the potential unintended consequences that can arise from telecommuting.
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a dramatic surge in demand for personal protective equipment (PPE) worldwide. Many countries have imposed export restrictions on PPE to ensure the sufficient domestic supply. The surging demand and export restrictions cause shortage contagions on the global PPE trade network. Here, we develop an integrated network model, which integrates a metapopulation model and a threshold model, to investigate the shortage contagion patterns. The metapopulation model captures disease contagion across countries. The threshold model captures the shortage contagion on the global PPE trade network. Results show that, the shortage contagion patterns are mainly decided by top exporters. Export restrictions exacerbate the shortages of PPE and cause the shortage contagion to transmit even faster than the disease contagion. Besides, export restrictions lead to ineffective and inefficient allocation of PPE around the world, which has no benefits for the world to fight against the pandemic.
This paper investigates the impact of economic policy uncertainty (EPU) on the crash risk of US stock market during the COVID-19 pandemic. To this end, we use the GARCH-S (GARCH with skewness) model to estimate daily skewness as a proxy for the stock market crash risk. The empirical results show the significantly negative correlation between EPU and stock market crash risk, indicating the aggravation of EPU increase the crash risk. Moreover, the negative correlation gets stronger after the global COVID-19 outbreak, which shows the crash risk of the US stock market will be more affected by EPU during the pandemic.
Publish or perish is an expression describing the pressure on academics to consistently publish research to ensure a successful career in academia. With a global pandemic that has changed the world, how has it changed academic productivity? Here we show that academics are posting just as many publications on the arXiv pre-print server as if there were no pandemic: 168,630 were posted in 2020, a +12.6% change from 2019 and $+1.4sigma$ deviation above the predicted 162,577 $pm$ 4,393. However, some immediate impacts are visible in individual research fields. Conference cancellations have led to sharp drops in pre-prints, but laboratory closures have had mixed effects. Only some experimental fields show mild declines in outputs, with most being consistent on previous years or even increasing above model expectations. The most significant change is a 50% increase ($+8sigma$) in quantitative biology research, all related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some of these publications are by biologists using arXiv for the first time, and some are written by researchers from other fields (e.g., physicists, mathematicians). While quantitative biology pre-prints have returned to pre-pandemic levels, 20% of the research in this field is now focussed on the COVID-19 pandemic, demonstrating a strong shift in research focus.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
