'Covidonomics' of combating pandemic
By Gouranga Gopal Das
An unprecedented virus, uncertainty in people's lives, and fear of the unknown. All these make us think about the impending existential threat of COVID-19 pandemic.
In a broad swing of the pendulum, the disease has proven the “interconnectedness” and “flatness” of the world. The disease is “globalized” via the flow of people, their proximity, and the death of distance.
Human mobility and “contiguity” shape its spread. The scientific community is engaged in finding antidotes (vaccines) to fight this outbreak. Combating such a virulent virus needs a concerted effort of “teams” with experts from different fields, say, medical and pure science, as well as from the social sciences.
As an onerous responsibility for developing vaccines lies in the domain of scientists, epidemiologists, biologists and technologists, we can no way rule out the role of the economics profession. The importance of “clinical trials” in the medical sciences and epidemiology is felt stronger.
However, in order to eradicate the deadly outbreak any nation needs to comprehend the spread and social impact of COVID-19 at the grassroots level. Without understanding the health and internal conditions of the people, especially those of the poor, eradication efforts can't be fruitful.
In fact, when an epidemic occurs it gravely attacks those who suffer from inherent weaknesses in health. For that, we need to run “social experiments” across households segregated and isolated geographically.
We need a broad-based idea where different intervention programs and their impact are evaluated to broaden the knowledge base. In order to introduce newly discovered drugs to patients, this prior knowledge is essential so as to gauge the underlying causes for the success and/or failure driving the consequences of new inventions.
With numerous data points being available in real time, and the use of machine learning and big data as analytical tools dominating the disciplines, economists can use such data to find factors and predict the potential for future resurgences.
The 2019 Nobel Prize in economics awarded to the trio, Abhijit Vinayak Banerjee, Esther Duflo and Michael Kremer, was a reiteration of the emphasis that fighting back diseases like malaria was essential for the success of sustainable development goals.
What is novel in these three's contribution is bridging field experiments ― just like in a scientific laboratory ― with the theoretical rationale of social science. This enables a diagnosis of the root causes undergirding symptoms of severe economic distress following the novel coronavirus outbreak.
As Einstein wrote: “Creating a new theory is not like destroying an old bar and erecting a skyscraper in its place. It is rather like climbing a mountain, gaining new and wider views, discovering unexpected connections between our starting point and its rich environment.”
The works done by Banerjee, Duflo, and Kremer throws light on conducting such scientific experiments. The difference lies in the application of the scientific approach via field experiments ― randomized control trials (RCTs) combining microscopic analyses with a macro “lens” view ― for evidence-based policymaking.
RCT offers grounds for practical policy intervention to cure the failure on socioeconomic fronts just like a medical practitioner does for a patient suffering from lung or organ failure. Epidemics affect the poorest of the poor who live cheek by jowl. The noticeable thing is the marriage of science and economics in providing concrete evidences.
The RCT methodology may perhaps help in designing programs at the village or block or, at the district level. This uniqueness in dealing with the problems could ameliorate the health fallout, educational deficiencies, fatality rates, infant mortality and maternal health, etc.
Combining approaches could open horizons for analyzing the effectiveness of specific policies for improving development outcomes in health management, detection and governance. The broader lessons for countries in South Asia and Africa is that for solving complex development challenges we require cost-effective policies.
This could touch citizen's lives positively. For example, India and South Korea had a GDP per capita of $82 in 1961. However, as of 2019, India's enclave or pockets of growth could make India an upper-middle income nation falling behind South Korea. Now, the Indian economy is in a tailspin.
Over the years, the cumulative strength culminated in South Korea's exemplary performance in managing the deadly coronavirus at a rapid pace beating almost all nations in their efforts. Even the U.S. and other European nations cited its success story with great aplomb.
South Korea stands apart amongst all nations fighting this deadly pathogen. That was possible because of historically rooted development plans based on health and education supporting national innovation systems.
Flattening the curve of progress of the virus was achieved through judicious use of technology, GPS, big data, medical technology and a mixture of social trust and the government's proactive approach. South Korea was able to do this without imposing draconian restrictions till now, when it has spread across 196 countries and territories put under lockdown.
Prompt action, agile healthcare workers, developing test kits at affordable prices, tracing contacts, individual level surveys about health, critical support and civic sense all worked simultaneously.
The WHO and leaders of other countries have been advised to emulate the Korean experience as a role model. However, this requires a concerted effort ― the cross-fertilization of ideas among scientists and researchers at the macro level ― for combating COVID-19.
The globalization of ideas could prevent a global contagion. The exponential growth of cases needs a multiplicity of ideas, the combinatorial process of innovations, and putting them into sequential trial phases.
In developing a vaccine, multidisciplinary approaches spanning the Fourth Industrial Revolution, synthetic biology, epidemiology, and economic evaluations are necessary in running trials.
Most importantly, if the concerted research effort succeeds in developing a research consortium and designing aggressive public health policies, going beyond the political fervor and bureaucratic loopholes, then that would be a real “winner” ensuring no chance of resurgence. Valuing “human agency” lies at the core of all these fundamental efforts.
Whether this unlocks new doors, facilitates widespread applications, and has a sustained positive impact for the underprivileged remains to be seen. Our role is to soak ourselves into that deep ocean of knowledge where global alliances could make world leaders not confine themselves within narrow walls and dogma.
The need of the hour is to address the root cause, construct measures for resilience, and help create a “Great Escape” from this deadly outbreak plaguing the world. Nothing succeeds like success, and nothing fails like failure.
Gouranga Gopal Das (dasgouranga@yahoo.com) is professor of economics at Hanyang University.