COVID-19: A Magnifying Glass for Inequalities
According to the latest report by UNDP, global human development is projected to decline for the first time since the UN defined and began measuring the concept in 1990. Unlike other crises over the past three decades, the “triple hit to health, education and income” as a result of COVID-19 has been reported globally. The UNDP warns that developing countries that are less able to cope with the pandemic’s social and economic fallout remain acutely vulnerable. The report urges countries to focus on equity in order to limit these impacts. Closing the digital divide by providing more equitable internet access, for example, is estimated to cost less than 1% of the fiscal support packages but could result in a two-thirds reduction of the impact of school closures that currently leave 60% of children globally without access to education.
WHO COVID-19 Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan
The WHO published a Strategy Update to the COVID‐19 Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan of the emerging epidemiological situation in order to support countries preparing for a phased transition from widespread transmission to a steady state of low‐level or no transmission. The Strategy Update emphasizes a whole-of-UN approach, and provides practical guidance for whole‐of‐society strategic action that can be adapted to local conditions and capacities. Countries have been asked to identify the lead coordinator of multiagency COVID-19 plans, map existing preparedness and response capacities and gaps, engage key technical and operational partners to identify appropriate coordination mechanisms and mobilize resources and capacities, and to establish monitoring mechanisms and operational reviews to track progress and adjust strategies.
An accompanying COVID‐19 Monitoring & Evaluation Framework was developed to support countries, listing key public health and health systems indicators for countries to monitor their preparedness and response to the pandemic. The M&E Framework is organized across three dimensions: Geographical Scope (global, all countries, priority countries); Planning and Monitoring Needs (informing strategic planning, operational tracking, evidence‐based decision‐making, as well as advocacy and transparency between donors, UN agencies, and partners); and across 9 Pillars (Country‐level coordination/planning/monitoring, Risk communication/community engagement, Surveillance/rapid response teams, Points of entry/travel/transport, National laboratories, Infection prevention & control, Case management, Operational support & logistics, Maintaining essential health services & systems).
World Economic Forum’s COVID-19 Risks Outlook
The World Economic Forum, which publishes the annual Global Risks Report, released two new reports that map the global risks, challenges and opportunities that COVID-19 presents. Adopting a complex systems approach, the reports highlight the interdependencies within and across borders but also health, economic, environmental, social, geopolitical systems. At the same time, the emphasis in both documents tilts towards the Great Transformation that will be needed. These include the need to reframe essential public services, notably health but also education, care and social safety nets. The factors that promote and inhibit solidarity and compassion are also raised, alongside needed behavioural shifts towards more sustainable consumption and mobility habits.
Global fiscal support during the COVID pandemic
The monthly IMF Fiscal Monitor adjusted the estimated fiscal support by countries around the world to US$9 trillion as a result of COVID-19. This was roughly divided between public sector loans (and other equity injections) as well as direct budgetary support. The IMF reports that a second wave of government measures to address the economic impact of the pandemic this past month accounted for the $1 trillion increase in the overall figure.
The G20 account for most of this sum ($8 trillion), reinforcing global inequities in the distribution of resources and fiscal support capacities. Developing countries, meanwhile, are also anticipating a “hidden debt risk” due to the unprecedented synchronization of fiscal stresses. Including currency depreciation, capital outflows and foreign-currency borrowing.
Dynamic intervention to relax lockdowns and school closures
A study in the European Journal of Epidemiology modelled dynamic interventions (i.e. cycles of lockdown to reduce R0 to below 1, and intervals of relaxed social distancing) across 16 distinct countries globally. The authors conclude that a ‘rolling schedule’ of 50 days of lockdown followed by 30 days of relaxation could reduce transmission levels and keep ICU demands below national capacities. The model furthermore suggests that adopting such dynamic suppression measures over 18 months could lead to significant reductions of new infections and deaths, particularly in developing countries. Since each model was only run one time per country, one study limitation is testing underlying factors at one fixed value rather than a range of possible outcomes from multiple runs, introducing uncertainty.
The SAGE group in the U.K. also released a report last week that modelled the impact of eight scenarios of school re-opening on community transmission of COVID-19. Between the two extremes of staying closed and fully opening, the most promising scenario was breaking classes into two cohorts and alternating between ‘two weeks on / two weeks off’ over academic year. The authors acknowledge the uncertainties associated with the model, but nevertheless suggest that the impact of school re-opening is likely to be relatively small compared to maintenance of other social distancing measures in the broader community.