Search

Begin New Search Topic Health Crisis Publication Year within 5 Years

1. The First COVID Wave: Comparing Experiences of Adults Age 50 and Older in the U.S. and Europe

Author:
Thomas Barnay and Eric Defebvre
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Commonwealth Fund
Abstract:
Three years after the COVID-19 pandemic began, the United States remains one of the hardest-hit countries, with more than 1 million confirmed coronavirus deaths, of which more than 91 percent involved people 50 years and older.1 Beyond causing this enormous loss of life, the pandemic has had other significant adverse consequences, including hospitalizations, job loss, and delayed care for millions of Americans. In this brief, we examine how U.S. adults age 50 and older fared during the first wave of the pandemic in the summer of 2020, compared with their peers in European countries.
Topic:
Pandemic, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2. A return to grace for nuclear power in European public opinion? Some elements of a rapid paradigm shift

Author:
Mathieu Brugidou and Jérémy Bouillet
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
The health crisis triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic, and perhaps above all the war in Ukraine, together with increasingly outspoken Chinese and/or American interventionism, have largely contributed to "breaking European energy taboos"[1] towards more collective and coordinated approaches. This is undeniable in the field of energy: if certain mechanisms such as the general cap on gas prices have not been adopted, some measures, which were hard to imagine at European level until recently, have now been ratified, such as joint gas purchases, shared objectives for reducing energy demand, the obligation to store energy, etc.
Topic:
Public Opinion, Nuclear Power, COVID-19, Health Crisis, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe

3. Warnings and Welcomes: China’s Reopening and the Politics of International Travel

Author:
John Van Oudenaren
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
China Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
Over the past two months, as the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has rapidly rolled back its strict zero-COVID epidemic prevention policy, COVID-19 has spread rapidly throughout the country. The combination of the PRC reopening its borders to outbound travel on January 8 and the ongoing pandemic has put countries that are major travel destinations for Chinese nationals in a bind. Governments have responded differently to the situation, with some imposing testing and quarantine requirements and others declining to do so. In China, official and social media have generally lauded countries that have desisted from testing requirements and opened their doors to Chinese tourists. Thailand, in particular, has been widely celebrated. Not only did Thailand decline to impose testing requirements on inbound travelers from the PRC, but several senior Thai government ministers went to the airport to welcome the first planeload of Chinese tourists following the lifting of travel restrictions on January 8 (Guangming Daily, January 17). Scenes of smiling Thai officials and airport workers greeting the first group of arriving tourists circulated widely in Chinese media.
Topic:
Politics, COVID-19, Health Crisis, and Travel
Political Geography:
China and Asia

4. Social Protection Reforms in the MENA Region: Possibilities and Challenges

Author:
Abdalhadi Alijla
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
IEMed/EuroMeSCo
Abstract:
The COVID-19 crisis that hit the world in 2020 revealed a huge gap in access to public services, equality and government responsiveness to the consequences of the pandemic. In the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, the COVID-19 crisis showed the inadequacy of the public institutions and their abilities to protect the poor, and ensure that populations’ needs are met, especially informal workers, women, children and the elderly. The social protection systems in the MENA countries are relatively weak, facing challenges or disfunctions through many ad-hoc programmes, making it difficult to respond to the COVID-19 crisis. This is particularly observed in countries facing a pre- COVID-19 economic crisis, such as Lebanon. There is clear evidence that social protection systems have a positive impact on the lives of the population in times of crisis. They improve access to health and education, and increase economic security. Social protection systems work during times of crisis and times of stability, but they are strategic tools that show that states have the capacity to design and deploy policy tools to protect people. In divided societies, inequalities are usually wider and, therefore, a comprehensive social protection system with a high rate of coverage is needed. In this Policy Study, we present four chapters, examining the state-of-the-art of social protection systems in the MENA region, challenges, and potential opportunities that government, local non-governmental organizations (NGOs), international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) and the European Union (EU) could take to assist in establishing comprehensive social protection systems. The COVID-19 crisis is an opportunity to learn and identify where the gaps are and what needs to be done by formal and informal institutions in the MENA region to reform and re-engineer their social protection systems with help from the EU and its institutions. COVID-19 arrived in the MENA region during an economic crisis in Lebanon, Jordan and Tunisia, marked by huge inequalities, vulnerabilities with increasing poverty and low trust in governments and their performance. Lockdown, closure and physical distancing have also led to loss of jobs and income for millions of people, mainly informal workers, and businesses. The vulnerable groups who are already living in economic distress, such as informal workers, youth, women and the elderly, are the most affected parts of the population. They are the most vulnerable to loss of income and unemployment. This study highlights that MENA states lack comprehensive and effective social protection systems. In many MENA countries, ad-hoc programmes substitute a comprehensive social protection system. The study examines the rural-urban and socioeconomic group gaps in accessing services, such as health and education, and economic opportunities. It shows that the historic gap between urban-rural and socioeconomic groups' ability to access the same services and opportunities compared to other groups affected the ability of those groups to cope with the pandemic, exposing them to more vulnerability. The study examines the policy response of the MENA governments to the pandemic, namely in Lebanon, Jordan, Tunisia and Morocco – four countries that have been particularly challenged by COVID-19. It identifies several gaps and op- portunities to develop the social protection system. The study examines cash- based programmes, access to public health, informal workers, women’s protection, digitalisation of social protection systems, and education, to some extent. It focuses on youth, women, the elderly, disabled persons and children as the most vulnerable groups in the region. It identifies that coordination between formal in- stitutions and INGOs needs to be formalised, informal workers need to be included in the social protection system, women and the elderly should be prioritised, and informal social protection mechanisms could be supported through livelihood activities, but is not seen as a major part of any social protection mechanism. It finally highlights the need for digitalisation of reformed social protection systems or strategies.
Topic:
Governance, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Africa, Middle East, North Africa, and MENA

5. A Package of Reforms for Financing Pandemic Preparedness and Response for the G7

Author:
Amanda Glassman and Eleni Smitham
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
COVID-19 has shown the detrimental consequences of insufficient and fragmented financing for outbreak preparedness, prevention, and response (PPR). As the world seeks to recover from the current COVID-19 pandemic, and to mitigate recovery needs for future health crises, more must be done to accelerate global efforts to ensure rapid, adequate funding and governance for global health security, which has been under-resourced and under-prioritized. The rationale for reforming and replenishing the global health architecture to prepare for the next pandemic is clear: to protect health, human lives, and economic well-being.[1] Without dedicated and accelerated investment—in scaled up surveillance, strengthened national health systems, enhanced research and development of medical countermeasures, and more—we will continue to face more frequent and more complex epidemics and pandemics in the years ahead, and be less prepared to stop them.[2] Without the capacity to surge financing to respond at-scale to infectious disease outbreaks, we risk a repeat of the devastation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Last July, the High-Level Independent Panel (HLIP) on Financing the Global Commons for Pandemic Preparedness and Response, mandated by the Italian Presidency of the G20, released the report A Global Deal for Our Pandemic Age, laying out policies and investments needed to reduce vulnerabilities to future pandemics.[3] Likewise, in 2021, the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response[4] described the shortcomings of the existing architecture and suggested similar policies for the future, including greater assessed contributions for the World Health Organization (WHO) and the need for dedicated financing to prevent and prepare for the next COVID-19 variant and pandemic risk. The Global Preparedness and Monitoring Board’s periodic reports went in this same direction[5] , as did earlier assessments following Ebola, SARS and MERS outbreaks though recommendations often went without implementation.[6] These reports and the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic itself have again made clear that existing mechanisms for financing pandemic preparedness and response are not fit-for-purpose, nor at the sufficient speed and scale needed to ensure global health security. Current financing for pandemic preparedness is small, fragmented, and concentrated in the health sector.[7] Different organizations across the global health and international financial institution architecture hold different comparative advantages in mobilizing and deploying monies and need to be fully financed to do what they are best suited to do. However, no institution (that is adequately funded, credible, and capable) is currently mandated to or accountable for ensuring pandemic preparedness, resulting in financing and accountability gaps, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where Global Health Security Action Plans too often go un-costed and unfunded.[8] Further, new regional organizations and groupings are leaders in their own development, and must be a central part of a new global health security architecture—the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), Partnerships for African Vaccine Manufacturing (PAVM), Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Forum for the Progress and Development of South America (PROSUR), among others, are examples. Adequate reforms and robust replenishments of global health organizations new and old are needed to ensure stronger global health security and pandemic preparedness now and in the future. External funders should take a comprehensive view of the major global health initiatives and consider how a range of reforms, when combined, have the potential to respond more coherently and efficiently to the financing demands related to the on-going COVID-19 pandemic, other macro risks that affect public spending on health, and in the face of future health threats. There are reasons for optimism. Unlike the experience during previous pandemic threats, COVID-19 has finally seen the International Monetary Fund become more aware and vocal on the need to address both COVID-19 and future pandemic risks as “systemic risk(s) to the global economy, not just the development […] of a particular country.”[9] Finance, health and development policymakers are increasingly coming together in different fora and recognizing the need to invest across sectors and to connect the international financial architecture with health initiatives in ways that will deliver better outcomes.[10]
Topic:
Reform, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

6. The impacts of the pandemic on investment flows in BRICS countries: a preliminary analysis based on UNCTAD global investment reports

Author:
Ana Garcia, Rafaela Mello, Victor Fernandes, Maria Eduarda Lopes, João Carmino, and Felipe Queiroz
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
BRICS Policy Center
Abstract:
In 2020, with the advent of the pandemic, the lockdown and social isolation actions implemented by governments in order to contain the contagion of the virus had an impact on the economies, reducing the speed of execution of existing investment projects and hindering the prospect of new ones. In this sense, the flow of direct investments around the world fell by 35% in 2020, reaching US$ 1 trillion, compared to US$ 1.5 trillion in the previous year, according to UNCTAD. Based on this observation, the present research aims to understand the main trends around the investment flow related to the BRICS countries, in order to assess how the Covid-19 pandemic impacted the dynamics of investments in the world, and especially, in emerging economies. To this end, the reports produced by UNCTAD from 2019 to 2022 regarding global investment flows were analyzed, in order to understand how the scenario was before the pandemic and what dynamics were underway before the health crisis, but it also allowed to understand what transformations occurred with the course of the pandemic, in addition to signaling paths and trends for the future.
Topic:
Economy, Investment, COVID-19, BRICS, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Russia, China, India, South Africa, and Brazil

7. Prospects for agriculture in the new European context: the French example

Author:
Bernard Bourget
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
The health crisis and the subsequent invasion of Ukraine by the Russian army has revealed the EU's dependence on agriculture and food, as well as in other strategic sectors such as energy[1]. Can French agriculture seize the opportunities offered by the new situation resulting from these major events to give it new life? As the French Presidency of the Council of the European Union enters its final month, this is an opportunity to take stock of the situation and prospects for French agriculture before the implementation of the new Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in 2023 and the objectives of the European Commission's Green Deal.
Topic:
Agriculture, European Union, Health Crisis, Green Deal, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and France

8. Delay, Detect, Defend: Preparing for a Future in which Thousands Can Release New Pandemics

Author:
Kevin M. Esvelt
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The world is demonstrably vulnerable to the introduction of a single pandemic virus with a comparatively low case fatality rate. The deliberate and simultaneous release of many pandemic viruses across travel hubs could threaten the stability of civilisation. Current trends suggest that within a decade, tens of thousands of skilled individuals will be able to access the information required for them to single-handedly cause new pandemics. Safeguarding civilisation from the catastrophic misuse of biotechnology requires delaying the development and misuse of pandemic-class agents while building systems capable of reliably detecting threats and preventing nearly all infections.
Topic:
Security, Public Health, Pandemic, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

9. Transforming Health Crises with Pandemic Therapies Image

Author:
Katherine E. Bliss and J. Stephen Morrison
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
The CSIS Commission on Strengthening America’s Health Security convened a working group on Covid-19 therapies in the fall of 2021 to develop policy recommendations aimed at strengthening U.S. leadership and global action to ensure development of, access to, and uptake of Covid-19 therapies worldwide. Drawing on insights gleaned through private meetings and roundtable discussions with pharmaceutical manufacturers, government officials, representatives of multilateral organizations, and nongovernmental organizations, and building on points raised in an interim report published in July 2022.
Topic:
Health, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. From emergency to structure: ways to fight Covid-19 via international cooperation in health from Brazil

Author:
Andemar Pozzatti and Luiza Witzel Farias
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional (RBPI)
Institution:
Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais (IBRI)
Abstract:
This article argues the need for complementarity between emergency and structuring international cooperation in scenarios of health crises in developing countries. Through a review of contemporary literature and document analysis, it analyzes some aspects of the performance of global and Latin American institutions in the Covid-19 pandemic in light of this argument. It also makes a brief survey of forms of international cooperation that emerge from Brazil, with BRICS and Latin American partners, to fight the pandemic, which have a local and sectoral character: paradiplomacy, structuring networks and the role of local agents and health experts.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Public Health, Humanitarian Crisis, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Brazil and South America