Football supporters in England in a state of exasperation with the selection and game plan of their team’s manager like to chant “you don’t know what you are doing”. While wishing them well, we could say the same at times of our elected leaders across the world.
In East Asia governments were prepared in terms of the medical equipment in their hospitals because they had tackled the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). As second or localised spikes in the Covid-19 virus are now being recorded across the world, however, we can see that governments have to take political decisions that may or may not be guided by their leading scientists.
The economic cost of lockdowns has been brutal. In Q2 the US economy contracted by -9.5 percent q/q and the German economy, the largest and strongest in the Eurozone, by -10.1 percent. Worse is to come: the lockdown in Germany was shorter and less draconian than most in Europe, and a substantial post-Covid fiscal stimulus has been prepared.
The IMF brought forward the update to its World Economic Outlook to late June to reflect its more negative call. In April it had a global contraction of -3.0 percent for this year and a rebound of 5.8 percent in 2021 but has revised its forecasts to -4.9 percent and 5.4 percent respectively. Few economies were spared as the Fund made sizeable changes on the downside for the US, the Eurozone, India, Brazil, Nigeria, South Africa and more.
The lockdown was the easy part for governments. Most people followed the simple message, and the positive impact on infection rates and deaths was clear. In some advanced economies with established safety nets it was maintained for three months but everywhere it has been lifted for fear of the size of the hit to the economy.
We say it was the easy part because governments must now experiment with the easing and selective reimposing of controls. Another set of full national lockdowns would kill off the forecast rebound in 2021 so they must balance the needs of the economy with the advice of their scientists. Their experiences with tracing, self-isolation and travel restrictions have shown them the fickle nature of humanity.
Without any qualifications in behavioural science and armed only with anecdotal evidence, we detect two very different popular responses. Some people, and not just the elderly, still feel in lockdown mode despite the lifting of controls. They are reluctant to leave their homes and wary of public transport and gatherings. They may well not have kept important appointments with their doctors for the same reason. They are not going to kick-start their local economy in a spending binge.
The second group has embraced the easing of restrictions with a vengeance. Most of them respected the lockdown yet now feel cavalier about the remaining official guidance. They have all become their own medical experts. When pressed on their behaviour, they will say a) that the danger has passed, b) that they will not get the virus or c) that they had to get out and about to preserve their sanity or a combination of the three.
We do not buy into the apologists’ argument that they have been confused by the guidance because this demeans their common sense. This group might undermine the policy of their government, for example, by ignoring a request to take part in a tracing programme. It is also the group that gives a boost to household consumption.
This analysis is based upon our experiences in England yet has far broader application. As we all wait for the development of a vaccine that is widely available, our governments and public agencies can lessen the hardship for the poorest in society, who suffer the most from every natural disaster, pandemic and financial crash. Education plays a part, and we give the example of the text messages sent by the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control on matters of hygiene. Where resources permit, governments can provide food for the most vulnerable and teaching for their children (even when schools are closed). A large network of community health groups across Ethiopia, expanded under the direction of the late Meles Zenawi, has helped to contain the virus in the absence of a lockdown.
Low-cost technology can play a part, too. In Ghana the use of drones from a US start-up to deliver Covid-19 test samples from outlying areas to urban laboratories helped the authorities to hasten the lifting of the lockdown. In Kenya in March the government fast-tracked the regulatory go-ahead for Loon balloons, a joint venture between the parent company of Google and the state telecoms operator to extend 4G data products to remote areas. The approvals had been delayed in the bureaucracy but became a priority in the light of the pandemic.
Our governments are struggling in untested territory. Their learning from the first wave of infections takes them a long way medically in preparation for a second or third. However, it helps little in their economic planning or their grasp of the behaviour of their population. In our view our hopes and expectations of our governments are too high. Public officials are mortals like the rest of us. Indeed, in some countries a career in public service has become a second choice.
