IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pid/wpaper/20208.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Case for Social Distancing in Developing Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Ammar Rashid

    (Senior Researcher, Health Policy Think Tank Heartfile)

Abstract

The following paper is a response to the paper ‘The Benefits and Costs of Social Distancing in Rich and Poor Countries’ by Zachary Barnett-Howell and Mushfiq Mobarak (April 2020) of Yale, who use a Value of Statistical Lives (VSL) analysis to argue that the epidemiological and economic benefits of saving lives via social distancing in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic are ‘much smaller in poorer countries’ than in rich countries. This paper argues that Barnet-Howell and Mobarak’s paper does not amount to a credible cost-benefit analysis of social distancing in the present context as: (a) It mischaracterizes the goal of social distancing as a permanent imposition until a vaccine is developed rather than an epidemiological measure aiming to bring the reproduction number below 1 ; (b) It underestimates the mortality risks in developing countries owing to a lack of consideration of lower healthcare capacity, greater incidence of existing infectious diseases, higher levels of air pollution and multi-generational households; (c) It relies on flawed methodology that calculates the value of statistical lives for developing countries in the context of a pandemic from a past, unrepresentative sample of studies consisting of valuations of willingness to pay (WTP) to reduce linear workplace risk - rather than non-linear infectious disease risk - in developed countries; (d) It uses questionable assumptions of an absence or impossibility of any government intervention that could reduce the risk-income trade-off for workers from low-income countries; (e) It fails to assess the costs of potential COVID19 contagion including the long-term damage to public health, health worker mortality, and supply chains and food production disruption, among others, critical to conduct an objective cost-benefit analysis on the merits of social distancing. It is argued in response that that social distancing is not a negotiable measure exclusively applicable to rich countries but is demonstrably necessary to avert the potentially catastrophic mortality, morbidity and economic consequences of COVID-19 contagion. Cost-benefit analyses for the pandemic must assess the risks and costs specific to the current context rather than abstract estimates of VSL based on past, linear risks. While social distancing exerts economic costs, evidence shows that mitigating those costs through targeted stimulus measures in developing countries for time-bound periods is both possible and necessary for long-term economic revival. Further, instead of blanket claims about the inapplicability of disease suppression measures in developing countries, economic policy will need to work in tandem with epidemiological and public health indicators like the reproduction number (R), rate of growth of infections, hospital, bed and ICU capacity and testing statistics, while reviewing a range of fiscal and monetary options to assess how economic costs can be averted to minimize loss of both life and livelihoods through appropriate income support, food distribution, health and employment interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ammar Rashid, 2020. "A Case for Social Distancing in Developing Countries," PIDE-Working Papers 2020:8, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:pid:wpaper:2020:8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.pide.org.pk/pdf/Working%20Paper/WorkingPaper-2020-8.pdf
    File Function: First Version, 2020
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zachary Barnett-Howell & Ahmed Mushfiq Mobarak, 2020. "The Benefits and Costs of Social Distancing in Rich and Poor Countries," Papers 2004.04867, arXiv.org.
    2. Demirguc-Kunt,Asli & Lokshin,Michael M. & Torre,Ivan, 2020. "The Sooner, the Better : The Early Economic Impact of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9257, The World Bank.
    3. Viscusi, W. Kip & Masterman, Clayton J., 2017. "Income Elasticities and Global Values of a Statistical Life," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 226-250, July.
    4. Guojun He & Yuhang Pan & Takanao Tanaka, 2020. "COVID-19, City Lockdowns, And Air Pollution: Evidence from China," HKUST IEMS Working Paper Series 2020-72, HKUST Institute for Emerging Market Studies, revised Mar 2020.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ahmed Mushfiq Mobarak & Edward Miguel, 2022. "The Economics of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Poor Countries," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 253-285, August.
    2. Abel Brodeur & David Gray & Anik Islam & Suraiya Bhuiyan, 2021. "A literature review of the economics of COVID‐19," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 1007-1044, September.
    3. Loayza,Norman V., 2020. "Costs and Trade-Offs in the Fight Against the COVID-19 Pandemic : A Developing Country Perspective," Research and Policy Briefs 148535, The World Bank.
    4. Davide Furceri & Siddharth Kothari & Longmei Zhang, 2021. "The effects of COVID‐19 containment measures on the Asia‐Pacific region," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 469-497, October.
    5. repec:idq:ictduk:16468 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Jubril Animashaun & Ada Wossink, 2020. "Patriarchy, Pandemics and the Gendered Resource Curse Thesis: Evidence from Petroleum Geology," Economics Discussion Paper Series 2006, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    7. Correia, Sergio & Luck, Stephan & Verner, Emil, 2022. "Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: Evidence from the 1918 Flu," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 82(4), pages 917-957, December.
    8. Moritz A. Drupp & Martin C. Hänsel, 2021. "Relative Prices and Climate Policy: How the Scarcity of Nonmarket Goods Drives Policy Evaluation," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 168-201, February.
    9. Decerf, Benoit & Ferreira, Francisco H.G. & Mahler, Daniel G. & Sterck, Olivier, 2021. "Lives and livelihoods: Estimates of the global mortality and poverty effects of the Covid-19 pandemic," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    10. Adhvaryu, Achyuta & Molina, Teresa & Nyshadham, Anant & Tamayo, Jorge & Torres, Nicolas, 2023. "The health costs of dirty energy: Evidence from the capacity market in Colombia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    11. St-Amour, Pascal, 2024. "Valuing life over the life cycle," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    12. Pullabhotla, Hemant K. & Souza, Mateus, 2022. "Air pollution from agricultural fires increases hypertension risk," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    13. Muhammad Irfan & Michael P Cameron & Gazi Hassan, 2021. "Interventions to mitigate indoor air pollution: A cost-benefit analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-17, September.
    14. James K. Hammitt & Peter Morfeld & Jouni T. Tuomisto & Thomas C. Erren, 2020. "Premature Deaths, Statistical Lives, and Years of Life Lost: Identification, Quantification, and Valuation of Mortality Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 674-695, April.
    15. Marcela V. Parada‐Contzen, 2019. "The Value of a Statistical Life for Risk‐Averse and Risk‐Seeking Individuals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(11), pages 2369-2390, November.
    16. Lin Ma & Gil Shapira & Damien de Walque & Quy‐Toan Do & Jed Friedman & Andrei A. Levchenko, 2022. "The Intergenerational Mortality Trade‐Off Of Covid‐19 Lockdown Policies," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(3), pages 1427-1468, August.
    17. Patrick Connerton & João Vicente de Assunção & Regina Maura de Miranda & Anne Dorothée Slovic & Pedro José Pérez-Martínez & Helena Ribeiro, 2020. "Air Quality during COVID-19 in Four Megacities: Lessons and Challenges for Public Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-24, July.
    18. Alcaraz Carrillo de Albornoz, Vicente & Molina Millán, Juan & Lara Galera, Antonio & Muñoz Medina, Belén, 2022. "Road speed limit matters – Are politicians doing the right thing?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    19. Egger, Dennis & Miguel, Edward & Warren, Shana S. & Shenoy, Ashish & Collins, Elliott & Karlan, Dean & Parkerson, Doug & Mobarak, A. Mushfiq & Fink, Günther & Udry, Christopher & Walker, Michael & Hau, 2021. "Falling living standards during the COVID-19 crisis: Quantitative evidence from nine developing countries," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7(6), pages 1-1.
    20. Surender Kumar & Shunsuke Managi, 2020. "Does Stringency of Lockdown Affect Air Quality? Evidence from Indian Cities," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 481-502, October.
    21. Mališa Đukić & Margareta Zidar, 2021. "Sustainability of Investment Projects with Energy Efficiency and Non-Energy Efficiency Costs: Case Examples of Public Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Covid-19; Social Distancing; Value of Statistical Lives; VSL; Cost-benefit Analysis; Developing Countries;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • O10 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pid:wpaper:2020:8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Khurram Iqbal (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/pideipk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.