Countries have sought to stop the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by severely restricting travel and in-person commercial activities. Here, we analyse the supply-chain effects of a set of idealized lockdown scenarios, using the latest global trade modelling framework. We find that supply-chain losses that are related to initial COVID-19 lockdowns are largely dependent on the number of countries imposing restrictions and that losses are more sensitive to the duration of a lockdown than its strictness. However, a longer containment that can eradicate the disease imposes a smaller loss than shorter ones. Earlier, stricter and shorter lockdowns can minimize overall losses. A 'go-slow' approach to lifting restrictions may reduce overall damages if it avoids the need for further lockdowns. Regardless of the strategy, the complexity of global supply chains will magnify losses beyond the direct effects of COVID-19. Thus, pandemic control is a public good that requires collective efforts and support to lower-capacity countries.

Countries around the world have sought to stop the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) by severely restricting travel and in-person commercial activities. Here, we analyse the economic footprint of such “lockdowns” using detailed datasets of global supply chains and a set of pandemic scenarios. We find that COVID-related economic losses are largely dependent on the number of countries imposing lockdowns, and that losses are more sensitive to the duration of a lockdown that its strictness—suggesting that more severe restrictions can reduce economic damages if they successfully shorten the duration of a lockdown. Our results also highlight several key vulnerabilities in global supply chains: Even countries that are not directly affected by COVID-19 can experience large losses (e.g., >20% of their GDP)—with such cascading impacts often occurring in low- and middle-income countries. Open and highly-specialized economies suffer particularly large losses (e.g., energy-exporting Central Asian countries or tourism-focused Caribbean countries). Supply bottlenecks and declines in consumer demand lead to especially large losses in globalized sectors such as electronics (production decreases of 13-53% across our scenarios) and automobiles (2-49%). Although retrospective analyses will undoubtedly provide further policy-relevant insights, our findings already imply that earlier, stricter, and thus shorter lockdowns are likely to minimize overall economic damages, and that global supply chains will magnify economic losses in some countries and industry sectors regardless of direct effects of the coronavirus.

No abstract

The inclusive wealth index (IWI) is a stock metric proposed internationally in recent years to measure a region's sustainable development potential. To explore sustainability more comprehensively in this context, this paper improves the inclusive wealth (IW) system proposed by the United Nations Environment Programme by extending the definition of intangible capital and refining the classification of different types of capital. We then used the advanced IWI to investigate the changes in per capita IW and its capital composition in China's 10 National Sustainable Development Agenda Innovation Demonstration Zones from 2010 to 2019, and proposed sustainable development pathways for Chinese cities. Our results underline the fact that IW and capital structure across different types of cities is highly variable. The growth of IW per capita in Shenzhen, an international metropolis, mainly depends on advanced produced capital and intangible capital. For Ordos, however—a resource‐rich “energy city”—the per capita IW is driven by ordinary produced capital and restricted by non‐renewable natural capital, thus showing a low level of sustainability. Through its consideration of four kinds of capital, this study also points out the inequality of human capital between urban‐rural and male‐female groups, and demonstrates how increasing educational attainment helps to promote the transfer of human capital between regions and sectors. In general, a strong potential for sustainable development is linked to the promotion of highly educated human capital, advanced produced capital and intangible capital, while the ecosystem service value of natural capital is also key.