Social Repercussions of Pandemics

Barrett, Philip; Chen, Sophia

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3799613

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The article is also narrower than we would like: while the pandemic has touched all aspects of our lives, we lack the space to cover all relevant economic and societal issues. In particular, there are multiple important political economy topics -regarding political stability, democratic transitions, and conflict (Barrett, Chen, and Li 2021), as well as pandemic misinformation --that we are unable to cover.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

The Economics of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Poor Countries

Miguel

Mobarak

2022

Annu. Rev. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has upended health and living standards around the world. This article provides an interim overview of these effects, with a particular focus on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Economists have explained how the pandemic is likely to have different consequences for LMICs and demands distinct policy responses compared to those of rich countries. We survey the rapidly expanding body of empirical research that documents the pandemic's many adverse economic and noneconomic effects in terms of living standards, education, health, and gender equality, which appear to be unprecedented in scope and scale. We also review research on successful and failed policy responses, including the failure to ensure widespread vaccine coverage in many LMICs, which is needed to end the pandemic. We close with a discussion of implications for public policy in LMICs and for the institutions of international governance, given the likelihood of future pandemics and other major shocks (e.g., climate).

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 98%

The Economics of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Poor Countries

Miguel

Mobarak

2022

Annu. Rev. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is clear that despite the limitations imposed by the pandemic, the battle for democracy is being waged as multiple crises unfold. Protests and social unrest will likely increase as the pandemic is brought under control, restrictions are lifted, and the full longer term political, social, and economic effects of the pandemic are felt ( Barrett & Chen, 2021 ). Mobilization during the coronavirus pandemic has defied expectations in key ways and thereby destabilized some of the categories of analysis routinely drawn on by social movement scholars.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilizing During the Covid-19 Pandemic: From Democratic Innovation to the Political Weaponization of Disinformation

Fominaya

2022

American Behavioral Scientist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political scholars express concern for the continued resilience of democracy in the face of multiple crises. In times of crisis, social movements articulate grievances and make demands of political leaders and policymakers. In contrast to the wave of pro-democracy movements following the 2008 global financial crash where protesters demanded accountability from elites, mobilization during the COVID-19 pandemic has defied expectations in several key ways. First, the expectation for protesters to mobilize primarily online in the face of the restrictions and risk associated with large gatherings has not been upheld. Instead, we have witnessed widespread “offline” mass protests. Second, despite high mortality rates and significant disparities in the effectiveness of national public health responses, we have not witnessed widespread mobilizations demanding governments do better to protect citizens from the virus. Instead, we have seen two radically different responses: At one extreme, veterans of “pro-democracy” movements have “pivoted,” using their skills and experience to either make up for weak government responses to COVID-19 (Hong Kong) or to reinforce government efforts to contain it (Taiwan). At the other extreme, “antidemocratic” and predominantly far right-wing movements have mobilized against public health measures, circulating COVID negationist and conspiracy messages. Indeed, the political weaponization of disinformation has been a notable feature of pandemic mobilization. I analyze these contrasting trends, highlighting the challenges they pose for the effective handling of the pandemic, and their broader implications for democratic legitimacy and resilience. In so doing, I call attention to the ways that mobilization during the pandemic challenges scholars to revisit some of our assumptions about the dynamics of social movements in times of crisis, and how they can foster or erode democracy. The analysis also suggests that scholars analyzing the impact of information disorders on democracy need to pay careful attention to offline protest as well as online transmission.

show abstract

“…, 2020). For instance, it has been used to assess the social repercussions of pandemics such as COVID-19 (Barrett and Chen, 2021). RSUI is of monthly frequency.…”

Section: Social Unrest and Growth Rates: A Comparative Descriptive Pr...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The nexus between social unrest and economic growth in Middle East and Central Asia countries

Kollias

2022

REPS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Conflict and civil strife adversely affect the economy since it severely disrupts the normal, daily routine of economic activity. Similarly, economic downturns can trigger discontent that has the potential to escalate into social unrest and strife. Using the recently compiled index on social unrest (RSUI) of Barrett et al. (2020), the paper sets out to examine the nexus between economic growth and social unrest in the case of 29 Middle East and Central Asia countries over the period 2000–2018.Design/methodology/approach To probe into the issue at hand, the paper adopts a panel causality approach. To this effect, two panel causality tests are used. The first is the heterogeneous panel causality model proposed by Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) is employed. The second panel Granger causality test is the frequency domain causality test constructed by Breitung and Candelon (2006) and extended for panel testing by Croux and Reusens (2013).Findings The results of the causality tests indicate a strong bidirectional nexus between civil unrest and economic growth. The findings support the contention that civil strife adversely affects economic performance and economic downturns can trigger discontent and unrest.Research limitations/implications Albeit consistent and robust, the results reported herein concern the specific sample of countries under scrutiny. Extending the analysis to other groups of countries will offer better insights into the nexus between civil unrest and economic performance.Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the present paper is the first to address the nexus between social unrest and economic growth for this group of countries using the recently compiled index on social unrest (RSUI).

show abstract

Social Repercussions of Pandemics

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

The Economics of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Poor Countries

The Economics of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Poor Countries

Mobilizing During the Covid-19 Pandemic: From Democratic Innovation to the Political Weaponization of Disinformation

The nexus between social unrest and economic growth in Middle East and Central Asia countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About