Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for :

  • "reinfection risk" x
Clear All
International Monetary Fund. European Dept.

? How do official reopening measures translate into actual improvements in activity and influence the subsequent evolution of COVID-19 infections? What early lessons can be drawn from the reopening experiences? Were some strategies associated with lower reinfection risks than others and, if so, at what cost in reduced activity? Figure 2.1. Infections and Activity Sources: Google; Our World in Data; European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control; and IMF staff calculations. Note: Solid (hollow) markers in panel 1 denote lockdown start (end

International Monetary Fund. European Dept.

Abstract

This chapter was prepared by Kamil Dybczak, Carlos Mulas Granados, and Ezgi Ozturk with inputs from Vizhdan Boranova, Karim Foda, Keiko Honjo, Raju Huidrom, Nemanja Jovanovic and Svitlana Maslova, under the supervision of Jörg Decressin and the guidance of Gabriel Di Bella. Jaewoo Lee and Petia Topalova provided useful advice and comments. Nomelie Veluz provided administrative support. This chapter reflects data and developments as of September 28, 2020.

International Monetary Fund. European Dept.

Abstract

Christian Ebeke (co-lead), Nemanja Jovanovic, Svitlana Maslova, Francisco Parodi, Laura Valderrama (co-lead), Svetlana Vtyurina, and Jing Zhou prepared this chapter under the supervision of Mahmood Pradhan and the guidance of Laura Papi and Petia Topalova. Jörg Decressin provided useful advice and comments. Jankeesh Sandhu provided outstanding research assistance, and Nomelie Veluz was expertly in charge of administrative support.

Mr. Jeffrey R. Franks, Bertrand Gruss, Carlos Mulas Granados, Manasa Patnam, and Mr. Sebastian Weber

strategies adopted to reopen the economy differed significantly across countries in terms of timing, pace, and sequencing of sectoral reopening measures. The cross-country differences in the evolution of infections following reopenings is also notable. This paper analyses how the de-jure reopening measures translate into de-facto improvements in activity and how they influence the subsequent evolution of Covid-19 infections. It then explores whether some reopening strategies are associated with lower reinfection risks than others and, if so, whether it comes at the

Mr. Jeffrey R. Franks, Bertrand Gruss, Mr. Carlos Mulas-Granados, Manasa Patnam, and Mr. Sebastian Weber
European authorities introduced stringent lockdown measures in early 2020 to reduce the transmission of COVID-19. As the first wave of infection curves flattened and the outbreak appeared controlled, most countries started to reopen their economies albeit using diverse strategies. This paper introduces a novel daily database of sectoral reopening measures in Europe during the first-wave and documents that country plans differed significantly in terms of timing, pace, and sequencing of sectoral reopening measures. We then show that reopenings led to a recovery in mobility—a proxy for economic activity—but at the cost of somewhat higher infections. However, the experience with reopening reveals some original dimensions of this trade-off. First, the increase in COVID-19 infections after reopening appears less severe in fatality rates. Second, a given reopening step is associated with a worse reinfection outcome in countries that started reopening earlier on the infection curve or that opened all sectors at a fast pace in a relatively short time. Finally, while opening measures tend to have an amplification effect on subsequent cases when a large fraction of the economy is already open, this effect appears heterogenous across sectors.