The two-month strict lockdown implemented in countries like India, China in April-May has been more successful economically than in countries where partial ban has been in place for four-six months. This has been revealed in a study of 141 countries of London College University and Shingua University.
Countries such as Sweden, New Zealand, South Korea did not strictly enforce lockdowns in the early stages and were forced to implement lockdowns when there was a sharp jump. They have failed to save the economy from further losses. Researchers have also confirmed the India-China strategy of gradually giving concessions after two-and-a-half months of strict lockdown. Opening the economy immediately may entail a lockdown again.
Also read: Unlock-1: Patna’s temples, mosques, churches and gurdwaras will open from June 8 with these rules
Chief researcher Dabo Guan said that the lockdown period for a country’s economy matters more than its intensity. Businesses can withstand short-term setbacks by finding old stocks or new markets. Such a brief lockdown does little harm to that country or the global supply chain. Research co-author Steven Davis said that a two-month tight lockdown with a strategy in the world would be less damaging. Whereas the lockdown at different times in different countries can bring down the global economy by 60 per cent.
- Strict lockdown: Restrictions on 80% travel and labor based industries, India, China, Germany, Spain, South Africa and Italy etc.
- Medium Lockdown: 60 percent travel and labor resources banned, Singapore, Japan, Finland, Turkey, Iran, Philippines etc.
- Partial Lockdown: 40 percent travel and labor related industries closed, New Zealand, Sweden, South Korea, Brazil etc.
- Losses will increase by 30% if lockdown has to be implemented again
- If the American economy is put on lockdown again, there will be 2 times loss.
- The step to slowly open the economy in 12 months would be right
- 57% loss to British economy from separate lockdown