How Nations Balanced Health and Economy in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Global Review
- Share
- Tweet
- Send to email
Image Title: Total deaths, stay-at-home measures, vaccination rates, production, and consumption
Image Caption: The figure illustrates the six distinctive countries referenced in our research paper. The number of deaths (red line) varies considerably across countries, as does the distribution of stay-at-home measures (box plots). While vaccination rates (colors within box plots) show differences in initiation timing, there were no significant disparities by the end of 2022. Furthermore, from 2022 onward, some countries have achieved recovery in consumption (dot-dash line) and production (dashed line), while others have not.
Image Credit: Professor Hiroaki Masuhara from Shinshu University and Professor Kei Hosoya from Kokugakuin University, Japan
License Type: Original content
Usage Restriction: Credit must be given to the creator. Cannot be used without permission
Researchers evaluated the performance of multiple countries in terms of achieving infection control and economic recovery during the COVID-19 pandemic
How did different countries fare in achieving a balance between infection control and economic stability during the COVID-19 pandemic? To address this question, researchers studied the temporal dynamics of number of deaths, vaccination rates, production, and economic recovery across multiple countries. The study highlights that countries differed in risk attitudes and economic preferences that shaped policy decisions, hence impacting their performance. These insights will benefit governments and citizens in forming social defense during future pandemics.
The COVID-19 pandemic took the world by surprise, spreading rapidly and forcing governments to respond with unprecedented measures. While nations adopted different strategies, the central questions were the same everywhere: How should governments respond during this emerging infectious disease outbreak? How should people cooperate with their governments?
Responses varied widely, with some countries prioritizing strict infection control and others moving quickly to protect economic activity. Each approach yielded different outcomes in terms of public health and socioeconomic stability, offering valuable insights for managing future crises.
In this context, Professor Hiroaki Masuhara from the Faculty of Economics and Law at Shinshu University, Japan, and Professor Kei Hosoya from the Faculty of Economics at Kokugakuin University, Japan, conducted a cross-country analysis of the temporal dynamics of COVID-19. Their study, published online in the Journal of Policy Modeling on August 7, 2025, examined deaths, vaccination rates, production, and consumption across member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), as well as Singapore and Taiwan, from early 2020 to the end of 2022.
The findings reveal that infection control was rarely permanent. Eastern European countries and the United Kingdom faced the greatest challenges in containing deaths, while Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan were initially successful in keeping death rates low during 2020. However, by 2022, these countries too saw significant increases.
On the economic side, efforts to suppress infection often came at the cost of reduced production and consumption. With the exception of Norway, Finland, and Israel, all countries experienced declines in production, while consumption fell everywhere. The authors highlight that people’s behavior and attitudes—such as patience, trust in government, and tolerance of risk—played a crucial role in shaping policy outcomes.
Norway was most effective in achieving a balance between limiting deaths and resuming production and consumption. Similarly, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan managed to limit deaths in the early stages while managing economic revival. The Nordic countries and those bordering the Pacific Ocean share features of patience and risk-aversion, and have high levels of trust. In contrast, the US, which is considered less patient and less averse to risk, and Eastern Europe, with low trust levels, both experienced a higher number of deaths. Although these preferences may not be reliable and sufficient conditions for predicting fatalities, they have an impact. The influence of neighbouring countries is also noted to influence decisions.
The analysis also underscores the role of risk tolerance in reopening economies. The United States, with relatively low patience and higher risk tolerance, managed a steady economic recovery despite higher deaths. In contrast, Japan’s strong risk aversion and low confidence levels were linked to weaker economic revival.
Reflecting on these findings, Prof. Masuhara notes, “To enhance public health and economic performance, it is necessary to take into account the different time preferences and attitudes toward risk that vary by country and its citizens. These insights should be recognized not only by governments but also by people themselves, and constitute an important component of social defense, including voluntary behavioral changes during future pandemics.”
It is evident from these results that achieving both long-term infection control and stable economic performance is not simple. Barring “luck,” the knowledge of risk attitudes and levels of patience will help shape appropriate public health policies for future pandemics. In the future, identifying the appropriate social measures that limit the spread of infectious diseases while sustaining the economy is likely to enhance societal performance as a whole.
As Prof. Masuhara concludes, “The success or failure of interventions depends on public patience and trust, and widespread cooperation with governmental interventions can contribute to building a robust social epidemic prevention system. We hope that our paper will serve as foundational material for future policy discussions.”
|
Reference |
||
|
Title of original paper: |
Which countries performed better in the COVID-19 pandemic? Lessons from and for governments |
|
|
Journal: |
Journal of Policy Modeling |
|
|
DOI: |
||
Related SDGs
