Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add filters

Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
CESifo Econ Stud ; 67(3): 332-369, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1467299

ABSTRACT

This article analyses the reopening process of countries in Europe and Central Asia after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and provides evidence on the effects of different reopening trajectories and their timing and speed on economic recovery. The analysis indicates that countries that adopted a gradual, staged reopening experienced stronger economic recovery compared with the countries that rushed into lifting the restrictive measures before the pandemic was under control. Postponing lifting the restrictions until after the pandemic's peak was reached has a positive impact on economic activity. Governance also matters: a higher level of trust in government is associated with increased economic activity among countries that carried out a gradual reopening process. There is also suggestive evidence that providing people objective data on the progress of the pandemic may speed up the recovery process. (JEL codes: D14, E21, and G51).

2.
Journal of Financial Stability ; : 100939, 2021.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-1433507

ABSTRACT

Despite the devastating worldwide human and economic tolls of the COVID-19 crisis, it has created some positive economic and financial surprises and opportunities for research. We highlight two such favorable surprises – the shortest U.S. recession on record and the avoidance of any banking crisis – and a number of research opportunities. We tie the “economic surprise” of the short recession to the speed and size of U.S. stimulus programs during COVID-19 – faster and larger than for the Global Financial Crisis (GFC). We connect the “financial surprise” of the resilient banking sector to prudential policies put in place during and after the GFC that fortified U.S. banks prior to COVID-19. These twin “surprises” are also mutually reinforcing – if either the economy or banking system had failed, so would the other. We also review extant COVID-19 banking research and suggest paths for future research. We recommend particular attention be paid to research outside of the U.S. – where fewer favorable “surprises” may be present – to best advance the knowledge.

3.
J Bank Financ ; 133: 106305, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1373106

ABSTRACT

This paper examines the impact of financial sector policy announcements on bank stocks around the world during the onset of the COVID-19 crisis. Overall, we find that liquidity support, borrower assistance programs and monetary easing moderated the adverse impact from the crisis, but their impact varied considerably across banks and countries. By contrast, countercyclical prudential measures led to negative abnormal returns in bank stocks, suggesting that markets price the downside risks associated with these policies.

5.
Economics of Transition and Institutional Change ; n/a(n/a), 2021.
Article in English | Wiley | ID: covidwho-1367308

ABSTRACT

Abstract This paper estimates the economic impact of the non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) implemented by countries in Europe and Central Asia during the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis relies on daily electricity consumption, nitrogen dioxide emission and mobility records to trace the economic disruptions caused by the pandemic and calibrate these measures to estimate the magnitude of the economic impact. To address the potential endogeneity in the introduction of NPIs, we instrument their stringency by the extent of a country's social ties to China. The results suggest that the NPIs led to a decline of about 10% in economic activity across the region. On average, countries that implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions in the early stages of the pandemic appear to have better short-term economic outcomes and lower cumulative mortality, compared with countries that imposed non-pharmaceutical interventions during the later stages of the pandemic. Moreover, there is evidence that COVID-19 mortality at the peak of the local outbreak has been lower in countries that acted earlier. In this sense, the results suggest that the sooner non-pharmaceutical interventions are implemented, the better are the economic and health outcomes.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL