COVID Article Roundup: March 29-31

Notes from March 29

One thing that is becoming very clear is that supply chains matter. There is a lot of information out there about what it takes to bring supplies in, what states (and corporations) are doing to address shortages and the long term impacts of disruptions in trade. There are two articles that popped up on my feed that I think are worth sharing. First, Axios' Inside the start of the great virus airlift discusses what the US government is doing to bring the medical supplies needed. There is an interesting discussion about the nationalization of the supply chain:

"(Rear Admiral John) Polowczyk (working with FEMA) said many members of Congress "want me to nationalize this supply chain by using the Defense Production Act. They want me to do all the buying, all the distributing, and all the allocation." But he's been resisting that. "This medical supply chain, there's like six, seven big distributors who have like 600–700 nodes that push out product," he said. "I'm not going to re-create that. I'm looking to break down barriers ... to help them feed product where it needs to go." He said the federal government will buy some medical supplies but will try to feed them into existing supply chains. Polowczyk said he doesn't want to use the Defense Production Act, but he leaves the door open to using those powers to move supplies around the country if his current plan doesn't work."
​
The Texas Monthly article Inside the Story of How H-E-B Planned for the Pandemic focuses on the importance of preparedness inside the private sector, especially the grocery store sector. This was so far one of the most fascinating articles for me since it showed how private (non-state) actors may have been better prepared for the pandemic than local, state, and federal officials.

Moving to international law, the forum Just Security had an interesting discussion about "punishing" countries for pandemics. The article, COVID-19 and International Law: Must China Compensate Countries for the Damage? lays out the reasons why it is unlikely that China will be required to compensate other countries, arguing that "Claims that China has committed internationally wrongful acts and has an obligation to compensate foreign governments form part of a feature of this pandemic that is not really about international law." Moreover, the author states that "The most important consequences of the geopolitical aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic will appear after countries bring the outbreak under control in their territories." I appreciated this article for bringing some key international treaties to explaining what can and cannot happen based on precedent. 

There were other interesting articles, here are a few links:

• BBC article about Tunisian workers (mostly women) self-isolating inside a factory to continue the production of medical supplies.
• A Guardian article discussing the gendered dynamics of labor and family during the pandemic. Spoiler alert: women are being punished for being women in a man's world.
• A NY Times article about the economic responses to COVID-19 in Denmark.
• This Project Syndicate commentary about what developing countries should do to flatten the curve.

---

Notes for March 30

I am going to start this roundup with the first academic article I have seen on COVID 19. Adolph et al. (2020) wrote Pandemic Politics: Timing State-Level Social Distancing Responses to COVID-19 where they analyze state policies in reaction to the virus and the factors influencing such policies. In their analysis, "all else equal, Republican governors and governors from states with more Trump supporters were slower to adopt social distancing policies. These delays are likely to produce significant, on-going harm to public health" (p. 2). This is a provocative quote in the same article: 

"We strongly believe that realistic assessments of decision-making by elected officials must take electoral motivations and career ambitions seriously – as impolitic as that may be. Elected officials, regardless of party, must be responsive to the concerns of their voters and party leaders. However, this essential feature of democratic representation does not inevitably produce the best policy outcome" (p. 13).

This Independent article is one of the many I saw discussing the role of the February 19 Champion's League game between Atalanta and Valencia (a Spanish team). The game was played in Milan (30 miles away from Atalanta's home Bergamo), and the movement of people and created what many are now referring to as a "biological bomb." According to the article, "At the time, few in Italy were greatly concerned about Covid-19. Two days after the match was played, though, the country saw its first confirmed death from the illness, and within two weeks Bergamo was reporting a sharp increase in its rate of coronavirus cases." I also wonder how many Valencia fans were in the Stadium and eventually made their way back to Spain. 

I am also sharing here the link to a Tweet from Dr. Rama Dieng that highlights a number of written pieces about COVID 19 from a feminist (and mostly Global South) perspective. 

Finally, two more interesting artifacts that are COVID-adjacent. First, this Planet Money episode about unemployment in the US in March explains why the system is not enough to address the economic depression that has started and will follow COVID 19. Next, this 10 Percent Happier Podcast episode about how to engage "corona-deniers" delves deeper into some of the ethics surrounding this whole situation. This was a very interesting piece, and I also recommend the 10 Percent Happier website (or other mindfulness apps and sites) to help in these stressful times. 
​

---

Notes from March 31

​I want to start this roundup with a great podcast episode from Brene Brown on grieving and finding meaning. Whether you realize it already or not, the world as we knew it is no more. This podcast was very provocative and provided some great insights on how to think about this pandemic and its consequences.

Now a quick tour around the world of COVID around the world.

• In Sweden, some are arguing that their culture may help since they already kinda social isolate anyways. On the policy side, "Sweden’s more formal efforts to tackle the coronavirus are controversial. Unlike in neighbouring European countries (including Denmark, which currently has a similar number of fatalities), public authorities are avoiding stricter measures and following a strategy of trying to slow down the spread of the virus in a calm and controlled way, while focusing on the protection of vulnerable groups."
• This Foreign Policy commentary focuses on China and their attempt to divert blame from them when it comes to the COVID pandemic. They conclude the article by stating that  "the CCP does not actually hope to convince the world that the virus may have started in the United States—or Italy, for that matter. But it absolutely does feel the need to blunt and undercut Washington’s efforts to point out China’s early role in letting the coronavirus get out of hand, a devastating reality for Beijing’s efforts to portray itself internationally as a responsible global power and potentially damaging domestically too if this international consensus is allowed to seep back into mainland China." This is where public health is not the focus, but state power and state posturing become part of the analysis of COVID 19 and its aftermath.
• This Eurodad (European Network on Debt and Development, not a European father...) piece focuses on Latin America and the issues with addressing the pandemic in the region. Here is a quote with a bunch of terms from our classes: "In Latin America, most national health systems were transformed under the influence of the Washington Consensus, driven by the Bretton Woods Institutions. This reform process emphasised the liberalisation of the health sector and the contraction of the public health system. Structural adjustments have left health systems vulnerable to shocks and have compromised countries’ ability to provide basic healthcare to all citizens."