Pandemic Response and the Cost of Lockdowns brings the vast analytical apparatus of the humanities and social sciences to the task of critically analysing the political decisions taken in 2020–21. The global response to the COVID-19 pandemic left little time for critical debate about the impact of lockdowns. Across the world, governments claimed to "follow the science", but they rarely paid attention to the humanities and social sciences. Indeed, the absence of these perspectives is symptomatic of a longer-term trend in the marginalisation of the humanities and social sciences in policymaking and public debate. This book exposes the tragic consequences of this omission in 2020–21 and demonstrates the potential for a different path in the future – a path in which we pay attention to power, complexity, and our biases. The authors establish what these disciplines have to offer in a global emergency and how we can ensure they help us avoid the mistakes of 2020–21 in the future. This original and interdisciplinary book will be of great interest to students, scholars, and researchers throughout the humanities and social sciences, including the fields of philosophy, sociology, anthropology, law, political science, and history, as well as relevant policymakers.

The world has been shaken by the response of governments to the COVID-19 pandemic in a way unlike what we have seen in any prior global health event. What started as a local health anomaly in one Chinese province quickly became a world-stopping crisis affecting every major nation in 2020. Industries from travel to manufacturing suffered sudden, acute disruptions due to political action to lock down cities and block the free movement of people and goods within and between countries. Was all of this necessary to save lives, or did it on net produce human damage? This report aims to evaluate whether Australia's COVID lockdown policies - a central feature of our COVID policy response - were on net helpful or harmful. Gigi Foster is Professor of Economics, UNSW Business School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Sanjeev Sabhlok is a PhD economist formerly of the Department of Treasury and Finance in Victoria.

Since the onset of the pandemic, progressive opinion has been clear that hard lockdowns are the best way to preserve life, while only irresponsible and destructive conservatives like Trump and Bolsonaro oppose them. But why should liberals favor lockdowns, when all the social science research shows that those who suffer most are the economically disadvantaged, without access to good internet or jobs that can be done remotely; that the young will pay the price of the pandemic in future taxes, job prospects, and erosion of public services, when they are already disadvantaged in comparison in terms of pension prospects, paying university fees, and state benefits; and that Covid's impact on the Global South is catastrophic, with the UN predicting potentially tens of millions of deaths from hunger and declaring that decades of work in health and education is being reversed. Toby Green analyses the contradictions emerging through this response as part of a broader crisis in Western thought, where conservative thought is also riven by contradictions, with lockdown policies creating just the sort of big state that it abhors. These contradictions mirror underlying irreconcilable beliefs in society that are now bursting into the open, with devastating consequences for the global poor.

This open access book collects expert contributions on actuarial modelling and related topics, from machine learning to legal aspects, and reflects on possible insurance designs during an epidemic/pandemic. Starting by considering the impulse given by COVID-19 to the insurance industry and to actuarial research, the text covers compartment models, mortality changes during a pandemic, risk-sharing in the presence of low probability events, group testing, compositional data analysis for detecting data inconsistencies, behaviouristic aspects in fighting a pandemic, and insurers' legal problems, amongst others. Concluding with an essay by a practicing actuary on the applicability of the methods proposed, this interdisciplinary book is aimed at actuaries as well as readers with a background in mathematics, economics, statistics, finance, epidemiology, or sociology.

Utilizing extensive research in economics, psychology, political science, neuroscience and evolutionary theory, Ananish Chaudhuri provides a critical perspective on the role of cognitive biases in decision-making during the Covid-19 pandemic. The extensive use of, and support for, stringent social distancing measures in particular is explored in depth.

COVID-19 is the most significant global crisis of any of our lifetimes. The numbers have been stupefying, whether of infection and mortality, the scale of public health measures, or the economic consequences of shutdown. Coronavirus Politics identifies key threads in the global comparative discussion that continue to shed light on COVID-19 and shape debates about what it means for scholarship in health and comparative politics. Editors Scott L. Greer, Elizabeth J. King, Elize Massard da Fonseca, and André Peralta-Santos bring together over 30 authors versed in politics and the health issues in order to understand the health policy decisions, the public health interventions, the social policy decisions, their interactions, and the reasons. The book’s coverage is global, with a wide range of key and exemplary countries, and contains a mixture of comparative, thematic, and templated country studies. All go beyond reporting and monitoring to develop explanations that draw on the authors' expertise while engaging in structured conversations across the book.

The COVID 19 pandemic has profoundly impacted the world, affecting not only physical health and the economy but also mental well being. This chapter provides an investigation of the causal link between lockdown measures a significant public health intervention and mental health. Our examination begins with an overview of the mental health landscape across various countries prior to the COVID 19 pandemic. We then summarize key insights from a range of surveys, reviews, and meta analyses concerning the pandemic's effect on mental health. Further, we delve into a detailed analysis of three noteworthy studies that employ natural experiments to investigate the effects of lockdowns on mental health in different countries. Despite their differing research designs, these studies converge on the conclusion that lockdowns have had a detrimental impact on mental health. The intensity of this effect, however, varies among different population groups. This suggests that lockdown measures have affected certain segments of the population more profoundly than others.