Daily Times

The novel coronavirus has a few key attributes: it is new to mankind (so there is no developed immunity); it has a protracted asymptomatic period; it is extremely contagious, and there is, so far, no vaccination or treatment for it. These highlights have prompted a quick spread and comparatively high mortality rates. The absence of a political will, coupled with incertitude and uncertainty led to passive policy responses. Due to the possibility of a greater number of cases of the disease than even the best health systems could deal with, a definitive reaction in the country after country has been some adaptation of a lockdown, suspending economic and social activities, and interrupting large swathes of the economy.

As Pakistan’s economy was already going through a severe economic turmoil, owing to the regressive economic policies, the COVID-19 outbreak has further dented our crippling economy. As per the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the economy of Pakistan could suffer from losses ranging up to $5 billion which our fragile and dilapidated economic and social system is incapacitated to endure. Prime Minister Imran Khan opposed a complete lockdown, yet the provincial and federal governments have enforced partial and complete lockdown to contain the pandemic. There will be an estimated 946,000 job losses from the documented economy which is a gigantic sum given the fact that the unemployment levels in the undocumented economy will be much higher. The country is already trapped under the vicious debt burden and the stringent FATF compliance is another challenge that the policymakers have to deal with in the coming months. At this stage, we are welcoming the decision of G-20 countries regarding the deferral of debt servicing payments for developing countries, but our policymakers need to realize that once the grace period is over our economy is incapacitated to pay these accrued costs in a lump sum.

There is a self-evident and much-discussed trade-off between the seriousness and length of a lockdown and the lives spared or lost. What has got sidelined in these discussions is the significance of another question. Given that we prioritize saving human lives, and that economies are as of now shut down and crippling, what is the most productive approach to re-start the economy? The response to this pressing question likewise has some pertinent ramifications for the strain on the healthcare system, so there is a dual advantage for thoroughly considering the appropriate response.

In this context, Paul Romer has given the most appropriate response to the subject on how to restart economic activities whilst minimizing illness and fatalities. Romer has been awarded a Nobel Prize in economics for his work on economic growth and innovation. He contends that the most efficient utilization of resources is in an accelerated ramp-up of testing faculties for the COVID-19 virus, accompanied by antibody testing. While many analysts have suggested ramped-up testing, Romer suggests a distinctive scale altogether. A few public health experts are prescribing testing 1% of the populace. The US is getting there, after several weeks, with a bungled beginning to the testing cycle and continued lapses, including opposition from the president to making COVID-19 testing a national priority. There are a lot of nations in the American range of cumulative testing, with Iceland being an exception at 10%. Pakistan’s cumulative testing is abysmal- an estimated total of 175,000 people have been tested in the country of over 200 million people, significantly following five weeks of lockdown. This reflects the gravity of the fractured and the dilapidated health care system of the country which is incapable of handling this emergency and not to mention the spiraling levels of poverty which continue to haunt our cause of social justice. The government may disburse relief package to the most affected families for a month or two but the economic repercussions of this draconian pandemic are anticipated to linger on for an exceedingly long period. Will the government be capable of tackling the increased financial pressure in the upcoming months without external aid? Germany is now one of the most secure countries in the world with regards to the COVID-19 pandemic, unlike its neighboring European countries. What was different in Germany, that made it cope-up with this pandemic quickly? The answer is those charged with governance continued to ramp-up the testing facilities of the country, focused on upgrading healthcare infrastructure and the results are evident. As the world health experts are speculating South Asian countries to remain the next target for the ferocious COVID-19 attack, the policymakers need to invest more in upgrading our weak healthcare systems rather than engaging in social media banters with their political opponents.

Romer proposes testing 7% of the US populace daily, so the entire populace would be canvassed in only 14 days. He additionally advocates nonstop testing, since tests can have false negatives error or can overlook the virus infection in its initial stages. He gauges the expense of this program to be in the range of a whopping $100 billion, which appears to represent a gigantic total, however, it is not exactly a tenth of the loss of trillions of dollars of output due to economic and social lockdowns. The rationale is clear: universal testing (concomitant with focused quarantining) is the most ideal approach to evacuate vulnerability and license as many numbers of individuals to come back to work and routine activities as securely and swiftly as could be expected under the circumstances. The strategy proposed by Romer enjoys an economic rate of return of almost over one thousand percent of the losses incurred as a result of lockdown. Also, this is with no expenses as far as lives lost, or more noteworthy disease.

All-inclusive testing, concomitant with focused quarantining, is the most ideal approach to succor swift and secure resumption of normal economic activities

What are roadblocks to this approach? Scaling up the testing to an inclusive, continual procedure will require some investment of time and money, yet the alternative is more regrettable. The issue is by all accounts with certain healthcare experts, politicians, and corporations that are accustomed to minting profits. The solution to managing the third barrier is delineated by a verifiable model provided by the economic historian Bernard Elbaum. According to him, in World War II “the US government suspended patent rights and put together organizations to exchange exclusive proprietary information. The UK likewise shared key innovation insights with the US, which helped accelerate the development of radar and penicillin”. The present reaction of US administrators has been something, contrary to the worldwide sharing of research and innovation for testing, and yet another example of the Trump Administration’s incompetence. Be that as it may, there are lessons here for Pakistan as well.

The second hindrance to this approach endures the customary way of thinking. The healthcare specialists near the US administration are offering better guidance over the president, however, they have failed to stand up for aggressive testing, concentrating too much on uncertainties and complexities. Without a doubt, Romer recommends that his all-inclusive testing approach would make contact tracing-which is a part of public health customary wisdom, yet can be exorbitant, troublesome, and obtrusive of security- practically superfluous.

The third barrier i.e. political obstruction is the hardest to survive. Legislators are not considered answerable, aside from intermittent decisions. Indeed, even there, the counterfactual for their strategies is hard for the ordinary voter to pass judgment. This applies, particularly to financial expenses. Fortunately, in the US, one of the top public health officials near the president is at long last conceding that the Trump Administration messed up its reaction, prompting a sheerer number of fatalities than expected. Paul Romer, as a financial specialist, is stating that the US testing arrangement is prompting considerably more economic damage than anticipated.

There are arguments regarding Romer’s suggestions. Nothing but, their excellence is that they give simplicity, clarity, and focus for a policy approach that can lessen the economic damage of the pandemic (with its extremely negative effects on health and welfare, particularly of impoverished people), with no extra costs as far as illness and mortality are concerned. On the off chance that we apply Romer’s rationale to Pakistan, at that point going for fast widespread testing, in any event, until a vaccine is developed and delivered (which will take increased time), is a vital piece of economic policy.

The writer is a chartered accountant and a specialist in global democratic affairs, education, economy, taxation and governance based in Lahore, Pakistan. He has extensive research and hands-on experience in the public sector and can be reached out at arsyed09 @gmail.com | Twitter @SyedAbd90588948