IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/107746.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

L'impact du Brexit sur l'Afrique en période de crise Corona: le cas de l'Afrique du Sud, du Nigeria, du Ghana et du Kenya
[The impact of Brexit on Africa in times of the Corona Crisis : The case of South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana and Kenya]

Author

Listed:
  • Kohnert, Dirk

Abstract

ABSTRACT & RÉSUMÉ & ZUSAMMENFASSUNG : Although Britain has been so far the hardest hit among the EU member states by the corona pandemic, Johnson persists to leave the EU at the end of 2020, whatever the cost. Presumably, the pandemic will have a by far bigger impact on the UK African trade than a no-deal Brexit. In Sub-Saharan Africa, South Africa had been arguably the hardest hit country both by Brexit and Corona. However, the poor, mainly working in the informal sector, were more concerned about the economic impact of the pandemic than the disease itself. In Nigeria, many people envisaged Corona as a plague of the rich and the elite. President Buhari shared the hubris of many British that they are less vulnerable to the pandemic and could continue with high-flying Post-Brexit plans. Ghana counts among those countries in Sub-Sahara Africa which has been most severely hit by the corona pandemic. But unlike South Africa and Nigeria, the direct effects of the pandemic on the downturn of its economy are not as significant as in other African states. In Kenya the number of corona-death had been much lower than for the SARS pandemic of 2003, but the transmission of the COVID-19 virus had been significantly greater. Nevertheless, many Kenyan’s saw the Brexit as a disguised blessing because they pined their hope on massive FDI by UK investors. In any case, it is clear beyond doubt that those who are to suffer most by the combined effects of the corona-pandemic and Brexit in Africa (and presumably world-wide) are the poor and vulnerable. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RÉSUMÉ : Bien que la Grande-Bretagne ait jusqu'à présent été la plus durement touchée par la pandémie corona parmi les États membres de l'UE, Johnson persiste à quitter l'UE fin 2020, quel qu'en soit le coût. Vraisemblablement, la pandémie aura un impact beaucoup plus important sur le commerce africain du Royaume-Uni qu'un Brexit sans accord. En Afrique subsaharienne, l'Afrique du Sud a probablement été le pays le plus durement touché par le Brexit et Corona. Cependant, les pauvres, travaillant principalement dans le secteur informel, étaient plus préoccupés par l'impact économique de la pandémie que par la maladie elle-même. Au Nigéria, beaucoup de gens considéraient Corona comme un fléau pour les riches et l'élite. Le président Buhari a partagé l'orgueil de nombreux Britanniques selon lesquels ils sont moins vulnérables à la pandémie et pourraient continuer avec des plans de haut vol après le Brexit. Le Ghana compte parmi les pays d'Afrique subsaharienne qui ont été les plus durement touchés par la pandémie de corona. Mais contrairement à l'Afrique du Sud et au Nigéria, les effets directs de la pandémie sur le ralentissement de son économie ne sont pas aussi importants que dans d'autres États africains. Au Kenya, le nombre de décès par effet corona a été beaucoup plus faible que pour la pandémie de SRAS de 2003, mais la transmission du virus COVID-19 a été nettement plus importante. Néanmoins, de nombreux Kenyans ont vu le Brexit comme une bénédiction déguisée car ils portaient leur espoir sur le IDE massif des investisseurs britanniques. En tout état de cause, il est clair, sans aucun doute, que ceux qui souffriront le plus des effets combinés de la pandémie corona et du Brexit en Afrique (et vraisemblablement dans le monde entier) sont les pauvres et les vulnérables. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ZUSAMMENFASSUNG : Obwohl Großbritannien unter den EU-Mitgliedstaaten bislang am stärksten von der Koronapandemie betroffen war, besteht Johnson weiterhin darauf, die EU Ende 2020 zu verlassen, unabhängig von den Kosten. Vermutlich wird die Pandemie einen weitaus größeren Einfluss auf den afrikanischen Handel im Vereinigten Königreich haben als ein No-Deal-Brexit. In Afrika südlich der Sahara war Südafrika sowohl vom Brexit als auch von Corona das vermutlich am stärksten betroffene Land. Die Armen, die hauptsächlich im informellen Sektor tätig sind, waren jedoch mehr besorgt über die wirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen der Pandemie als über die Krankheit selbst. In Nigeria stellten sich viele Menschen Corona als Plage der Reichen und der Elite vor. Präsident Buhari teilte die Hybris vieler Briten, dass sie weniger anfällig für die Pandemie sind und mit hochfliegenden Plänen nach dem Brexit fortfahren könnten. Ghana zählt zu den Ländern in Subsahara-Afrika, die ebenfalls mit am stärksten von der Koronapandemie betroffen sind. Im Gegensatz zu Südafrika und Nigeria sind die direkten Auswirkungen der Pandemie auf den wirtschaftlichen Abschwung jedoch nicht so bedeutend wie in anderen afrikanischen Staaten. In Kenia war die Zahl der Koronatoten viel geringer als bei der SARS-Pandemie von 2003, aber die Übertragung des COVID-19-Virus war signifikant höher. Dennoch sahen viele Kenianer den Brexit als verschleierten Segen an, weil sie ihre Hoffnung auf massive ausländische Direktinvestitionen britischer Investoren setzten. In jeden Fall ist klar, dass diejenigen, die am meisten unter den kombinierten Auswirkungen der Koronapandemie und des Brexit in Afrika (und vermutlich weltweit) leiden müssen, die Armen und Verletzlichen sind.

Suggested Citation

  • Kohnert, Dirk, 2021. "L'impact du Brexit sur l'Afrique en période de crise Corona: le cas de l'Afrique du Sud, du Nigeria, du Ghana et du Kenya [The impact of Brexit on Africa in times of the Corona Crisis : The case of," MPRA Paper 107746, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:107746
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/107746/1/MPRA_paper_107746.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Breinlich, Holger & Leromain, Elsa & Novy, Dennis & Sampson, Thomas, 2020. "Voting with their money: Brexit and outward investment by UK firms," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    2. Ross Brown & Jose Liñares-Zegarra & John O. S. Wilson, 2019. "The (potential) impact of Brexit on UK SMEs: regional evidence and public policy implications," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(5), pages 761-770, May.
    3. Gabila Nubong, 2019. "Brexit and European Union Disintegration: Lessons for Africa’s Integration," Africagrowth Agenda, Africagrowth Institute, vol. 16(4), pages 10-13.
    4. Siphumlile Mangisa & Sonali Das & Rangan Gupta, 2022. "Analyzing The Impact Of Brexit On Global Uncertainty Using Functional Linear Regression With Point Of Impact: The Role Of Currency And Equity Markets," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 67(04), pages 1377-1388, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ana Venâncio & João Pereira dos Santos, 2021. "The effect of Brexit on British workers living in the EU," Working Papers REM 2021/0197, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    2. Kohnert, Dirk, 2020. "The impact of Brexit on Africa in times of the Corona Crisis," MPRA Paper 101202, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Yuko Imura, 2023. "Reassessing Trade Barriers with Global Production Networks," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 51, pages 77-116, December.
    4. Marco Cavallaro & Benedetto Lepori, 2021. "Institutional barriers to participation in EU framework programs: contrasting the Swiss and UK cases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1311-1328, February.
    5. Nicolo' Tamberi, 2020. "Export-platform FDI and Brexit Uncertainty," Working Paper Series 0320, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    6. Hanna Adam & Mario Larch & Jordi Paniagua, 2023. "Spain, Split and Talk: Quantifying Regional Independence," CESifo Working Paper Series 10742, CESifo.
    7. Gabriel, Ricardo Duque & Pessoa, Ana Sofia, 2020. "Adopting the Euro: a synthetic control approach," MPRA Paper 99391, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Breinlich, Holger & Leromain, Elsa & Novy, Dennis & Sampson, Thomas, 2020. "Voting with their money: Brexit and outward investment by UK firms," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    9. Holger Breinlich & Elsa Leromain & Dennis Novy & Thomas Sampson, 2019. "Exchange Rates and Consumer Prices: Evidence from Brexit," CESifo Working Paper Series 8001, CESifo.
    10. Bakker, Jan David & Datta, Nikhil & Davies, Richard & De Lyon, Josh, 2023. "Brexit and consumer food prices," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1461, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    11. Di Ubaldo, Mattia & Gasiorek, Michael, 2022. "Non-trade provisions in trade agreements and FDI," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    12. Kohnert, Dirk, 2020. "The impact of Brexit on Africa in times of the Corona Crisis - The case of South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana and Kenya," AfricArxiv tdbgu, Center for Open Science.
    13. Ferdi De Ville & Gabriel Siles-Brügge, 2019. "The Impact of Brexit on EU Trade Policy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 7-18.
    14. Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes & Agnese Romiti, 2022. "International Student Applications in the United Kingdom After Brexit," Working Papers 22-03, University of Strathclyde Business School, Department of Economics.
    15. Fetzer, Thiemo & Wang, Shizhuo, 2020. "Measuring the Regional Economic Cost of Brexit: Evidence up to 2019," CEPR Discussion Papers 15051, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Ross Brown & Ronald V Kalafsky & Suzanne Mawson & Lori Davies, 2020. "Shocks, uncertainty and regional resilience: The case of Brexit and Scottish SMEs," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 35(7), pages 655-675, November.
    17. Josh De Lyon & Swati Dhingra, 2020. "Covid-19 and Brexit: Real-time updates on business performance in the United Kingdom," CEP Covid-19 Analyses cepcovid-19-006, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    18. Bakker, Jan David & Datta, Nikhil & Davies, Richard & De Lyon, Josh, 2023. "Did the policy response to the energy crisis cause crime? Evidence from England," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 663, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    19. Bakker, Jan & Datta, Nikhil & Davies, Richard & De Lyon, Joshua, 2022. "Non-tariff barriers and consumer prices: evidence from Brexit," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118040, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Jan David Bakker & Nikhil Datta & Richard Davies & Josh De Lyon, 2022. "Non-tariff barriers and consumer prices: evidence from Brexit," CEP Discussion Papers dp1888, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    COVID-19; Corona; Brexit; Afrique; Royaume-Uni; UE; commerce international; récession économique; pauvreté; Afrique du Sud; Nigeria; Ghana; Kenya;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F35 - International Economics - - International Finance - - - Foreign Aid
    • F54 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - Colonialism; Imperialism; Postcolonialism
    • F63 - International Economics - - Economic Impacts of Globalization - - - Economic Development
    • G15 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - International Financial Markets
    • I0 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - General
    • N17 - Economic History - - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics; Industrial Structure; Growth; Fluctuations - - - Africa; Oceania
    • N47 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation - - - Africa; Oceania
    • N67 - Economic History - - Manufacturing and Construction - - - Africa; Oceania
    • O17 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Formal and Informal Sectors; Shadow Economy; Institutional Arrangements
    • P16 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Institutions; Welfare State
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:107746. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.