IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i21p13956-d954662.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trade-Off between COVID-19 Pandemic Prevention and Control and Economic Stimulus

Author

Listed:
  • Fangfang Liu

    (School of Marxism, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Zheng Ma

    (School of Automobile, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Ziqing Wang

    (NIT-O2S, UTBM, University Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 91110 Belfort, France)

  • Shaobo Xie

    (School of Automobile, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed a severe threat to public health and economic activity. Governments all around the world have taken positive measures to, on the one hand, contain the epidemic spread and, on the other hand, stimulate the economy. Without question, tightened anti-epidemic policy measures restrain people’s mobility and deteriorate the levels of social and economic activity. Meanwhile, loose policy measures bring little harm to the economy temporarily but could accelerate the transmission of the virus and ultimately wreck social and economic development. Therefore, these two kinds of governmental decision-making behaviors usually conflict with each other. With the purpose of realizing optimal socio-economic benefit over the full duration of the epidemic and to provide a helpful suggestion for the government, a trade-off is explored in this paper between the prevention and control of the epidemic, and economic stimulus. First, the susceptible–infectious–recovered (SIR) model is introduced to simulate the epidemic dynamics. Second, a state equation is constructed to describe the system state variable—the level of socio-economic activity dominated by two control variables. Specifically, these two variables are the strengths of the measures taken for pandemic prevention and control, and economic stimulus. Then, the objective function used to maximize the total socio-economic benefit over the epidemic’s duration is defined, and an optimal control problem is developed. The statistical data of the COVID-19 epidemic in Wuhan are used to validate the SIR model, and a COVID-19 epidemic scenario is used to evaluate the proposed method. The solution is discussed in both static and dynamic strategies, according to the knowledge of the epidemic’s duration. In the static strategy, two scenarios with different strengths (in terms of anti-epidemic and economic stimulus measures) are analyzed and compared. In the dynamic strategy, two global optimization algorithms, including the dynamic programming (DP) and Pontryagin’s minimum principle (PMP), respectively, are used to acquire the solutions. Moreover, a sensitivity analysis of model parameters is conducted. The results demonstrate that the static strategy, which is independent of the epidemic’s duration and can be easily solved, is capable of finding the optimal strengths of both policy measures. Meanwhile, the dynamic strategy, which generates global optimal trajectories of the control variables, can provide the path that leads to attaining the optimal total socio-economic benefit. The results reveal that the optimal total socio-economic benefit of the dynamic strategy is slightly higher than that of the static strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Fangfang Liu & Zheng Ma & Ziqing Wang & Shaobo Xie, 2022. "Trade-Off between COVID-19 Pandemic Prevention and Control and Economic Stimulus," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-22, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:13956-:d:954662
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/13956/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/13956/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abel Brodeur & David Gray & Anik Islam & Suraiya Bhuiyan, 2021. "A literature review of the economics of COVID‐19," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 1007-1044, September.
    2. Wei Liu & Xiao-Guang Yue & Paul B. Tchounwou, 2020. "Response to the COVID-19 Epidemic: The Chinese Experience and Implications for Other Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-6, March.
    3. Enrique Alberola & Yavuz Arslan & Gong Cheng & Richhild Moessner, 2021. "Fiscal response to the COVID‐19 crisis in advanced and emerging market economies†," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 459-468, October.
    4. Joshua M. Epstein, 2009. "Modelling to contain pandemics," Nature, Nature, vol. 460(7256), pages 687-687, August.
    5. Hector Pollitt & Richard Lewney & Bence Kiss-Dobronyi & Xinru Lin, 2021. "Modelling the economic effects of COVID-19 and possible green recovery plans: a post-Keynesian approach," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(10), pages 1257-1271, November.
    6. Makin, Anthony J. & Layton, Allan, 2021. "The global fiscal response to COVID-19: Risks and repercussions," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 340-349.
    7. Petrović, Pavle & Arsić, Milojko & Nojković, Aleksandra, 2021. "Increasing public investment can be an effective policy in bad times: Evidence from emerging EU economies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 580-597.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ahmad Zaini Miftah & Ida Widianingsih & Entang Adhy Muhtar & Ridwan Sutriadi, 2023. "Reviving a City’s Economic Engine: The COVID-19 Pandemic Impact and the Private Sector’s Engagement in Bandung City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-15, June.

    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. Segarra-Blasco, Agustí & Teruel, Mercedes & Cattaruzzo, Sebastiano, 2021. "The economic reaction to non-pharmaceutical interventions during Covid-19," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 592-608.
    2. Zhang, Dengjun & Sogn-Grundvåg, Geir, 2022. "Credit constraints and the severity of COVID-19 impact: Empirical evidence from enterprise surveys," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 337-349.
    3. Iza Gigauri & Mirela Panait & Simona Andreea Apostu & Lukman Raimi, 2022. "The Essence of Social Entrepreneurship through a Georgian Lens: Social Entrepreneurs’ Perspectives," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, June.
    4. G.J. Melman & A.K. Parlikad & E.A.B. Cameron, 2021. "Balancing scarce hospital resources during the COVID-19 pandemic using discrete-event simulation," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 356-374, June.
    5. Phurichai Rungcharoenkitkul, 2021. "Macroeconomic effects of COVID‐19: A mid‐term review," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 439-458, October.
    6. Brodeur, Abel & Clark, Andrew E. & Fleche, Sarah & Powdthavee, Nattavudh, 2021. "COVID-19, lockdowns and well-being: Evidence from Google Trends," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    7. Borisova, Ekaterina & Gründler, Klaus & Hackenberger, Armin & Harter, Anina & Potrafke, Niklas & Schoors, Koen, 2023. "Crisis experience and the deep roots of COVID-19 vaccination preferences," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    8. Kahanec, Martin & Lafférs, Lukáš & Schmidpeter, Bernhard, 2021. "The Impact of Mass Antigen Testing for COVID-19 on the Prevalence of the Disease," GLO Discussion Paper Series 775, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    9. Vivek Shastry & D Cale Reeves & Nicholas Willems & Varun Rai, 2022. "Policy and behavioral response to shock events: An agent-based model of the effectiveness and equity of policy design features," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-21, January.
    10. Lalinsky, Tibor & Pál, Rozália, 2022. "Distribution of COVID-19 government support and its consequences for firm liquidity and solvency," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 305-335.
    11. Wolter H. J. Hassink & Guyonne Kalb & Jordy Meekes, 2020. "The Dutch labour market early on in the COVID-19 outbreak: Regional coronavirus hotspots and the national lockdown," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2020n17, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    12. Di Bartolomeo, Giovanni & D'Imperio, Paolo & Felici, Francesco, 2022. "The fiscal response to the Italian COVID-19 crisis: A counterfactual analysis," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    13. Olivier Chanel, 2022. "Impact of COVID‑19 Activity Restrictions on Air Pollution: Methodological Considerations in the Economic Valuation of the Long‑Term Effects on Mortality [Impact sur la pollution de l’air des restri," Working Papers hal-03778336, HAL.
    14. Hai-Anh H. Dang & Long T. Giang & Minh N. N. Do, 2021. "Building on Vietnam’s Recent COVID-19 Success: A Job-Focused Analysis of Individual Assessments on Their Finance and the Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-21, September.
    15. Viral V. Acharya & Zhengyang Jiang & Robert J. Richmond & Ernst-Ludwig von Thadden, 2020. "Divided We Fall: International Health and Trade Coordination During a Pandemic," NBER Working Papers 28176, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Brotherhood, Luiz & Cavalcanti, Tiago & Da Mata, Daniel & Santos, Cezar, 2022. "Slums and pandemics," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    17. Roberto Roson & Camille Van der Vorst, 2021. "The COVID crumbling of tourism in Andalusia: an assessment of economic and environmental consequences," Working Papers 2021: 18, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    18. Abu Bakkar Siddique & Kingsley E. Haynes & Rajendra Kulkarni & Meng-Hao Li, 2023. "Regional poverty and infection disease: early exploratory evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 70(1), pages 209-236, February.
    19. Nicholas Bloom & Philip Bunn & Paul Mizen & Pawel Smietanka & Gregory Thwaites, 2020. "The Impact of Covid-19 on Productivity," NBER Working Papers 28233, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Michal Hrivnák & Peter Moritz & Marcela Chreneková, 2021. "What Kept the Boat Afloat? Sustainability of Employment in Knowledge-Intensive Sectors Due to Government Measures during COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-21, July.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:13956-:d:954662. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.