IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How does South Africa’s Covid-19 response compare globally? A preliminary analysis using the new OxCGRT dataset


  • Martin Gustafsson



A group at the University of Oxford has recently launched a dataset, updated on a daily basis, on the stringency of the measures countries are taking in response to the Covid-19 crisis. The dataset is known as the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, or OxCGRT. It provides countries with an opportunity to examine how typical or atypical their responses are. Interpreting these types of cross-country comparisons must of course be done carefully. Yet they can be invaluable in guiding the debates around next steps. Decisions by countries point roughly to a hierarchy of actions used when ‘the screws are tightened’ in response to the pandemic. International travel restrictions are the first to be imposed, then schools are closed and public events cancelled, then internal movement is restricted, then workplaces are closed, and lastly public transport is shut down. South Africa has more or less followed this pattern, but with an above average degree of stringency. If one examines each country’s most recent level of overall stringency, just 30 (of 139) countries had reached the maximum stringency level. One of these countries is South Africa. If one brings in additional World Bank indicators into the analysis, a multivariate analysis is possible of what characteristics of countries are associated with greater or less stringency in their Covid-19 responses. It is clear that developing countries have responded more stringently, when one takes into account where each country lies in the evolution of the pandemic. Having fewer hospital beds relative to the population is associated with a more stringent response, for instance. Thus, it appears that stricter restrictions on movement are imposed where the risk of overwhelming the health system seems greater. South Africa’s response has been stringent, even in comparison to economically similar countries. For instance, restrictions with respect to accessing the workplace have been over twice as stringent as one might expect, at South Africa’s current point in the pandemic’s trajectory. Yet South Africa is not unique. The level of workplace restrictions in the Latin America and Caribbean region, the highest in the world, is at South Africa’s level. If one examines the lag between a country’s first Covid-19 case and workplace restrictions of maximum stringency, South Africa was about average. Absolute numbers of deaths, or Covid-19 deaths relative to how many deaths a country could have expected anyway in 2020, provide what is probably the best basis for comparing, across multiple countries, the speed with which Covid-19 multiplies. There is clearly a large variety of trajectories for Covid-19 deaths across countries. South Africa’s trajectory is not that unusual. Predicting how sensitive these pathways are to restrictions imposed by governments is hugely important, and will preoccupy analysts in the coming months and years. Datasets such as OxCGRT will be important for this work. Some very preliminary analysis done for the current paper points to the difficulty of detecting meaningful correlations, let alone cause and effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Gustafsson, 2020. "How does South Africa’s Covid-19 response compare globally? A preliminary analysis using the new OxCGRT dataset," Working Papers 07/2020, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:sza:wpaper:wpapers342

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: First version, 2020
    Download Restriction: no


    Blog mentions

    As found by, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. 42. Selected Data of Coronavirus in Spain, United States, Europe, America and other areas, year 2020: Statistics of Cases and Hospital beds
      by MCG Blogs de Economía in Euro-American Association: World Development on 2020-05-12 09:25:00


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

    Cited by:

    1. Martin Gustafsson & Carol Nuga Deliwe, 2020. "How is the COVID-19 pandemic affecting educational quality in South Africa? Evidence to date and future risks," Working Papers 23/2020, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
    2. Robert Hill & Tim Köhler, 2021. "Mind the gap: The distributional effects of South Africa’s national lockdown on gender wage inequality," Working Papers 202101, University of Cape Town, Development Policy Research Unit.
    3. Bassier, Ihsaan & Budlender, Joshua & Zizzamia, Rocco & Leibbrandt, Murray & Ranchhod, Vimal, 2021. "Locked down and locked out: Repurposing social assistance as emergency relief to informal workers," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    4. Simone Schotte & Rocco Zizzamia, 2021. "The livelihood impacts of COVID-19 in urban South Africa: A view from below," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2021-56, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    5. Haroon Bhorat & Morné Oosthuizen & Ben Stanwix, 2021. "Social Assistance Amidst the COVID‐19 Epidemic in South Africa: A Policy Assessment," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 89(1), pages 63-81, March.
    6. Haroon Bhorat & Morné Oosthuizen & Ben Stanwix, 2020. "Social Assistance Amidst the Covid-19 Epidemic in South Africa: An Impact Assessment," Working Papers 202006, University of Cape Town, Development Policy Research Unit.

    More about this item


    OxCGRT; movement restrictions; Covid-19;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy
    • N30 - Economic History - - Labor and Consumers, Demography, Education, Health, Welfare, Income, Wealth, Religion, and Philanthropy - - - General, International, or Comparative


    Access and download statistics


    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:sza:wpaper:wpapers342. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Melt van Schoor (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.