The cross-country relationship of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case and death rates with previously measured income inequality and poverty in the pandemic's first wave is studied, controlling for other underlying factors, in a worldwide sample of countries. If the estimated associations are interpreted as causal, the Gini coefficient for income has a significant positive effect on both cases and deaths per capita in regressions using the full sample and for cases but not for deaths when Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and non-OECD sub-samples are treated separately. The Gini coefficient for wealth has a significant positive effect on cases, but not on deaths, in both sub-samples and in the full sample. Poverty generally has weak positive effects in the full and non-OECD samples, but a relative poverty measure has a strong positive effect on cases in the OECD sample. Analysis of the gap between COVID-19 first-wave cases and deaths per capita in Canada and the higher rates in the United States indicates that 37 percent of the cases gap and 28 percent of the deaths gap could be attributed to the higher-income Gini in the United States according to the full-sample regressions.
We examine how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected trade between Canada and the United States, using a novel dataset on monthly bilateral trade flows between Canadian provinces and US states merged with COVID-19 health data. Our results show that a one-standard-deviation increase in COVID-19 severity (case levels, hospitalizations, deaths) in a Canadian province leads to a 3.1 percent to 4.9 percent fall in exports and a 6.7 percent to 9.1 percent fall in imports. Decomposing our analysis by industry, we determine that trade in the manufacturing industry was most negatively affected by the pandemic, and the agriculture industry had the least disruption to trade flows. Our descriptive evidence suggests that lockdowns may also have reduced Canadian exports and imports. However, although our regression coefficients are consistent with that finding, they are not statistically significant, perhaps because of the lack of variation as a result of similar timing in the imposition of restrictions across provinces.
We introduce evidence that for-profit long-term-care providers are associated with less successful outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak management. We introduce two sets of theoretical arguments that predict variation in service quality by provider type: those that deal with the institution of contracting (innovative competition vs. erosive competition) and those that address organizational features of for-profit, non-profit, and government actors (profit seeking, cross-subsidization, and future investment). We contextualize these arguments through a discussion of how contracting operates in Ontario long-term care. That discussion leads us to exclude the institutional arguments while retaining the arguments about organizational features as our three hypotheses. Using outbreak data as of February 2021, we find that government-run long-term-care homes surpassed for-profit and non-profit homes in outbreak management, consistent with an earlier finding from Stall et al. (2020). Non-profit homes outperform for-profit homes but are outperformed by government-run homes. These results are consistent with the expectations derived from two theoretical arguments-profit seeking and cross-subsidization-and inconsistent with a third-capacity for future investment.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：