Search

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed several chinks in the armour of public health infrastructure across the world. However, the impact of the pandemic has been assessed primarily from the perspective of the 'privileged' members of society. The experiences of the 'other' world inhabited by the marginalised communities, who have had their livelihoods crushed under the weight of the pandemic, have been scarcely documented. As thousands of migrant workers were more scared of death caused by hunger rather than the disease itself, the various steps taken by different countries to curb community transmission have unveiled the ugly side of these measures. For example, as several states such as the US, the UK, Singapore, Hong Kong, and India/Bharat imposed lockdowns, border closures, quarantines, inter alia, the most vulnerable section of the human population has been the migrant workers, especially those individuals who were employed in the unorganised sector. Thus, the global health crisis has unravelled deep-rooted deficiencies, racial biases, and an overall lack of concern and empathy for the lesser privileged, apart from the growing socio-economic divide between the rich and the poor. This research paper aims to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on migrant workers in the informal sector by exploring the measures imposed by the US, the UK, Singapore, Hong Kong, and India/Bharat and analyse how their fundamental rights, including the right to development, were compromised. Through this paper, the author provides a five-point strategic framework that can be adopted globally to prevent such instances in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Borrower hardship, while a critical issue, is not often addressed by consumer protection frameworks across the Asia–Pacific. The widespread use of payment holidays during the COVID-19 crisis provides a significant case study on the importance of having borrower hardship provisions as a consumer protection tool. This paper compares the pre-pandemic availability of payment holidays in three Asia–Pacific jurisdictions: Australia, Singapore, and Hong Kong. It evaluates their existing legislative frameworks, as well as regulatory and industry guidelines on borrower hardship, and contrasts this with their use of payment holidays during the pandemic. Where there were existing industry guidelines on borrower hardship, lenders were able to spearhead an industry-wide approach towards payment relief without regulatory intervention by governments. Beyond the pandemic, the paper argues that self-regulation has potential for protecting borrower interests by standardising the scope of, and the procedure for, obtaining hardship relief. It argues that there is a need for a greater prevalence of industry codes of conducts governing lenders' approach towards borrower hardship across the Asia–Pacific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The East Asian experience in tackling COVID-19 has been highly praised, but this high-level generalisation neglects variation in pandemic response measures adopted across countries as well as the socio-political factors that shaped them. This paper compares the early pandemic response in Singapore and Hong Kong, two Asian city-states of similar sizes, a shared history of SARS, and advanced medical systems. Although both were able to contain the virus, they did so using two very different approaches. Drawing upon data from a cross-national, probability sample Internet survey conducted in May 2020 as well as media and mobility data, we argue that the different approaches were the result of the relative strength of civil society vs. the state at the outset of the outbreak. In protest-ridden Hong Kong, low governmental trust bolstered civil society, which focused on self-mobilisation and community mutual-help. In Singapore, a state-led response model that marginalised civil society brought early success but failed to stem an outbreak among its segregated migrant population. Our findings show that an active civil society is pivotal to effective outbreak response and that trust in government may not have been as important as a factor in these contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Economic Annals-XXI / Ekonomìčnij Časopis-XXI is the property of Institute of Society Transformation and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The fifth wave of COVID-19 in Hong Kong (2022) had brought a series of chaos to society. Nevertheless, its Asian neighbours, namely Singapore and Macao, have avoided such chaos. By investigating the well-rounded preventive measures and social environment in Singapore and Macao, this article highlights the Hong Kong government's "idleness". It reveals that the relationship between a government and its people does play a significant role in operating COVID-19 measures, which could directly prevent a large-scale outbreak. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What is the effect of declaring a pandemic? This research assesses behavioral and psychological responses to the WHO declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic, in Hong Kong, Singapore, and the U.S. We surveyed 3,032 members of the general public in these three regions about the preventative actions they were taking and their worries related to COVID-19. The WHO announcement on March 11th, 2020 created a quasi-experimental test of responses immediately before versus after the announcement. The declaration of the pandemic increased worries about the capacity of the local healthcare system in each region, as well as the proportion of people engaging in preventative actions, including actions not recommended by medical professionals. The number of actions taken correlates positively with anxiety and worries. Declaring the COVID-19 crisis as a pandemic had tangible effects–positive (increased community engagement) and negative (increased generalized anxiety)–which manifested differently across regions in line with expectancy disconfirmation theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various topics within the issue, including the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on social workers in Australia, posttraumatic growth (PTG), and the preparedness of social workers in Israeli hospitals for the next pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic, an exceptional crisis, sparked the introduction of new digital infrastructure to halt the novel coronavirus's spread. This paper explores how such digital infrastructure's impact might reverberate over the long term, by comparing Singapore, Hong Kong, and mainland China's utilization of digital technology in response to the 2003 SARS outbreak, and their responses to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. We find that advancements in digital technology since 2003 have boosted governments' surveillance and segregation abilities substantially—most dramatically so in China. Even though some of these new digital interventions are ostensibly designed to be temporary ones to address the needs of the immediate crisis, we argue that the resultant extensions of state power experienced during COVID-19 are likely to have profound long-term effects because they fundamentally affect sociopolitical contexts, institutional capabilities, and digital cultures. We also find that the extent to which governments can extend digital surveillance and segregation abilities during the pandemic is contingent on their respective sociopolitical, institutional, and digital cultural contexts. • COVID-19 pandemic sparked calls for a new digital infrastructure. • We compare 2003 SARS outbreak to COVID-19 pandemic. • New digital technologies increased governments' ability to surveil and segregate. • Their impact on surveillance and segregation will persist post COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]