What works and what doesn’t

ACOUPLE of recent publications by the World Bank (WB) and the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) are instructive on what works and what does not work in promoting economic recovery during the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. WB just released this month its study titled “Uneven Recovery, which assesses the factors that helped in accelerating recovery of the Asia-Pacific region. On the other hand, FAO, with technical support from the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), almost at the same time shared to the public its research work titled “Rapid assessment of the impact of Covid-19 on the food supply chains in the Philippines.”

The two publications complement each other because the former takes a macro perspective on the impact of Covid-19 while the latter focuses on its sectoral (agriculture and food) effect. These excellent analytical pieces provide us clear insights on what works and what doesn’t.

Uneven recovery

The WB noted that countries in the Asia-Pacific region attempting to revive their economy produced mixed results. China and Vietnam registered a “V” shape type of economic recovery. The bulk of the countries in the region experienced a turnaround during the fourth quarter of last year and early this year. But the small islands in the Pacific are not showing any signs of a rebound.

Although all of these countries adopted practically the same set of policies in responding to the pandemic, why did they obtain different results?

The WB attributed this to three factors. One was the effectivity by which the various governments attempted to check the spread of the virus, including the efficiency of their mass vaccination program. Two was their ability to take advantage of the opportunities of global trade, particularly in those countries that have resumed their economic growth path (i.e., particularly China and partly, the United States). And three was the manner by which governments extended fiscal and monetary support to industries and citizens who were severely affected by the pandemic.

After a thorough examination of the performance of the AsiaPacific countries on these three parameters, the WB concluded that: “The countries with the weakest performance were the ones that suffered high rates of Covid-19 infections and mortality; that relied more on prolonged restrictions on mobility rather an effective test-based strategy; that depend on earnings from tourism rather than exports of manufactured goods, especially electronics; and whose governments had limited fiscal space.”

The inability to adjust to the challenges of the pandemic has resulted in the significant increase in the number of poor in the region, which was slowly reduced during the prepandemic period, but now becomes a major development challenge.

Impact on food supply

The FAO impact assessment of Covid-19 on the food supply chain covered five sites (Metro Manila, Metro Cebu, and Metro Davao; and the Basilan island and Marawi City in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao) and assessed the supply of 16 food commodities to these areas. It arrived at the following conclusions:

One is that even before the pandemic, the country’s agri-food system was already facing serious development challenges. Already poor and inadequate, its logistics system practically excludes the small farmers and fisherfolk, and does not guarantee affordable food to poor consumers.

Two, the report noted that the Department of Agriculture (DA) was able to alleviate the supply chain disruptions during the pandemic through innovative measures such as the issuance of food passes for trucks and vans transporting food and agricultural products, the deployment of Kadiwa mobile stores in strategic locations in the urban areas and the introduction of e-commerce in collaboration with the private sector.

Three, the challenge to meet demand continues, thus the need to increase the productivity of the agriculture sector. Also, a contraction in agricultural exports due to lower global demand led to a loss or reduction of income for cultivators of these export products.

The report optimistically assessed that agriculture’s prospect for rebound is high. Among the economic sectors, agriculture recorded the least contraction and, thus, offers the best prospect for economic recovery and growth. According to FAO’s recommendations, innovations and appropriate technology, including expansion of e-commerce, application of digital agriculture, establishment of food hubs in strategic areas to improve food dispersion and encouraging greater private sector participation in the sector should all be accelerated.

Rise of instant experts

The Covid-19 pandemic has also resulted in the emergence of instant experts ever ready to share their analyses and recommendations to the media. Though their opinions might not necessarily be helpful, they are, however, guaranteed their direly craved media projections to advance their selfinterest, monetary or political. I have a contemptuous view of such instant experts; hence, I rely on information from the analyses and recommendations of highly reputable sources.

And most highly reputable think-tanks in the world essentially provide a set of common observations and policy prescriptions given that they based their analyses and conclusions on solid empirical data painstakingly derived from various sources. Analyzing the adverse impact of Covid-19 is no rocket science. From the analyses of reputable think-tanks and experts, we are informed of what works and does not work.

But in between these two considerations, there is politics whose valuation process deviates from the obsession for scientific rigor as the only route to arriving at conclusions and recommendations. Unfortunately, across the world there are many practitioners of politics that put premium on their ideological or philosophical position and the advancement of their political agenda rather than the guidance of science.

Those who stuck to science and good governance saw relatively fast recovery from the adverse impacts of Covid-19. Those who listened to their demagogues remain in the quagmire of extricating themselves from the challenges posed by the pandemic.

Thus the phenomenon of uneven economic recovery of countries hit by Covid-19.