skip to main content

This content will become publicly available on August 1, 2023

Title: Uncertainty Analysis of Business Interruption Losses in the Philippines Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic
In this study, we utilize an input–output (I–O) model to perform an ex-post analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic workforce disruptions in the Philippines. Unlike most disasters that debilitate physical infrastructure systems, the impact of disease pandemics like COVID-19 is mostly concentrated on the workforce. Workforce availability was adversely affected by lockdowns as well as by actual illness. The approach in this paper is to use Philippine I–O data for multiple years and generate Dirichlet probability distributions for the Leontief requirements matrix (i.e., the normalized sectoral transactions matrix) to address uncertainties in the parameters. Then, we estimated the workforce dependency ratio based on a literature survey and then computed the resilience index in each economic sector. For example, sectors that depend heavily on the physical presence of their workforce (e.g., construction, agriculture, manufacturing) incur more opportunity losses compared to sectors where workforce can telework (e.g., online retail, education, business process outsourcing). Our study estimated the 50th percentile economic losses in the range of PhP 3.3 trillion (with telework) to PhP 4.8 trillion (without telework), which is consistent with independently published reports. The study provides insights into the direct and indirect economic impacts of workforce disruptions in emerging economies and will contribute more » to the general domain of disaster risk management. « less
Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ;
Award ID(s):
1832635
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10389388
Journal Name:
Economies
Volume:
10
Issue:
8
Page Range or eLocation-ID:
202
ISSN:
2227-7099
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. COVID-19 resulted in health and logistical challenges for many sectors of the American economy, including the trucking industry. This study examined how the pandemic impacted the trucking industry, focused on the pandemic’s impacts on company operations, health, and stress of trucking industry employees. Data were collected from three sources: surveys, focus groups, and social media posts. Individuals at multiple organizational levels of trucking companies (i.e., supervisors, upper-level management, and drivers) completed an online survey and participated in online focus groups. Data from focus groups were coded using a thematic analysis approach. Publicly available social media posts from Twitter were analyzed using a sentiment analysis framework to assess changes in public sentiment about the trucking industry pre- and during-COVID-19. Two themes emerged from the focus groups: (1) trucking company business strategies and adaptations and (2) truck driver experiences and workplace safety. Participants reported supply chain disruptions and new consumer buying trends as having larger industry-wide impacts. Company adaptability emerged due to freight variability, leading organizations to pivot business models and create solutions to reduce operational costs. Companies responded to COVID-19 by accommodating employees’ concerns and implementing safety measures. Truck drivers noted an increase in positive public perception of truck drivers, butmore »job quality factors worsened due to closed amenities and decreased social interaction. Social media sentiment analysis also illustrated an increase in positive public sentiment towards the trucking industry during COVID-19. The pandemic resulted in multi-level economic, health, and social impacts on the trucking industry, which included economic impacts on companies and economic, social and health impacts on employees within the industry levels. Further research can expand on this study to provide an understanding of the long-term impacts of the pandemic on the trucking industry companies within the industry and segments of the trucking industry workforce.« less
  2. This research measures the epidemiological and economic impact of COVID-19 spread in the US under different mitigation scenarios, comprising of non-pharmaceutical interventions. A detailed disease model of COVID-19 is combined with a model of the US economy to estimate the direct impact of labor supply shock to each sector arising from morbidity, mortality, and lockdown, as well as the indirect impact caused by the interdependencies between sectors. During a lockdown, estimates of jobs that are workable from home in each sector are used to modify the shock to labor supply. Results show trade-o s between economic losses, and lives saved and infections averted are non-linear in compliance to social distancing and the duration of lockdown. Sectors that are worst hit are not the labor-intensive sectors such as Agriculture and Construction, but the ones with high valued jobs such as Professional Services, even after the teleworkability of jobs is accounted for. Additionally, the findings show that a low compliance to interventions can be overcome by a longer shutdown period and vice versa to arrive at similar epidemiological impact but their net effect on economic loss depends on the interplay between the marginal gains from averting infections and deaths, versus the marginalmore »loss from having healthy workers stay at home during the shutdown.« less
  3. Water is a critical natural resource that sustains the productivity of many economic sectors, whether directly or indirectly. Climate change alongside rapid growth and development are a threat to water sustainability and regional productivity. In this paper, we develop an extension to the economic input-output model to assess the impact of water supply disruptions to regional economies. The model utilizes the inoperability variable, which measures the extent to which an infrastructure system or economic sector is unable to deliver its intended output. While the inoperability concept has been utilized in previous applications, this paper offers extensions that capture the time-varying nature of inoperability as the sectors recover from a disruptive event, such as drought. The model extension is capable of inserting inoperability adjustments within the drought timeline to capture time-varying likelihoods and severities, as well as the dependencies of various economic sectors on water. The model was applied to case studies of severe drought in two regions: (1) the state of Massachusetts (MA) and (2) the US National Capital Region (NCR). These regions were selected to contrast drought resilience between a mixed urban–rural region (MA) and a highly urban region (NCR). These regions also have comparable overall gross domestic productsmore »despite significant differences in the distribution and share of the economic sectors comprising each region. The results of the case studies indicate that in both regions, the utility and real estate sectors suffer the largest economic loss; nonetheless, results also identify region-specific sectors that incur significant losses. For the NCR, three sectors in the top 10 ranking of highest economic losses are government-related, whereas in the MA, four sectors in the top 10 are manufacturing sectors. Furthermore, the accommodation sector has also been included in the NCR case intuitively because of the high concentration of museums and famous landmarks. In contrast, the Wholesale Trade sector was among the sectors with the highest economic losses in the MA case study because of its large geographic size conducive for warehouses used as nodes for large-scale supply chain networks. Future modeling extensions could potentially include analysis of water demand and supply management strategies that can enhance regional resilience against droughts. Other regional case studies can also be pursued in future efforts to analyze various categories of drought severity beyond the case studies featured in this paper.« less
  4. Abstract This research measures the epidemiological and economic impact of COVID-19 spread in the US under different mitigation scenarios, comprising of non-pharmaceutical interventions. A detailed disease model of COVID-19 is combined with a model of the US economy to estimate the direct impact of labor supply shock to each sector arising from morbidity, mortality, and lockdown, as well as the indirect impact caused by the interdependencies between sectors. During a lockdown, estimates of jobs that are workable from home in each sector are used to modify the shock to labor supply. Results show trade-offs between economic losses, and lives saved and infections averted are non-linear in compliance to social distancing and the duration of the lockdown. Sectors that are worst hit are not the labor-intensive sectors such as the Agriculture sector and the Construction sector, but the ones with high valued jobs such as the Professional Services, even after the teleworkability of jobs is accounted for. Additionally, the findings show that a low compliance to interventions can be overcome by a longer shutdown period and vice versa to arrive at similar epidemiological impact but their net effect on economic loss depends on the interplay between the marginal gains from avertingmore »infections and deaths, versus the marginal loss from having healthy workers stay at home during the shutdown.« less
  5. In evaluating the appropriate response to the covid-19 pandemic, a key parameter is the rate of substitution between wealth and mortality risk, conventionally summarized as the value per statistical life (VSL). For the United States, VSL is estimated as approximately $10 million, which implies the value of preventing 100,000 covid-19 deaths is $1 trillion. Is this value too large? There are reasons to think so. First, VSL is a marginal rate of substitution and the potential risk reductions are non-marginal. The standard VSL model implies the rate of substitution of wealth for risk reduction is smaller when the risk reduction is larger, but a closed-form solution calibrated to estimates of the income elasticity of VSL shows the rate of decline is modest until the value of a non-marginal risk reduction accounts for a substantial share of income; average individuals are predicted to be willing to spend more than half their income to reduce one-year mortality risk by 1 in 100. Second, mortality risk is concentrated among the elderly, for whom VSL may be smaller and who would benefit from a persistent risk reduction for a shorter period because of their shorter life expectancy. Third, the pandemic and responses to itmore »have caused substantial losses in income that should decrease VSL. In contrast, VSL is plausibly larger for risks (like covid-19) that are dreaded, uncertain, catastrophic, and ambiguous. These arguments are evaluated and key issues for improving estimates are highlighted.« less