Mowshumi Sharmin :
In 2019, WHO confirmed five “Public Health Emergencies of International Concern.” The number six declaration came on 30 January 2020, for the escalating COVID-19 outbreak. It is a global crisis and responsible for severe disruptions related to trade, travel, economy, health in national as well as international trajectories consistently forcing us to reevaluate human and economic cohorts.
Given the situation the world is swaying like a pendulum between whether to save human life or economy-life or livelihood. In the war economy seems to be victorious over human at present. If we go through the decisions of the policy makers in the past few months all over the world, we will find that the country that give priority livelihood over life lost both.
On the contrary, those who value life over livelihood though initially faces some economic hurdles eventually became victorious. The best example of giving priority of human life includes countries like Bhutan, Vietnam, Hong Kong, Australia, Denmark, Norway, Canada, New Zealand and Finland and there are also countries on the other side of the coin that are not doing well.
To fathom the spread of the pandemic is very challenging as the way the virus spread in different countries, states or regions has been quite diverse. First group of countries i.e. Bhutan, Vietnam and to some extent Nepal were closed at early stage with mandatory quarantine of those coming from outside as controlling mechanism.
Second cluster of countries those disconnected after being affected and gave priority to life saving includes New Zealand, Australia and Canada. They managed the spread and transmission by strict early border control measures and implemented strict social distancing rules at all spheres of life closing educational and religious institutes, entertainment venues.
Third group, Japan, Germany and South Korea took education and health measures continued with livelihood became good examples. These countries’ investment in health, education, research and innovation and the people’s response and learning towards the taken policy of testing, tracing, isolation and treatment was conducive towards a successful journey.
Conversely, the fourth group Italy, France, Spain and UK took late measures given priority of life and livelihood and the mass people also take it lightly thus experienced a high explosion of cases which overwhelmed the respective country’s health system. Regrettably Italy’s death toll mounts as a warning sign of aftermath of late strict decision and let the virus spread unchecked. The UK also responded to the transmission lately in pursue of attaining ‘herd immunity’ but later is on the verge of success after a huge death toll.
The fifth cluster is complete livelihood focused – USA, Mexico, Brazil and Peru where COVID-19 takes it ghoulish toll overwhelming the entire health system. To protect livelihood life was ignored, there were inefficient lockdown which shattered the city lives and will bear mark of the economic shock of this epidemic for many years to come compared to many other countries. Providence forbade Bangladesh to follow their path to represent this group. For the time being, Germany and Austria stand out as nations that adopted aggressive and early control strategies compared with Italy, France and Spain. Poorer nations seemed to take stricter measures than did the richer ones, fathoming their fragile health-care facility. Countries like Nepal and Bhutan could gauge the scale of the impending calamity and realizing their ability they took earlier decision to stop the transmission. Truly coined a stitch in time saves nine.
Put it that way, the realization of the situation and take action to avert it needed to be coined. But history demonstrates that in the wake of pandemics, human life often loses out to economic imperatives. Crucial lessons should be drawn from previous few century outbreaks during which to save economy won out over moral concerns.
Be it a plague or pandemic, the story tends to remain the same the quest for economic gain eventually prevailing over concerns of human being. There is no denying the fact that as COVID-19 extents across the world, dilemmas of significant moral and theological magnitude have appeared. The discussion of life versus livelihood is out of the scene in most of the cases.
Due to the incomparable nature of COVID-19 circumstances in this era of globalization with various cross boundary issues the world opts for rehumanization of globalization and harmonious actions steered by experts further guided by data-driven research models for sustainable solution. The existing trove of coronavirus datasets and extant literature could be used in research to stop COVID-19. Clean, fact-based, accurate information is vital in this respect.
Within this ample framework of complexity, policy makers and leaders both at country and global level must make prudent decisions, and hardly ever has that been more exact than these days when the tiny virus has unsettled our economic, social, financial, and emotional lives. It is time we should rise above thinking only of our personal gain and learn from our mistakes. Proper implementation of the policies undertaken is expected from all concerned. Taking the best examples of countries that stand out in this pandemic we are hoping against hope that we could see the light on the other side of the tunnel. Better late than never because human life is precious and non-replaceable.
(Mowshumi Sharmin is an Assistant Director (Research) at Bangladesh Institute of Governance and Management. E-mail: mowshumi405 @gmail.com)
