Cross-Country Effects and Policy Responses to COVID-19 in 2020: The Nordic Countries

Abstract

We provide a three-step analysis of the effects and responses to COVID-19 in Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden), large Western European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and United Kingdom) and OECD Europe. First, we compare public health trends over 2020 in terms of per capita COVID-19 cases, fatalities, testing and the stringency of social distancing (SD) measures. Second, in a 'like-with-like' policy response model between Nordic countries, we test for the effects of air border closures on the growth in per capita COVID-19 cases while accounting for differences in stringency of social distancing and other measures. Third, using data from OECD European countries, we regress percentage change in GDP (2020-2019) on cumulative per capita national COVID-19 fatalities. We find that: (1) Sweden is an outlier, relative to its Nordic neighbours, in its COVID-19 public health outcomes; (2) Sweden would have had reduced cases and fatalities if it had adopted the air border closures implemented by its Nordic neighbours in the first half of 2020; and, (3) for OECD Europe, there is a statistically significant and negative association between per capita COVID-19 fatalities and economic performance.

The economic reaction to non-pharmaceutical interventions during Covid-19

“…Interestingly, they show that speedier, stricter, and longer NPIs were associated with better economic outcomes in the long run. A somehow contrary view is that held by Gordon et al (2021) , which showed that in Nordic countries at least, poorer public health performance in the containment of Covid-related deaths led to a poorer economic performance. Nonetheless, and as highlighted by Watkins and Maruthappu (2021) , the first year of the pandemic was characterized by the continuous attempt of governments to find the tipping point between public health and economic responses.…”

Nonpharmaceutical interventions in Turkey and worldwide during COVID-19 pandemic

“…Unlike Scandinavian countries, which closed their air borders at the beginning of the pandemic, Sweden kept its air borders open and did not apply quarantine to those entering the country. It was stated that the increase in the number of COVID-19 cases and the number of COVID-19-related deaths in the country where the necessary measures to ensure social distance were not mandatory, was higher than in the neighbouring Scandinavian countries [28].…”

The effect of the pandemic on complex socio-economic systems: community detection induced by communicability

“…It is also interesting to note the different behaviour of Sweden, that seems not so closed to the other European countries providing a negative correlation. Sweden indeed has been characterized by a different national strategy with respect to the other countries and it has represented an outlier with cases and deaths increasing more rapidly than in its Nordic neighbours in the second wave of COVID-19 (see, e.g., Claeson and Hanson (2021) and Gordon et al (2021)). It is also noticeable the behaviour of Japan, United States and Israel that seem connected to the dense European group but at the same time, to confirm their specific behaviour.…”

“…This is mainly motivated by the fact that the country had relaxed requirement during the fist pandemic wave. For instance, Sweden maintained an open border in the first half of 2020 within the EU and beyond and imposed no quarantine requirements for arrivals (Gordon et al (2021)). In addition to an open border, Sweden minimised its government-mandated social distancing measures and placed a greater reliance on voluntary behaviours of Swedish residents to comply with national health advisories (see, e.g., Paterlini (2020) and Ludvigsson (2020)).…”