ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022
The perceived effectiveness and hidden inequity of postpandemic fiscal stimuli.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- How does COVID-19 lockdown affect air quality: Evidence from Lanzhou, a large city in Northwest China.Urban climate · 2023Article
- The Russia-Ukraine war disproportionately threatens the nutrition security of developing countries.Discover sustainability · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The world has committed trillions in fiscal expenditures to reboot the economy in the post–COVID-19 era. However, the effectiveness and the equity impacts of current fiscal stimuli are not fully understood. Using an extended adaptive regional input–output model, we assess the short-term impacts (2020 through 2022) of feasible stimuli on the global economy and the labor market. Our findings show that the stimuli pledged by 26 countries, i.e., 2.4 trillion euros in total, are effective in keeping the recession short and shallow by saving 53 million to 57 million jobs (compared to the no-stimulus scenario). However, the stimuli exacerbate income inequity at the global scale if we define “equity” as those who suffer more from the pandemic should receive more assistance. Low-skilled workers in these countries, who suffer more from the pandemic than high-skilled workers, benefit 38 to 41% less from the job-creation effects of the current fiscal stimuli. As an alternative, low-carbon stimuli can achieve a balance between effectiveness and equity at the global level. Low-carbon stimuli save 55 million to 58 million jobs and decrease income inequality by 2 to 3% globally compared to the currently pledged stimuli. Country-level situations are more complicated, as modifying the current stimuli to achieve more “greenness” brings win–win in effectiveness and equity in some countries, while in the others, more greenness and equity are at the expense of less job savings. Our findings underscore the need to consider the overlooked trade-offs between effectiveness, equity, and greenness, both globally and nationally, when designing further postpandemic fiscal stimuli.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.