COVID-19: The Lessons We Should Have Learned from Existing Literature
- PDF / 631,377 Bytes
- 12 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 87 Downloads / 186 Views
REVIEW PAPER
COVID‑19: The Lessons We Should Have Learned from Existing Literature Michael Jefferson1 Received: 15 June 2020 / Revised: 13 August 2020 / Accepted: 14 August 2020 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
Abstract The linkages between natural resources and human well-being lie at the heart of biophysical economics. Huge disruptions to human well-being which can occur as a result of the impact of particular natural resources or species are, or should be, an obvious focus of interest for the biophysical economist whose focus is on flows between the natural world and human society. The causes and consequences of such disruptions, such as emanate from pandemics and epidemics, are a clear example of this. There is a need for better understanding of these causes and consequences. As an example, twelve books on epidemics and pandemics are considered here as providing the core for what guidance they might, and should, have provided on the sources, spreaders, and responses to COVID-19. A substantial amount of guidance is given in these and other sources referenced, which if followed would have reduced spread and mortality, but in far too many countries preparedness and speed of responses were inadequate. An effective global network and funding are required, as long advocated, but still not implemented. The economic and resource costs of this failure are huge. Keyword COVID-19 · Preparedness · Speed of responses · Ongoing awareness
Introduction COVID-19, or SARS2-CoV2, is still with us. By 12 July 2020, over 560,000 deaths, and over 12.5 million cases, had been attributed to it—and rising. The debate continues as to how well prepared countries and people around the world were for it; the timeliness and soundness of responses; and how aware politicians, ‘scientists’, and the public were that “the Next Big One” pandemic was just around the corner? The focus of biophysical economics has always been on the intimate connection between the human economy and the natural environment, the needs of human society derived from natural resources, and the dependence of the natural environment to some degree upon human interventions. When those flows are severely disrupted the consequences can be dire, and few more obvious examples exist than those which flow from pandemics and epidemics. The principles lying behind biophysical economics have long been set out by the leading scholars in this field such * Michael Jefferson [email protected] 1
ESCP Europe Business School, London UK Campus, 527 Finchley Road, London NW3 7BG, UK
as Cutler Cleveland, Charles Hall, Robert Kaufmann, and their inspiration—Howard Odum. It was Howard Odum who referred to the “network nightmare” when stating that “the difficulties of managing nature and man can be stated in circuit terms” (Odum 1971, p. 274). Energy was being considered in its broadest ecological sense, mostly positive and essential for human existence, but also disruptive and even destructive. The focus of these luminaries in more recent years has been mainly on mainstream ene
Data Loading...
