• Publicationsclose
• Research dataclose
• 2018-2022close
• Preprint close
• FR close
• Hyper Article en Ligne - Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société close
• COVID-19 close

On both sides of the Atlantic, in Anglo-Saxon countries, the issue of excess mortality due to Covid-19 among members of minorities has emerged as a central social justice issue. Outside the Anglo-Saxon countries, where race and ethnicity are generally recorded, it is difficult to address this issue. However, in France, data for the period up to the end of confinement, mentioning country of birth and place of death, from "état-civil" files, allow comparisons to be made on the determinants of the severity of Covid-19 integrating ethnicity. Regression analyses based on the difference in death counts between the spring of 2020 and the same period of previous years, show that the interweaving of health status, household size and ethnicity accurately reflects the disparities between departmental mortality rates due to Covid-19. People born in Black Africa clearly appear to be in a worse position than those born in the Maghreb, in Asian and European countries, not to mention the natives, in terms of risk of death.

The European response to COVID-19 has revealed an inconvenient truth. Despite having integrated public health concerns across all its policies – be it agriculture, consumer protection, or security –, the Union cannot directly act to save people’s lives. Only member states can do so. Yet when they adopted unilateral measures to counter the spread of the virus, those proved not only ineffective but also disruptive on vital supply chains, by ultimately preventing the flow of essential goods and people across the Union. These fragmented efforts in tackling cross-border health threats have almost immediately prompted political calls for the urgent creation of a European Health Union. Yet this call raises more questions than answers. With the aim to offer a rigorous and timely blueprint to decision-makers and the public at large, this Special Issue of the European Journal of Risk Regulation contextualizes such a new political project within the broader constitutional and institutional framework of EU public health law and policy. By introducing the Special, this paper argues that unless the envisaged Health Union will tackle the root causes of what prevented the Union from effectively responding to COVID-19 – the divergent health capacity across the Union –, it might fall short of its declared objective of strengthening the EU’resilience for cross-border health threats.

Little is known about the general equilibrium impact COVID-19 induces on different gender groups. This paper addresses the problem of relatively few general equilibrium studies focusing on gender impacts of COVID-19. The analysis uses a gendered Computable General Equilibrium model linked to a microsimulation model that analyses a mild and severe scenario of the pandemic on economic and distributional outcomes for females. Irrespective of scenario, findings show that because women employment tend to have unskilled labour which is more concentrated in sectors that are hurt the most by COVID-19 response measures, they suffer disproportionately more from higher unemployment than their male counterparts. The poverty outcomes show worsened vulnerability for female-headed households given that, even prior to the pandemic, poverty was already higher amongst women. These simulated results are consistent with recently observed impacts and address research gaps important for well-designed public policies to reverse these trends.On connait peu les impacts d’équilibre général induits par la Covid-19 sur les groupes de genre différents. Cette étude adresse le problème de la pénurie d’études en équilibre général s’intéressant aux impacts de la COVID-19 sur le genre. L’analyse te combine un modèle d’équilibre général calculable sexo-spécifique avec un modèle de micro-simulation et évalue deux scenarios de la pandémie, l’un modéré et l’autre sévère, et leurs effets sur les résultats économiques et distributionnels des femmes. Quel que soit le scenario, les résultats démontrent que les femmes souffrent du chômage d’une manière disproportionée comparé aux hommes, puisque le travail des femmes tend à être du travail non qualifié, concentré dans les secteurs qui sont les plus frappés par les mesures de réponse à la COVID-19. En termes de pauvreté, les foyers dirigés par des femmes sont plus vulnérables, étant donné que même avant la pandémie, la pauvreté était déjà plus élevée chez les femmes. Les résultats simulés par cette étude concordent avec les impacts récemment observés, et abordent les lacunes de recherche nécessaires pour modéliser des politiques publiques bien conçues afin de renverser ces tendances.

Even though much has been learned about the new pathogen SARS-CoV-2 since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, a lot of uncertainty remains. In this paper we argue that what is important to know under uncertainty is whether harm accelerates and whether health policies achieve deceleration of harm. For this, we need to see cases in relation to diagnostic effort and not to look at indicators based on cases only, such as a number of widely used epidemiological indicators, including the reproduction number, do. To do so overlooks a crucial dimension, namely the fact that the best we can know about cases will depend on some welldefined strategy of diagnostic effort, such as testing in the case of COVID-19. We will present a newly developed indicator to observe harm, the acceleration index, which is essentially an elasticity of cases in relation to tests. We will discuss what efficiency of testing means and propose that the corresponding health policy goal should be to find ever fewer cases with an ever-greater diagnostic effort. Easy and low-threshold testing will also be a means to give back people’s sovereignty to lead their life in an “open” as opposed to “locked-down” society.

We see spikes in unemployment rates and turbulence in the securities markets during the COVID-19 pandemic. Governments are responding with aggressive monetary expansions and large-scale economic relief plans. We discuss the implications on banks and the economy of prudential regulatory intervention to soften the treatment of non-performing loans and ease bank capital buffers. We apply these easing measures on a sample of Globally Systemically Important Banks (G-SIBs) and show that these banks can play a constructive role in sustaining economic growth during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, softening the treatment of non-performing loans along with easing capital buffers should not undermine banks' solvency in the recovery period. Banks should maintain usable buffer in the medium-term horizon to absorb future losses, as the effect of COVID-19 on the economy might take time to fully materialise.

Cahiers Risques et Résilience; International audience; Cet article s’intéresse au construit théorique de l’agilité, perçu comme un moyen pour répondre aux difficultés du management, dans le but de permettre aux entreprises de faire face à un univers incertain, non prédictible, en rupture et instable. Un outil qui offre aux organisations l’opportunité d’accompagner le processus transformationnel et organisationnel vers un nouveau cycle de croissance, ce paradigme prend en compte la dimension humaine au service du changement dans les années 90. Depuis, le construit connaît un véritable engouement au sein de la communauté scientifique notamment sur ses pratiques et attributs. Si les entreprises ont pris conscience qu’il faut changer de modèle de management et d’organisation, très peu d’entre elles savent comment y arriver. À partir d’une étude qualitative menée auprès des entreprises à dimension européenne, ce papier présente et discute les résultats des entretiens exploratoires pour savoir comment les organisations se saisissent de cet outil et les pratiques et attributs qu’elles utilisent pour s’inscrire dans une nouvelle approche organisationnelle dans des situations inédites et urgentes.

En trois mois, le nouveau coronavirus SRAS-CoV-2 et la coronavirus disease CoViD-19 ont fait le tour du globe et déclenché une crise planétaire sans précédent dans l’histoire de l’humanité. Cet ébranlement anthropologique requiert un effort de la pensée pour y faire face et créer du sens. Rarement un épisode dramatique n’aura d’ailleurs généré autant de solidarités, d’interrogations et de propositions pour amélio­rer la société ! À côté de nombreuses autres voix, les lignes qui suivent proposent quelques hypothèses bien sûr fort provisoires pour nourrir la réflexion et le débat…

1st lines: In the upcoming European Council on July 17 and 18, EU member states will fight for a compromise on the European Commission’s main project to tackle the economic fallout of the Covid-19 crisis across Europe: a new 7-year EU budget propped up with a temporary Recovery Instrument (Next Generation EU) amounting to EUR 750 bn of jointly issued debt and to be passed on to EU countries as grants and loans. It is one of the most ambitious in a long line of proposals for European debt mutualisation. While joint borrowing can carry a lot of advantages, debt mutualisation has always been very controversial. Confrontations between those countries supposedly benefiting and losing from mutualising debt have repeatedly centered on the legitimate balance of solidarity and responsibility that such debt implies. Democratic legitimacy in solidarity-responsibility arrangements can be achieved when they can deliver in terms of output legitimacy (being effective in economic terms), input legitimacy (ensuring sufficient room for domestic politics in deciding national policy trajectories) and throughput legitimacy (being run in a transparent and accountable manner).