Skip to main content
Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2020 Sep 18;23(6):8559–8572. doi: 10.1007/s10668-020-00982-w

Double-hit scenario of Covid-19 and global value chains

Muhammad Zeshan 1,2,
PMCID: PMC7499944  PMID: 32982574

Abstract

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, labor force is greatly confined by quarantine (social distancing), and limited units of labor and capital are available at the workplace. Millions of employees have lost their jobs and are facing financial hardships. Likewise, capital owners have become illiquid and possibly insolvent within months. This cycle seems to continue for other factors of production as well. Even after lifting quarantines, the global trade might take months (years) to return to its actual potential. Using the GTAP-VA model, the present study simulates the impact of the double-hit scenario of Covid-19 on the global value chains and identifies production losses in different sectors of the world economy.

Keywords: Covid-19, Economy, Global value chains

Introduction

Global trade is rapidly transforming in the coronavirus era. OECD (2020) states that the economic cost of the ongoing pandemic can range between 2.47% (China) to 14.36% (Spain) in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) in the second phase of this pandemic. It will have a devastating impact on the world trade, and there is a need of more robust global supply chains, with more stable bilateral and multilateral trade systems. On the other hand, many global leaders are questioning the role of increasing economic ties beyond the national borders.

Amid growing uncertainty, there is a need to find collective solutions to recover from this ongoing crisis and rebuild a better post-Covid world, which, however, depends on many aspects. For instance, rebuilding such a post-Covid world requires a deeper understanding of trade flows. In the absence of this knowledge, national governments will find it much difficult to reform a more resilient post-pandemic trade era.

The Covid-19 virus grows at the exponential rate, and the rising uncertainty leads to the loss of investment and escalates fluctuations in international trade (Ozili and Arun 2020). Service-oriented economies, particularly dependent on tourism industry, are more affected such as Greece, Spain and Portugal, where the economic losses are even higher than 15% of GDP (Fernandes 2020). The present crisis is creating a spillover effect throughout supply chains, and countries dependent on global trade face severe economic turbulences.

Over 50% of the global trade occurs in intermediate products, and most of the countries use the foreign goods as inputs to boost their exports (Zeshan 2019). The fragmented production via intermediate products passes through numerous borders, sometimes more than once. Hence, the global economy is steadily shaping in global value chains (GVCs). However, the traditional trade data are limited, unable to assess the original contribution of domestic output in global trade since the value-added content in gross exports of a region does not truly represent total value of gross exports because the gross exports also comprise value-added contribution from various other countries. Further, trade deficit of a nation might get lower if stated in value-added terms instead of gross trade. This phenomenon is much apparent in case of high-tech goods (Xing and Detert 2010); many components of such goods are imported globally where tracing back the actual producer is almost impossible.

To examine the effect of Covid-19 pandemic on global trade, the present study introduces the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic in the GTAP-VA model by reducing the supply of factors of production (such as labor force, capital stock and land rents) caused by the pandemic. More specifically, it simulates the impact of a second outbreak of the pandemic on GVCs in 2020. For this purpose, it uses a global input–output table of 140 regions representing more than 98% of global GDP. Finally, it splits the gross trade flows in domestic and foreign value-added, in direct and indirect value-added from exporting and supporting industries, and in bilateral and multilateral value-added.

The rest of the study is as follows. The research methodology is provided in the next section. Section 3 provides simulation design and data, whereas Sect. 4 describes simulation results. Conclusion and policy recommendations are provided in Sect. 5. Finally, Sect. 6 provides the limitations of this research work.

Research methodology

Following the GTAP-VA framework, the following equation describes the value of industry j in region r, which is equal to the sum of intermediate inputs i (Zijsr) and value-added (VAjr), for details see Antimiani et al. (2018).

VOMjr=isZijsr+VAjr 1

The intermediate inputs can be described as follows:

Aijsr=ZijsrVOMjr 2

where Aijsr represents the share of intermediate inputs i manufactured in region s, consumed by sector j in country r in the production process. In a country r, shares of sectoral value-added become:

VSHjr=VAjrVOMjr 3

Further transformation leads to value-added created (in sector i) in country t, rooted in the exports (VXEjsr) of the country s (sector j) to country r (TVAijtsr) and becomes:

TVAijtsr=VS^HitLijtsVXEjsr 4

Equation (4) indicates the value-added within the gross traded goods that are rooted in all the inputs acquired locally or imported.

Simulation design and dataset

In the current Covid-19 pandemic, labor force is greatly confined by quarantine (social distancing), reducing wages and returns on investment. Thus, less labor and capital units are available at the workplace. Millions of employees have lost their jobs and are facing financial hardship. Likewise, capital owners have become illiquid and possibly insolvent within months. Both labor force and capital stock have reduced, and the link between them is clear. This cycle seems to continue for some time even after lifting quarantines, and the economy might take months (years) to return to its actual potential. In the GTAP-VA model, manufacturers pay land rents to regional households, who own the endowments. Hence, the reducing demand for land shrinks its rent causing a loss of revenue to a regional household during the time of crisis.

The above-mentioned changes are introduced in the GTAP-VA model by reducing levels of factors of production, also known as endowments, such that the loss of GDP in our model is approximately equal to the estimates provided by OECD (2020). Given the odd level of uncertainty triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic, it estimates that impact of a second outbreak of the pandemic on the GDP of all the countries worldwide in the year 2020.

For this purpose, the present study uses the GTAP database version 9 (Aguiar et al. 2016). It combines the input–output tables of all the 140 countries/regions under analysis and links them through trade flows resulting in a global input–output table. All the countries/regions in the database are grouped into 15 countries/regions, and all the sectors are grouped into 10 sectors. The most detailed description of the dataset is provided in “Appendix.”

Simulation results

The simulation results indicate that the Covid-19 pandemic has a negative impact on all the sectors of the global economy (Fig. 1). The most affected sectors comprise textiles and clothing, light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing, whereas the most affected countries/regions include Oceania, Nepal, North America, EU_28 and MENA. The production losses in the global economy reduce the welfare level and the GDP worldwide. The highest losses are witnesses in EU_28 and North America (Fig. 2), where welfare and GDP losses are USD 1517 billion and 10% in EU_28, while the respective losses are 1433 billion and 10% in North America.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Production losses (%)

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Welfare losses (USD million) and real GDP (%)

Overall, the simulation results reveal that global welfare losses are going to be around 4.6 trillion (5.2% of global GDP), which is consistent with The World Bank (2020). To recover from such huge economic downfall, there is a need to focus on the most devastated sectors of the global economy by strengthen the backward and forward production linkages. It can be done through a timely and targeted fiscal stimulus in a coordinated way where suitable public resources can be employed to healthcare sector as well as to economic sectors. Besides, there is a need to provide extra liquidity to the small and medium labor-intensive enterprises.

The production losses caused by the Covid-19 pandemic disrupt global trade. Nearly 50% of the world trade occurs in intermediate imports as most of the countries use foreign intermediate inputs in exporting industries. Decomposing the gross trade flows in local and overseas value-added contents describes a clear picture of the world economy. Hence, gross trade is divided into several types of value-added contents such as domestic contribution (DVA), foreign contribution (FVA),1 direct domestic contribution from exporting industries (DVA_dir), indirect contribution from supporting industries (DVA_indir),2 direct contribution in bilateral (DVA_blt) trade and contribution in multilateral trade (DVA_mlt).3

Analysis of DVA indicates that extraction, light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing are the most affected sectors worldwide (Table 3). The extraction sector is affected the most in MENA region where the DVA reduces by around USD 52 billion, while the highest loss to DVA in light manufacturing industry is around 21 billion and 43 billion in East Asian and EU_28. Further, the heavy manufacturing sector bears the highest losses in North America and EU_28, which are 53 billion and 88 billion, respectively. The similar trend is witnessed in case of FVA (Table 4). It specifies that the exporting industry is heavily dependent on both domestic and foreign value-added contents. However, the volume of FVA content is much smaller than the DVA content.

Table 3.

Change in domestic value-added (DVA) in gross trade (USD million) (a positive value indicates losses, whereas a negative value indicates gains)

Oceania East Asia SEAsia Bgd Ind Npl Pak Sri
GrainsCrops 473 − 303 416 5 732 − 15 48 92
MeatLstk 1118 − 8 78 0 301 − 1 9 1
Extraction 7830 223 1237 1 359 − 4 1 13
ProcFood 1252 865 2438 28 761 − 3 64 70
TextWapp 136 6983 1525 1174 2096 − 24 1024 182
LightMnfc 1181 21,354 3013 39 3023 − 8 153 37
HeavyMnfc 4600 43,287 12,066 25 4681 − 3 179 83
Util_Cons 92 1150 260 2 52 − 4 5 2
TransComm 2042 7561 3486 19 1051 − 8 113 82
OthServices 2411 7063 3463 117 3832 − 21 221 41
Xsa NAmerica LatinAmer EU_28 MENA SSA ROW
GrainsCrops 3 3390 2330 685 278 501 644
MeatLstk 1 984 1264 924 92 90 85
Extraction 10 2592 9640 1425 51,992 14,034 21,266
ProcFood 4 2129 4442 5432 719 592 1459
TextWapp 1 1053 1259 4319 3218 275 432
LightMnfc 2 18,962 3262 42,894 4367 1253 3486
HeavyMnfc 15 53,331 13,140 87,595 23,148 4873 29,853
Util_Cons 12 955 235 3096 924 161 1500
TransComm 25 9499 3895 19,862 7062 1442 4993
OthServices 24 25,658 4038 32,737 6749 1511 7118

Own calculations

Table 4.

Change in foreign value-added (FVA) in gross trade (USD million)

Oceania East Asia SEAsia Bgd Ind Npl Pak Sri
GrainsCrops 49 − 5 71 2 92 0 13 10
MeatLstk 130 4 13 0 17 0 1 0
Extraction 639 43 183 0 43 0 0 1
ProcFood 167 199 635 13 116 0 7 11
TextWapp 26 1566 940 515 512 − 13 295 107
LightMnfc 259 5366 1601 13 1206 − 3 22 30
HeavyMnfc 1367 16,315 8464 11 3820 − 6 71 81
Util_Cons 12 230 95 0 15 − 1 2 0
TransComm 233 734 812 2 130 − 2 13 10
OthServices 160 462 487 8 208 − 3 21 2
Xsa NAmerica LatinAmer EU_28 MENA SSA ROW
GrainsCrops 0 387 234 69 38 49 114
MeatLstk 0 86 89 91 17 9 16
Extraction 1 157 709 119 3631 1568 1873
ProcFood 2 229 458 592 196 111 328
TextWapp 1 190 226 691 946 65 191
LightMnfc 1 2875 573 6697 1630 341 1110
HeavyMnfc 15 12,258 2726 21,519 4736 1607 8850
Util_Cons 2 84 27 385 226 36 246
TransComm 3 628 288 1995 1032 236 673
OthServices 3 1062 149 1634 543 164 653

Own calculations

Further analysis of the simulation results indicates that the exporting industries use inputs directly and indirectly from different countries and sectors (Tables 5 and 6). The DVA_dir shows the same pattern as DVA, which portrays that DVA_dir has a high contribution in DVA. Further, DVA_indir shows heavy losses in transport and communication sectors along with the previously mentioned sectors. Hence, many industries are indirectly affected when there is a decrease in DVA due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Table 5.

Change in direct (DVA_dir) value-added in domestic value-added (USD million)

Oceania East Asia SEAsia Bgd Ind Npl Pak Sri
GrainsCrops 251 − 249 319 1 506 − 14 15 81
MeatLstk 568 − 5 48 0 204 − 1 5 1
Extraction 5291 114 970 0 282 − 3 0 13
ProcFood 482 395 1295 11 254 − 1 29 47
TextWapp 81 3468 1076 667 943 − 12 213 126
LightMnfc 639 10,369 1819 15 1565 − 3 30 26
HeavyMnfc 1911 25,835 7748 8 2451 − 2 42 56
Util_Cons 48 520 145 2 31 − 2 2 2
TransComm 1347 5433 2702 17 857 − 6 98 71
OthServices 2091 5881 2997 88 3553 − 16 153 34
Xsa NAmerica LatinAmer EU_28 MENA SSA ROW
GrainsCrops 2 1421 1338 375 192 417 423
MeatLstk 1 372 721 458 54 59 41
Extraction 9 1874 6768 952 48,496 10,934 14,994
ProcFood 3 979 1832 2681 358 261 662
TextWapp 0 581 801 2560 1961 125 261
LightMnfc 1 10,561 1811 23,417 2646 605 1900
HeavyMnfc 8 28,858 6701 55,198 12,118 2280 12,745
Util_Cons 7 557 150 1807 488 103 892
TransComm 22 6713 2947 11,704 5322 1145 3869
OthServices 21 22,033 3488 28,380 5817 1246 6024

Own calculations

Table 6.

Change in indirect value-added (DVA_indir) in domestic value-added (USD million)

Oceania East Asia SEAsia Bgd Ind Npl Pak Sri
GrainsCrops 130 850 554 78 486 − 5 90 15
MeatLstk 170 667 109 4 120 − 2 36 5
Extraction 995 773 1327 21 518 − 1 23 4
ProcFood 88 695 171 8 26 0 37 1
TextWapp 33 556 91 0 26 − 1 1 1
LightMnfc 451 2779 552 16 249 − 1 16 3
HeavyMnfc 480 5296 836 18 531 − 1 30 12
Util_Cons 798 1818 574 60 673 − 1 35 20
TransComm 1913 11,009 3023 356 2294 − 12 531 72
OthServices 3368 11,975 1627 42 1320 − 5 432 12
Xsa NAmerica LatinAmer EU_28 MENA SSA ROW
GrainsCrops 1 227 918 684 350 195 217
MeatLstk 1 168 335 496 157 61 141
Extraction 3 6510 2428 3351 8721 608 7953
ProcFood 1 398 286 1336 162 86 215
TextWapp 0 349 144 601 163 56 92
LightMnfc 1 3015 1045 6587 756 388 1147
HeavyMnfc 1 4025 1643 10,018 2867 577 1269
Util_Cons 1 3720 1126 5659 1206 417 3499
TransComm 8 12,709 4976 11,097 3619 3157 8512
OthServices 6 13,484 4051 31,606 3097 2011 5977

Own calculations

The losses to value-added content are quite alarming in the bilateral as well as multilateral trade (Tables 7 and 8). In case of former, EU_28 witnesses the highest loss (199 billion), whereas the South Asian region bears the lowest losses (20.7 billion). Extraction, light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing industries face the highest losses. In case of the latter, MENA region experiences the highest losses, whereas South Asian region experiences the lowest level of losses (2.8 billion). Extraction, heavy manufacturing and other services face the highest losses.

Table 7.

Change in bilateral (DVA_blt) value-added in domestic value-added (USD million)

Oceania East Asia SEAsia Bgd Ind Npl Pak Sri
GrainsCrops 473 − 303 416 5 732 − 15 48 92
MeatLstk 1118 − 8 78 0 301 − 1 9 1
Extraction 7830 223 1237 1 359 − 4 1 13
ProcFood 1252 865 2438 28 761 − 3 64 70
TextWapp 136 6983 1525 1174 2096 − 24 1024 182
LightMnfc 1181 21,354 3013 39 3023 − 8 153 37
HeavyMnfc 4600 43,287 12,066 25 4681 − 3 179 83
Util_Cons 92 1150 260 2 52 − 4 5 2
TransComm 2042 7561 3486 19 1051 − 8 113 82
OthServices 2411 7063 3463 117 3832 − 21 221 41
Xsa NAmerica LatinAmer EU_28 MENA SSA ROW
GrainsCrops 3 3390 2330 685 278 501 644
MeatLstk 1 984 1264 924 92 90 85
Extraction 10 2592 9640 1425 51,992 14,034 21,266
ProcFood 4 2129 4442 5432 719 592 1459
TextWapp 1 1053 1259 4319 3218 275 432
LightMnfc 2 18,962 3262 42,894 4367 1253 3486
HeavyMnfc 15 53,331 13,140 87,595 23,148 4873 29,853
Util_Cons 12 955 235 3096 924 161 1500
TransComm 25 9499 3895 19,862 7062 1442 4993
OthServices 24 25,658 4038 32,737 6749 1511 7118

Own calculations

Table 8.

Change in multilateral value-added (DVA_mlt) in domestic value-added (USD million)

Oceania East Asia SEAsia Bgd Ind Npl Pak Sri
GrainsCrops 71 146 120 8 146 − 2 17 11
MeatLstk 86 99 19 0 37 0 5 0
Extraction 1950 229 599 2 177 − 1 4 4
ProcFood 56 141 100 1 21 0 6 4
TextWapp 22 623 134 56 130 − 1 30 11
LightMnfc 181 1401 285 3 204 − 1 6 3
HeavyMnfc 556 5007 1563 3 559 − 1 12 12
Util_Cons 195 328 106 6 110 0 5 3
TransComm 578 3137 1073 35 541 − 2 85 17
OthServices 996 2428 575 13 521 − 2 76 5
Xsa NAmerica LatinAmer EU_28 MENA SSA ROW
GrainsCrops 1 211 304 89 76 106 76
MeatLstk 0 53 94 71 20 16 20
Extraction 3 1439 2302 606 15,679 3346 5051
ProcFood 0 109 158 263 44 33 73
TextWapp 0 103 66 282 165 23 37
LightMnfc 0 1439 368 2483 386 153 394
HeavyMnfc 1 5169 1404 8544 2863 635 2484
Util_Cons 1 547 207 752 251 109 696
TransComm 5 2538 1203 2974 1356 846 2307
OthServices 3 3806 1036 5699 1060 613 1659

Own calculations

Conclusion and discussion

The recent Covid-19 pandemic has challenged the global economy and even triggered a trade war between USA and China. In China, the provinces accountable for more than 90% exports have closed their production units or running at a low production capacity (Sohrabi et al. 2020). However, preparing and in-time viral response standard before the general public might have saved many lives. Millions of workers are out of work because exporting industries face severe barriers.

Rebuilding a better post-Covid world requires a deeper understanding of lost trade flows. In the absence of such knowledge, national governments will face many difficulties to build a more resilient post-pandemic trade era. To examine the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on global trade, the present study simulates how a second outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic might shake the global value chains in 2020.

Analysis of simulation results indicates that DVA in extraction, light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing export industries are affected the most globally. The extraction sector faces the worst hit in MENA region where the DVA reduces by around USD 52 billion, while the highest loss to DVA in light manufacturing industry is around 21 billion and 43 billion in East Asian and EU_28, respectively. Further, the heavy manufacturing sector bears the highest output losses in North America and EU_28 and the similar trend is witnessed in case of FVA. Exporting sectors use inputs directly from exporting industries and indirectly from supporting industries. In case of export supporting industries, Covid-19 causes heavy losses to transport and communication sectors. Based on the simulation results, the present study suggests the following policy recommendations:

  • There is a need of a timely and targeted fiscal stimulus in a coordinated way.

  • Direct public resources to healthcare sector as well as to economic sectors.

  • Extra liquidity is needed to target small and medium labor-intensive enterprises.

  • Develop country specific short-term, medium-term and long-term initiatives for economic stimulus and market stability.

Limitations

  • This research work employs a static CGE framework for the short-run analysis. However, a dynamic CGE framework can provide a better long-run analysis.

  • The (sector and country/region) aggregation schemes offer a convenient way to discuss a global perspective; however, they are less useful for a country specific analysis.

Appendix: aggregation scheme

See Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.

Table 1.

Regional aggregation

S. no. Code Names Description
1 Oceania Australia, New Zealand Australia, New Zealand, Rest of Oceania
2 EastAsia East Asia China, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Mongolia, Taiwan, Rest of East Asia, Brunei Darussalam
3 SEAsia Southeast Asia Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Viet Nam, Rest of Southeast Asia
4 BGD Bangladesh Bangladesh
5 IND India India
6 NPL Nepal Nepal
7 PAK Pakistan Pakistan
8 LKA Sri Lanka Sri Lanka
9 XSA Rest of South Asia Rest of South Asia
10 NAmerica North America Canada, USA, Mexico, Rest of North America
11 LatinAmer Latin America Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela, Rest of South America, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, El Salvador, Rest of Central America, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, Trinidad and Tobago, Rest of Caribbean
12 EU_28 European Union Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, UK, Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania
13 MENA Middle East and North Africa Bahrain, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Rest of Western Asia, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Rest of North Africa,
14 SSA Sub-Saharan Africa Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Nigeria, Senegal, Togo, Rest of Western Africa, Rest of Central Africa, South Central Africa, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Rest of Eastern Africa, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, Rest of South African Customs Union
15 ROW Rest of World Switzerland, Norway, Rest of European Free Trade Association, Albania, Belarus, Russian Federation, Ukraine, Rest of Eastern Europe, Rest of Europe, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Rest of Former Soviet Union, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Rest of the World

Table 2.

Sectoral aggregation

S. no. Code Names Description
1 GrainsCrops Grains and crops Paddy rice, wheat, cereal grains nec, vegetables, fruit, nuts, oil seeds, sugar cane, sugar beet, plant-based fibers, crops nec, processed rice
2 MeatLstk Livestock and meat products Bovine cattle, sheep and goats, horses, animal products nec, Raw milk, wool, silkworm, cocoons, bovine meat products, meat products nec
3 Extraction Mining and extraction Forestry, fishing, coal, oil, gas, minerals nec
4 ProcFood Processed food Vegetable oils and fats, dairy products, sugar, food products nec, beverages and tobacco products
5 TextWapp Textiles and clothing Textiles, wearing apparel
6 LightMnfc Light manufacturing Leather products, wood products, paper products, publishing, metal products, motor vehicles and parts, transport equipment nec, manufactures nec
7 HeavyMnfc Heavy manufacturing Petroleum, coal products, chemical, rubber, plastic products, mineral products nec, ferrous metals, metals nec, electronic equipment, machinery and equipment nec
8 Util_Cons Utilities and construction Electricity, gas manufacture, distribution, water, construction
9 TransComm Transport and communication Trade, transport nec, water transport, air transport, communication
10 OthServices Other services Financial services nec, insurance, business services nec, recreational and other services, public administration, defense, education, health, dwellings

Footnotes

1

DVA indicates the domestic contribution in gross domestic exports, whereas the rest comes from FVA.

2

DVA_dir shows the output generated directly by domestic exporting sector, whereas DVA_indir specifies the output manufactured by domestic supporting industries.

3

DVA_blt indicates domestic value-added in bilateral exports, whereas DVA_mlt characterizes the value-added content of a country (A) integrated in exports from a third countries (C) to a country (B).

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  1. Aguiar A, Narayanan B, McDougall R. An overview of the GTAP 9 database. Journal of Global Economic Analysis. 2016;1(1):181–208. doi: 10.21642/JGEA.010103AF. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Antimiani A, Fusacchia I, Salvatici L. GTAP-VA: An integrated tool for global value chain analysis. Journal of Global Economic Analysis. 2018;3(2):69–105. doi: 10.21642/JGEA.030202AF. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Fernandes, N. (2020). Economic effects of coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19) on the world economy. Available at SSRN 3557504.
  4. OECD. (2020). Economic outlook no 107: June 2020—Double-hit scenario. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EO. Retrieved July 07, 2020.
  5. Ozili, P. K., & Arun, T. (2020). Spillover of COVID-19: Impact on the global economy. Available at SSRN 3562570.
  6. Sohrabi C, Alsafi Z, O’Neill N, Khan M, Kerwan A, Al-Jabir A, Iosifidis C, Agha R. World Health Organization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) International Journal of Surgery. 2020;76:71–76. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.02.034. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. The World Bank (2020). The global economic outlook during the COVID-19 pandemic: A changed world. https://tinyurl.com/ycpxn4lb. Retrieved August 2, 2020.
  8. Xing, Y., & Detert, N. (2010). How iPhones widens the US trade deficits with PRC. GRIPS discussion paper (pp. 10–21).
  9. Zeshan M. Carbon footprint accounts of Pakistan: an input-output life cycle assessment model. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2019;26(29):30313–30323. doi: 10.1007/s11356-019-06196-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Environment, Development and Sustainability are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES