The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered an unprecedented economic crisis. This article analyses the impact of mandatory social distancing imposed by lockdown policies and voluntary social distancing triggered by COVID-19 fatality rates on GDP growth in the first three quarters of 2020 for a sample of 42 countries. OLS and IV results indicate an important role for the fatality rate, while panel regressions show that lockdown stringency is the more important driver of growth. When including lagged variables, more restrictive measures lead to lower GDP growth in the same quarter but are associated with a positive, catching-up effect in the following quarter.

The coronavirus pandemic led to substantial revisions of 2020 GDP growth projections. We analyse whether and to what extent the quality of government policies in handling the health aspects of the crisis influence cross-country differences in the economic impact of the pandemic as projected by the OECD, the IMF and the World Bank. We measure policy quality by a recently published Economist Intelligence Unit index and a COVID-19 Misery index combining the stringency of government-imposed distancing measures with the COVID-19 fatality rate. Moreover, we control for international spillovers captured by trade openness and export exposure to tourism. Results for most specifications show that good government performance pays off as the respective countries record less severe revisions of growth forecasts. Only in a few cases, our findings suggest that the pandemic’s global effect might be so strong that actions by individual governments do not affect cross-country differences of growth revisions. Finally, there is broad evidence supporting the view that a country’s exposure to the global economy influences its growth outlook relative to other countries.

We analyze whether and to what extent strategies employed by governments to fight the COVID-19 pandemic made a difference for GDP growth developments in 2020. Based on the strength and speed with which governments imposed non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) when confronted with waves of infections we distinguish between countries pursuing an elimination strategy and countries following a suppression / mitigation strategy. For a sample of 44 countries fixed effect panel regression results show that NPI changes conducted by elimination strategy countries had a less severe effect on GDP growth than NPI changes in suppression / mitigation strategy countries: strategy matters. However, this result is sensitive to the countries identified as “elimination countries” and to the sample composition. Moreover, we find that exogenous country characteristics drive the choice of strategy. At the same time our results show that countries successfully applying the elimination strategy achieved better health outcomes than their peers without having to accept lower growth.

A mid-century net zero target creates a challenge for reducing the emissions of emissions-intensive, trade-exposed sectors with high cost mitigation options. These sectors include aluminium, cement, chemicals, iron and steel, lime, pulp and paper and petroleum refining. Available studies agree that decarbonization of these sectors is possible by mid-century if more ambitious policies are implemented soon. Existing carbon pricing policies have had limited impact on the emissions of these sectors because their marginal abatement costs almost always exceed the tax rate or allowance price. But emissions trading systems with free allowance allocations to emissions-intensive, trade-exposed sectors have minimized the adverse economic impacts and associated leakage. Internationally coordinated policies are unlikely, so implementing more ambitious policies creates a risk of leakage. This paper presents policy packages a country can implement to accelerate emission reduction by these sectors with minimal risk of leakage. To comply with international trade law the policy packages differ for producers whose goods compete with imports in the domestic market and producers whose goods are exported. Carbon pricing is a critical component of each package due its ability to minimize the risk of adverse economic impacts on domestic industry, support innovation and generate revenue. The revenue can be used to assist groups adversely impacted by the domestic price and production changes due to carbon pricing and to build public support for the policies. Key policy insights

The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between corporate emission reduction policies (ERPs), greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the moderating role of corporate governance. Using a dataset of 18,559 firm-year observations from 28 developed and emerging countries from (Mollick, and Haidar, 2011) and 2022, the study finds that for firms with stronger corporate governance, higher ERPs are associated with more substantive emission intensity reductions. Findings remain robust across multiple specifications. Firm-level trend regression confirms that if a firm’s ERPs improve over time compared to the sector average, emission intensity decreases. Results underscore the importance of strong corporate governance in mitigating greenwashing risks and ensuring the credibility of corporate climate commitments. The study contributes to the growing literature on climate governance, and corporate environmental strategy by highlighting the interplay between corporate governance and ERPs in achieving emission intensity reductions. Research avenues, limitations, and recommendations are presented, emphasizing specifically the need for investors and regulators to not only focus on the level of ERP adoption, but scrutinize governance structures that determine ERP effectiveness in practice.