In September 2024, the global PMI amounted to 47.5 for new export orders and 48.8 for manufacturing. The manufacturing PMI was at its lowest point in August 2020. It decreased over the last months of 2022 after the effects of the Russia-Ukraine war and rising inflation hit the world economy, and remained around 50 since.

Updated weekly Public Health — Seattle & King County is monitoring changes in key economic, social, and other health indicators resulting from strategies to slow the spread of COVID-19. The metrics below were selected based on studies from previous outbreaks, which have linked strategies such as social distancing, school closures, and business closures to specific outcomes. Individual indicators in the grid below are updated daily, weekly, or monthly, depending on the source of data. Additional data will be added over time.

This 6MB download is a zip file containing 5 pdf documents and 2 xlsx spreadsheets. Presentation on COVID-19 and the potential impacts on employment

May 2020Waka Kotahi wants to better understand the potential implications of the COVID-19 downturn on the land transport system, particularly the potential impacts on regional economies and communities.

To do this, in May 2020 Waka Kotahi commissioned Martin Jenkins and Infometrics to consider the potential impacts of COVID-19 on New Zealand’s economy and demographics, as these are two key drivers of transport demand. In addition to providing a scan of national and international COVID-19 trends, the research involved modelling the economic impacts of three of the Treasury’s COVID-19 scenarios, to a regional scale, to help us understand where the impacts might be greatest.

Waka Kotahi studied this modelling by comparing the percentage difference in employment forecasts from the Treasury’s three COVID-19 scenarios compared to the business as usual scenario.

The source tables from the modelling (Tables 1-40), and the percentage difference in employment forecasts (Tables 41-43), are available as spreadsheets.

Arataki - potential impacts of COVID-19 Final Report

Employment modelling - interactive dashboard

The modelling produced employment forecasts for each region and district over three time periods – 2021, 2025 and 2031. In May 2020, the forecasts for 2021 carried greater certainty as they reflected the impacts of current events, such as border restrictions, reduction in international visitors and students etc. The 2025 and 2031 forecasts were less certain because of the potential for significant shifts in the socio-economic situation over the intervening years. While these later forecasts were useful in helping to understand the relative scale and duration of potential COVID-19 related impacts around the country, they needed to be treated with care recognising the higher levels of uncertainty.

The May 2020 research suggested that the ‘slow recovery scenario’ (Treasury’s scenario 5) was the most likely due to continuing high levels of uncertainty regarding global efforts to manage the pandemic (and the duration and scale of the resulting economic downturn).

The updates to Arataki V2 were framed around the ‘Slower Recovery Scenario’, as that scenario remained the most closely aligned with the unfolding impacts of COVID-19 in New Zealand and globally at that time.

Find out more about Arataki, our 10-year plan for the land transport system

May 2021The May 2021 update to employment modelling used to inform Arataki Version 2 is now available. Employment modelling dashboard - updated 2021Arataki used the May 2020 information to compare how various regions and industries might be impacted by COVID-19. Almost a year later, it is clear that New Zealand fared better than forecast in May 2020.Waka Kotahi therefore commissioned an update to the projections through a high-level review of:the original projections for 2020/21 against performancethe implications of the most recent global (eg International monetary fund world economic Outlook) and national economic forecasts (eg Treasury half year economic and fiscal update)The treasury updated its scenarios in its December half year fiscal and economic update (HYEFU) and these new scenarios have been used for the revised projections.Considerable uncertainty remains about the potential scale and duration of the COVID-19 downturn, for example with regards to the duration of border restrictions, update of immunisation programmes. The updated analysis provides us with additional information regarding which sectors and parts of the country are likely to be most impacted. We continue to monitor the situation and keep up to date with other cross-Government scenario development and COVID-19 related work. The updated modelling has produced employment forecasts for each region and district over three time periods - 2022, 2025, 2031.The 2022 forecasts carry greater certainty as they reflect the impacts of current events. The 2025 and 2031 forecasts are less certain because of the potential for significant shifts over that time.

Data reuse caveats: as per license.

Additionally, please read / use this data in conjunction with the Infometrics and Martin Jenkins reports, to understand the uncertainties and assumptions involved in modelling the potential impacts of COVID-19.

COVID-19’s effect on industry and regional economic outcomes for NZ Transport Agency [PDF 620 KB]

Data quality statement: while the modelling undertaken is high quality, it represents two point-in-time analyses undertaken during a period of considerable uncertainty. This uncertainty comes from several factors relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, including:

a lack of clarity about the size of the global downturn and how quickly the international economy might recover differing views about the ability of the New Zealand economy to bounce back from the significant job losses that are occurring and how much of a structural change in the economy is required the possibility of a further wave of COVID-19 cases within New Zealand that might require a return to Alert Levels 3 or 4.

While high levels of uncertainty remain around the scale of impacts from the pandemic, particularly in coming years, the modelling is useful in indicating the direction of travel and the relative scale of impacts in different parts of the country.

Data quality caveats: as noted above, there is considerable uncertainty about the potential scale and duration of the COVID-19 downturn. Please treat the specific results of the modelling carefully, particularly in the forecasts to later years (2025, 2031), given the potential for significant shifts in New Zealand's socio-economic situation before then.

As such, please use the modelling results as a guide to the potential scale of the impacts of the downturn in different locations, rather than as a precise assessment of impacts over the coming decade.

This page is no longer updated. It has been superseded by the Business insights and impacts on the UK economy dataset page (see link in Notices). It contains comprehensive weighted datasets for Wave 7 onwards. All future BICS datasets will be available there. The datasets on this page include mainly unweighted responses from the voluntary fortnightly business survey, which captures businesses’ responses on how their turnover, workforce prices, trade and business resilience have been affected in the two-week reference period, up to Wave 17.

Abstract

The World Bank and UNHCR in collaboration with the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics and the University of California, Berkeley are conducting the Kenya COVID-19 Rapid Response Phone Survey to track the socioeconomic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the recovery from it as well as other shocks to provide timely data to inform a targeted response. This dataset contains information from eight waves of the COVID-19 RRPS, which is part of a panel survey that targets refugee household and started in May 2020. The same households were interviewed every two months for five survey rounds, in the first year of data collection, and every four months thereafter, with interviews conducted using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) techniques. The sample aims to be representative of the refugee and stateless population in Kenya. It comprises five strata: Kakuma refugee camp, Kalobeyei settlement, Dadaab refugee camp, urban refugees, and Shona stateless. Waves 1-7 of this survey include information on household background, service access, employment, food security, income loss, transfers, health, and COVID-19 knowledge. Wave 8 focused on how households were exposed to shocks, in particular adverse weather shocks and the increase in the price of food and fuel, but also included parts of the previous modules on household background, service access, employment, food security, income loss, and subjective wellbeing. The data is uploaded in three files. The first is the hh file, which contains household level information. The 'hhid', uniquely identifies all household. The second is the adult level file, which contains data at the level of adult household members. Each adult in a household is uniquely identified by the 'adult_id'. The third file is the child level file, available only for waves 3-7, which contains information for every child in the household. Each child in a household is uniquely identified by the 'child_id'. The duration of data collection and sample size for each completed wave was: Wave 1: May 14 to July 7, 2020; 1,328 refugee households Wave 2: July 16 to September 18, 2020; 1,699 refugee households Wave 3: September 28 to December 2, 2020; 1,487 refugee households Wave 4: January 15 to March 25, 2021; 1,376 refugee households Wave 5: March 29 to June 13, 2021; 1,562 refugee households Wave 6: July 14 to November 3, 2021; 1,407 refugee households Wave 7: November 15, 2021, to March 31, 2022; 1,281 refugee households Wave 8: May 31 to July 8, 2022: 1,355 refugee households The same questionnaire is also administered to nationals in Kenya, with the data available in the WB microdata library: https://microdata.worldbank.org/index.php/catalog/3774

Geographic coverage

National coverage covering rural and urban areas

Analysis unit

Individual and Household

Universe

All persons of concern for UNHCR

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample aims to be representative of the refugee and stateless population in Kenya. It comprises five strata: Kakuma refugee camp, Kalobeyei settlement, Dadaab refugee camp, urban refugees, and Shona stateless, where sampling approaches differ across strata. For refugees in Kakuma and Kalobeyei, as well as for stateless people, recently conducted Socioeconomic Surveys (SES), were used as sampling frames. For the refugee population living in urban areas and the Dadaab camp, no such household survey data existed, and sampling frames were based on UNHCR's registration records (proGres), which include phone numbers. For Kakuma, Kalobeyei, Dadaab and urban refugees, a two-step sampling process was used. First, 1,000 individuals from each stratum were selected from the corresponding sampling frames. Each of these individuals received a text message to confirm that the registered phone was still active. In the second stage, implicitly stratifying by sex and age, the verified phone number lists were used to select the sample. Until wave 7 sampled households that were not reached in earlier waves were also contacted along with households that were interviewed before. In wave 8 only households that had previously participated in the survey were contacted for interview. The “wave” variable represents in which wave the households were interviewed in. For the stateless population, all the participants of the Shona socioeconomic survey (n=400) were included in the RRPS, because of limited sample size. The sampling frames for the refugee and Shona stateless communities are thus representative of households with active phone numbers registered with UNHCR.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Research instrument

The questionnaire included 12 sections Section 1: Introduction Section 2: Household background Section 3: Travel patterns and interactions Section 4: Employment Section 5: Food security Section 6: Income Loss Section 7: Transfers Section 8: Subjective welfare (50% of sample) Section 9: Health Section 10: COVID Knowledge Section 11: Household and Social Relations (50% of sample) Section 12: Conclusion

Cleaning operations

Variable names were kept constant across survey waves. For questions that remained exactly the same across survey waves, data points for all waves can be found under one variable name. For questions where the phrasing changed (even in a minimal way) across waves, variable names were also changed to reflect the change in phrasing. Extended missing values are used to indicate why a value is missing for all variables. The following extended missing values are used in the dataset: · .a for 'Don't know' · .b for 'Refused to respond' · .c for 'Outliers set to missing' · .d for 'Inconsistency set to missing' (used for employment data as explained below) · .e for 'Field Skipped' (where an error in the survey tool caused the question to be missed) · .z for 'Not administered' (as the variable was not relevant to the observation) More detailed data on children was collected between waves 3 and 7, compared to waves 1, 2 and 8. In waves 1 and 2, data on children, e.g. on their learning activities, was collected for all children in a household with one question. Therefore, variables related to children are part of the 'hh' data for waves 1 and 2. Between waves 3 and 7, questions on children in the household were asked for specific children. Some questions covered all children, while others were only administered to one randomly selected child in the household. This approach allows to disaggregate data at the level of the child household members, and the data can be found in the 'child' data set. The household level weights can be used for analysis of the children's data. In wave 8, detailed information on children was dropped, as the questionnaire focused on other topics. The education status of household members, except for the respondent, was imputed for rounds 1 and 2. For rounds 1 and 2, only the education status of the respondent was elicited, while for later rounds the education status for each household member was asked. In order to evaluate outcomes by the household member's education status, information on education was imputed for waves 1 and 2, using the information provided for all household members in waves 3, 4, and 5. This resulted in additional information on the education status for household members in round 1 and 2, which was not yet available for earlier versions of this data. Some questions are not asked repeatedly across waves such that their values were imputed. For some questions, answers are not possible or unlikely to change within two months between survey waves such that households were not asked about them in all waves. The questions on assets owned before March 2020 were only asked to households when they are interviewed for the first time. The questions on the dwelling's wall and floor material as well as the household's connection to the power grid was not asked for all households in wave 2 and 3, where only new households and those who moved were covered by these questions. Questions on the main source of electricity in the households and types of assets owned were not asked in wave 8. The missing values those variables have when they were not asked, are imputed from the answers given in earlier waves. Improved quality insurance algorithms lead to minor revisions to wave 1 to 5 data. Based on additional data checks, the team has made minor refinements to wave 1 to 5 data. The identification of the household members that were the respondent or the household head was refined in the rare cases where it was not possible to interview the same respondent as in previous waves for a given household such that another adult was interviewed. For this reason, for about 2 percent of observations the household head status was assigned to an incorrect household member, which was corrected. For <1 percent of households the respondent did not appear in adult level dataset. For about 1 percent of observations in wave 5 the respondent appeared twice in the adult level dataset. Data from questions on COVID-19 vaccinations from wave 7 was dropped from the dataset. Due to significantly higher self-reported vaccination rates compared to official administrative records, data on vaccinations was deemed unreliable, most likely due to social desirability bias. Consequently, questions on vaccination status and questions using the vaccination data as a validation criterion were dropped from the datasets.

The SPIN covid19 RMRIO dataset is a time series of MRIO tables covering years from 2016-2026 on a yearly basis. The dataset covers 163 sectors in 155 countries.

This repository includes data for years from 2020 to 2026 (counterfactual scenario).

Code, method material and data for years 2016-2019 are stored in the following repository: 10.5281/zenodo.5713811

Data for the covid scenario are stored in the following repository: 10.5281/zenodo.5713825

Tables are generated using the SPIN method, based on the RMRIO tables for the year 2015, GDP, imports and exports data from the International Financial Statistics (IFS) and the World Economic Outlooks (WEO) of October 2019 and April 2021.

The counterfactual scenario is in line with October 2019 WEO's data and simulates the global economy without Covid 19.

All tables are labelled in 2015 US$ and valued in basic prices.

The indicators and analysis presented in this bulletin are based on responses from the new voluntary fortnightly business survey, which captures businesses responses on how their turnover, workforce prices, trade and business resilience have been affected in the two week reference period. These data relate to the period 6 April 2020 to 19 April 2020.

This data looks at the impact of COVID-19 on employment, income, ability to pay expenses, and more in Côte D'Ivoire, Kenya, Mozambique Nigeria, and South Africa. Data is nationally representative by age, gender, and location, and is broken down by job type and formal or informal workers. Please contact us for data broken down by province or more information on the methodology.

To create the dataset, the top 10 countries leading in the incidence of COVID-19 in the world were selected as of October 22, 2020 (on the eve of the second full of pandemics), which are presented in the Global 500 ranking for 2020: USA, India, Brazil, Russia, Spain, France and Mexico. For each of these countries, no more than 10 of the largest transnational corporations included in the Global 500 rating for 2020 and 2019 were selected separately. The arithmetic averages were calculated and the change (increase) in indicators such as profitability and profitability of enterprises, their ranking position (competitiveness), asset value and number of employees. The arithmetic mean values of these indicators for all countries of the sample were found, characterizing the situation in international entrepreneurship as a whole in the context of the COVID-19 crisis in 2020 on the eve of the second wave of the pandemic. The data is collected in a general Microsoft Excel table. Dataset is a unique database that combines COVID-19 statistics and entrepreneurship statistics. The dataset is flexible data that can be supplemented with data from other countries and newer statistics on the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the fact that the data in the dataset are not ready-made numbers, but formulas, when adding and / or changing the values in the original table at the beginning of the dataset, most of the subsequent tables will be automatically recalculated and the graphs will be updated. This allows the dataset to be used not just as an array of data, but as an analytical tool for automating scientific research on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship. The dataset includes not only tabular data, but also charts that provide data visualization. The dataset contains not only actual, but also forecast data on morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 for the period of the second wave of the pandemic in 2020. The forecasts are presented in the form of a normal distribution of predicted values and the probability of their occurrence in practice. This allows for a broad scenario analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship, substituting various predicted morbidity and mortality rates in risk assessment tables and obtaining automatically calculated consequences (changes) on the characteristics of international entrepreneurship. It is also possible to substitute the actual values identified in the process and following the results of the second wave of the pandemic to check the reliability of pre-made forecasts and conduct a plan-fact analysis. The dataset contains not only the numerical values of the initial and predicted values of the set of studied indicators, but also their qualitative interpretation, reflecting the presence and level of risks of a pandemic and COVID-19 crisis for international entrepreneurship.

The global COVID-19 spread has forced countries to implement non-pharmacological interventions (NPI) to preserve health systems. Spain is one of the most severely impacted countries, both clinically and economically. In an effort to support policy decision-making, Candel et al.(2021) [https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3745801] have developed a modified Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Removed (SEIR) epidemiological model to simulate the pandemic evolution. Its output was used to populate an economic model to quantify healthcare costs and GDP variation, through a regression model which correlates NPI and GDP change from 42 countries. The dataset contains information on the main variables used in order to specify and estimate this predictive model.

Note: Blueprint has been retired as of June 15, 2021. This dataset will be kept up for historical purposes, but will no longer be updated. California has a new blueprint for reducing COVID-19 in the state with revised criteria for loosening and tightening restrictions on activities. Every county in California is assigned to a tier based on its test positivity and adjusted case rate for tier assignment. Additionally, a new health equity metric took effect on October 6, 2020. In order to advance to the next less restrictive tier, each county will need to meet an equity metric or demonstrate targeted investments to eliminate disparities in levels of COVID-19 transmission, depending on its size. The California Health Equity Metric is designed to help guide counties in their continuing efforts to reduce COVID-19 cases in all communities and requires more intensive efforts to prevent and mitigate the spread of COVID-19 among Californians who have been disproportionately impacted by this pandemic. Please see https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/COVID19CountyMonitoringOverview.aspx for more information. Also, in lieu of a Data Dictionary, please refer to the detailed explanation of the data columns in Appendix 1 of the above webpage. Because this data is in machine-readable format, the merged headers at the top of the source spreadsheet have not been included: The first 8 columns are under the header "County Status as of Tier Assignment" The next 3 columns are under the header "Current Data Week Tier and Metric Tiers for Data Week" The next 4 columns are under the header "Case Rate Adjustment Factors" The next column is under the header "Small County Considerations" The last 5 columns are under the header "Health Equity Framework Parameters"

An increase in morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19 in 2020-2022 has forced various countries to introduce lockdowns. Due to unfavorable economic consequences, this measure often caused a negative attitude toward the population, leading to sabotage and even protests. In this study, we question whether it is possible to change the population's attitude towards lockdown by emphasizing economic loss prevention. Based on the results of an online survey of 23,064 residents of Russia, we show that mentioning the negative economic consequences of a lockdown reduces the level of support for it. In contrast, mentioning the possibility of avoiding long-term negative consequences for the economy reinforces this support. The influence of economic loss prevention treatment holds for the poor and people with full-time employment, although these are groups that the lockdown can affect in the first place. Moreover, we show that economic loss prevention treatment can even influence people's opinions who were initially firmly against the lockdown. However, loss prevention treatment is not significant for people who have already experienced the pandemic's direct negative economic consequences.

This data package includes the underlying data to replicate the charts presented in Lessons from China's fiscal policy during the COVID-19 pandemic, PIIE Working Paper 24-7.

If you use the data, please cite as: Huang, Tianlei. 2024. Lessons from China's fiscal policy during the COVID-19 pandemic. PIIE Working Paper 24-7. Washington: Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The COVID-19 pandemic has represented the most significant public health challenge in a century, costing tens of thousands of people in the UK their lives. The UK and devolved governments have intervened in people’s personal lives to a degree unprecedented in peace time. The UK government has also presided over a dramatic increase in public spending and borrowing both to ensure that vital public services, including the health service, can cope with the disease and to mitigate the impact of the pandemic on the labour market and the economy more generally. Previous research on pandemics, infectious disease and recession suggests that COVID-19 could have a significant impact on the public’s public policy preferences - and thus the environment in which policymakers will have to address the pandemic’s consequences. Unsurprisingly, there has been considerable speculation about the impact that this dramatic shock to people’s lives and livelihoods will have on attitudes, behaviour and public policy. This project looks at whether key political attitudes and values have changed following the pandemic. In particular, it assesses whether or not the experience has changed attitudes towards: (i) the role of government in managing the economy, in providing welfare and in addressing inequality, (ii) the relative importance of individual civil liberties versus adherence to collective social codes, and (iii) the globalisation process, including most notably immigration.

As the UK went into the first lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic, the team behind the biggest social survey in the UK, Understanding Society (UKHLS), developed a way to capture these experiences. From April 2020, participants from this Study were asked to take part in the Understanding Society COVID-19 survey, henceforth referred to as the COVID-19 survey or the COVID-19 study.

The COVID-19 survey regularly asked people about their situation and experiences. The resulting data gives a unique insight into the impact of the pandemic on individuals, families, and communities. The COVID-19 Teaching Dataset contains data from the main COVID-19 survey in a simplified form. It covers topics such as

• Socio-demographics
• Whether working at home and home-schooling
• COVID symptoms
• Health and well-being
• Social contact and neighbourhood cohesion
• Volunteering

The resource contains two data files:

• Cross-sectional: contains data collected in Wave 4 in July 2020 (with some additional variables from other waves);
• Longitudinal: Contains mainly data from Waves 1, 4 and 9 with key variables measured at three time points.

Key features of the dataset

• Missing values: in the web survey, participants clicking "Next" but not answering a question were given further options such as "Don't know" and "Prefer not to say". Missing observations like these are recorded using negative values such as -1 for "Don't know". In many instances, users of the data will need to set these values as missing. The User Guide includes Stata and SPSS code for setting negative missing values to system missing.

• The Longitudinal file is a balanced panel and is in wide format. A balanced panel means it only includes participants that took part in every wave. In wide format, each participant has one row of information, and each measurement of the same variable is a different variable.

• Weights: both the cross-sectional and longitudinal files include survey weights that adjust the sample to represent the UK adult population. The cross-sectional weight (betaindin_xw) adjusts for unequal selection probabilities in the sample design and for non-response. The longitudinal weight (ci_betaindin_lw) adjusts for the sample design and also for the fact that not all those invited to participate in the survey, do participate in all waves.

• Both the cross-sectional and longitudinal datasets include the survey design variables (psu and strata).

A full list of variables in both files can be found in the User Guide appendix.

Who is in the sample?

All adults (16 years old and over as of April 2020), in households who had participated in at least one of the last two waves of the main study Understanding Society, were invited to participate in this survey. From the September 2020 (Wave 5) survey onwards, only sample members who had completed at least one partial interview in any of the first four web surveys were invited to participate. From the November 2020 (Wave 6) survey onwards, those who had only completed the initial survey in April 2020 and none since, were no longer invited to participate

The User guide accompanying the data adds to the information here and includes a full variable list with details of measurement levels and links to the relevant questionnaire.

We report and interpret preferences of a sample of the Dutch adult population for different strategies to end the so-called ‘intelligent lockdown’ which their government had put in place in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a discrete choice experiment, we invited participants to make a series of choices between policy scenarios aimed at relaxing the lockdown, which were specified not in terms of their nature (e.g. whether or not to allow schools to re-open) but in terms of their effects along seven dimensions. These included health-related effects, but also impacts on the economy, education, and personal income. From the observed choices, we were able to infer the implicit trade-offs made by the Dutch between these policy effects. For example, we find that the average citizen, in order to avoid one fatality directly or indirectly related to COVID-19, is willing to accept a lasting lag in the educational performance of 18 children, or a lasting (>3 years) and substantial (>15%) reduction in net income of 77 households. We explore heterogeneity across individuals in terms of these trade-offs by means of latent class analysis. Our results suggest that most citizens are willing to trade-off health-related and other effects of the lockdown, implying a consequentialist ethical perspective. Somewhat surprisingly, we find that the elderly, known to be at relatively high risk of being affected by the virus, are relatively reluctant to sacrifice economic pain and educational disadvantages for the younger generation, to avoid fatalities. We also identify a so-called taboo trade-off aversion amongst a substantial share of our sample, being an aversion to accept morally problematic policies that simultaneously imply higher fatality numbers and lower taxes. We explain various ways in which our results can be of value to policy makers in the context of the COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Decisions to shutdown economic activities to control the spread of COVID-19 early in the pandemic remain controversial, with negative impacts including high rates of unemployment. Here we present a counterfactual scenario for the state of California in which the economy remained open and active during the pandemic’s first year. The exercise provides a baseline against which to compare actual levels of job losses. We developed an economic-epidemiological mathematical model to simulate outbreaks of COVID-19 in ten large Californian socio-economic areas. Results show that job losses are an unavoidable consequence of the pandemic, because even in an open economy, debilitating illness and death among workers drive economic downturns. Although job losses in the counterfactual scenario were predicted to be less than those actually experienced, the cost would have been the additional death or disablement of tens of thousands of workers. Furthermore, whereas an open economy would have favoured populous, services-oriented coastal areas in terms of employment, the opposite would have been true of smaller inland areas and those with relatively larger agricultural sectors. Thus, in addition to the greater cost in lives, the benefits of maintaining economic activity would have been unequally distributed, exacerbating other realized social inequities of the disease’s impact.

Access the Data HereWhat is the COVID-19 Economic Vulnerability Index?The COVID-19 Vulnerability Index (CVI) is a measurement of the negative impact that the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis can have on employment based upon a region's mix of industries. For example, accommodation and food services are projected to lose more jobs as a result of the coronavirus (in the neighborhood of 50%) compared with utilities and healthcare (with none or little expected job contraction).An average Vulnerability Index score is 100, representing the average job loss expected in the United States. Higher scores indicate the degree to which job losses may be greater — an index score of 200, for example, means the rate of job loss can be twice as large as the national average. Conversely, an index score of 50 would mean a possible job loss of half the national average. Regions heavily dependent on tourism with relatively high concentrations of leisure and hospitality jobs, for example, are likely to have high index scores. The Vulnerability Index only measures the impact potential related to the mix of industry employment. The index does not take into account variation due to a region’s rate of virus infection, nor does it factor in local government's policies in reaction to the virus. For more detail, please see this description.MethodologyThe index is based on a model of potential job losses due to the COVID-19 outbreak in the United States. Expected employment losses at the subsector level are based upon inputs which include primary research on expert testimony; news reports for key industries such as hotels, restaurants, retail, and transportation; preliminary release of unemployment claims; and the latest job postings data from Chmura's RTI database. The forecast model, based on conditions as of March 23, 2020, assumes employment in industries in each county/region would change at a similar rate as employment in national industries. The projection estimates that the United States could lose 15.0 million jobs due to COVID-19, with over half of the jobs lost in hotels, food services, and entertainment industries. Contact Chmura for further details.

The SPIN covid19 RMRIO dataset is a time series of MRIO tables covering years from 2016-2026 on a yearly basis. The dataset covers 163 sectors in 155 countries.

This repository includes data for years from 2016 to 2019 (hist scenario) and the corresponding labels.
Data for years 2020 to 2026 are stored in the corresponding repositories:

• covid: 10.5281/zenodo.5713825
• counterfactual: 10.5281/zenodo.5713839

Tables are generated using the SPIN method, based on the RMRIO tables for the year 2015, GDP, imports and exports data from the International Financial Statistics (IFS) and the World Economic Outlooks (WEO) of October 2019 and April 2021.

From 2020 to 2026, the dataset includes two diverging scenarios. The covid scenario is in line with April 2021 WEO's data and includes the macroeconomic effects of Covid 19. The counterfactual scenario is in line with October 2019 WEO's data and simulates the global economy without Covid 19. Tables from 2016 to 2019 are labelled as hist.

The Projections folder includes the generated tables for years from 2016 to 2019 (hist scenario) and the corresponding labels.
The Sources folder contains the data records from the IFS and WEO databases. The Method data contains the data files used to generate the tables with the SPIN method and the following Python scripts:

• SPIN_covid19_MRIO_files_preparation.py generates the data files from the source data.
• SPIN_covid19_RMRIO runs.py is the command to run the SPIN method and generate the dataset.
• figures.py is a script to produce figures reflecting the consistency of the projected tables and the evolution of macroeconomic figures in the 2016-2026 period for a selection of countries.

All tables are labelled in 2015 US$ and valued in basic prices.

The U.S. Census Bureau, in collaboration with five federal agencies, launched the Household Pulse Survey to produce data on the social and economic impacts of Covid-19 on American households. The Household Pulse Survey was designed to gauge the impact of the pandemic on employment status, consumer spending, food security, housing, education disruptions, and dimensions of physical and mental wellness. The survey was designed to meet the goal of accurate and timely weekly estimates. It was conducted by an internet questionnaire, with invitations to participate sent by email and text message. The sample frame is the Census Bureau Master Address File Data. Housing units linked to one or more email addresses or cell phone numbers were randomly selected to participate, and one respondent from each housing unit was selected to respond for him or herself. Estimates are weighted to adjust for nonresponse and to match Census Bureau estimates of the population by age, sex, race and ethnicity, and educational attainment. All estimates shown meet the NCHS Data Presentation Standards for Proportions.