# COVID-19 in Africa: socio-economic impact, policy response and opportunities

Peterson Ozili (Central Bank of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria)

ISSN: 0144-333X

Publication date: 29 May 2020

## Abstract

### Purpose

This paper examines the socio-economic impact of COVID-19 and the policy response in African countries.

### Design/methodology/approach

This study uses discourse analysis to analyse the socio-economic impact of COVID-19 in Africa.

### Findings

The findings reveal that African countries have been affected by the coronavirus pandemic, and the effect was more severe for African regions compared to other regions. The rising pandemic affected social interaction and economic activities through the imposed social distancing policies that have different levels of strictness in several African countries

### Practical implications

The implication of the findings is that social policies can affect the social and economic well-being of citizens. Secondly, the coronavirus outbreak has revealed how a biological crisis can be transformed to a sociological subject. The most important sociological consequence of the coronavirus outbreak for African citizens is the creation of social anxiety among families and households in the region. The outbreak has also shown how vulnerable African societies are in facing health hazards. Policymakers should enforce social policies that unite communities in bad times, to reduce social anxiety.

### Originality/value

This is the first paper that explore the socio-economic impact of coronavirus and the policy response in African countries.

## Keywords

#### Citation

Ozili, P. (2020), "COVID-19 in Africa: socio-economic impact, policy response and opportunities", International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-05-2020-0171

### Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

## 1. Introduction

This paper examines the socio-economic impact of COVID-19 and the policy response in African countries. Coronavirus, or the disease it causes “COVID-19”, originated from the Wuhan Province of China in December 2019. It began spreading rapidly in China and to other parts of the world through the movement of people in early 2020. The spread of COVID-19 affected economic activities in China, and in February, the Chinese economy came to a halt. China is a major exporter of commodities to African countries, and the economic contraction in China is expected to have spillover consequences for African countries through the negative impact on African businesses that rely heavily on China for the supply of primary and intermediate raw materials. The coronavirus crisis is affecting many African countries, and the number of confirmed cases have been rising rapidly with a particularly severe situation in South Africa, Egypt, Algeria, Morocco and Cameroon.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, most of the healthcare infrastructure in African countries had deteriorated. Currently, in Africa, 65% of healthcare expenses are made from out-of-pocket expenditure compared to Europe where the national and regional authorities are responsible for the health policies and expenditure of citizens. During the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the quarantine and other measures adopted to stop the spread of COVID-19 in African countries, the number of infected cases continued to increase significantly. This situation mounted unprecedented pressure on the public health systems in many African countries. Some private hospitals refused to admit infected patients while public hospitals exceeded their capacity. This pressured the government of some countries to build isolation centres in large open fields around the country; notably, football stadiums were converted to isolation centres in countries such as Cameroon and Nigeria. In African countries where good healthcare systems exist, the government had to scale-up intensive care units and provide more resources for hospitals and healthcare systems to control the spread of coronavirus.

The severe social effect of the coronavirus crisis was felt through the imposition of movement restrictions in many African countries. Some restrictive measures that were imposed to control the spread of coronavirus include: restricting non-essential activities, closing schools and universities, encouraging people to stay home, the lockdown of entire cities, requiring essential businesses to run skeletal operations and employees should work from home. These measures inevitably affected economic activities in African countries, and policymakers had to use economic policies, both fiscal and monetary policies, to mitigate the negative effect on the economy. Many African countries deployed the national budget and Central Bank's support in developing policies to mitigate the health and economic crises. Generally, the policy response in several African countries is country-specific because African countries are not closely intertwined.

The exact socio-economic impact of COVID-19 and the consequence of each policy response on African countries is still unknown, and the literature has not documented the effects of the coronavirus pandemic on African countries. The emerging coronavirus literature has explored the impact of the coronavirus crisis using single-day data, two-day data or even a week data, and they mostly focus on a specific sector such as the tourism industry (Gössling et al., 2020), the mining sector (Laing, 2020), the healthcare sector (Ather et al., 2020) or the economy (Fernandes, 2020; Ozili and Arun, 2020; Fornaro and Wolf, 2020). This emerging literature has not explored the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on societal interaction in many countries especially for African countries that are vulnerable to the outbreak of diseases. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first paper that explores the socio-economic impact of coronavirus and the policy response in African countries. The findings reveal that African countries have been affected by the coronavirus pandemic, and the effect was more severe for African regions compared to other regions. The rising pandemic affected social interaction and economic activities through the imposed social distancing policies.

The analysis in this paper contributes to the literature in two ways. First, it contributes to the literature that examines the impact of social policies on the well-being of individuals in society (e.g. Lunau et al., 2013; Jutz, 2015; Acevedo et al., 2014; Li et al., 2016; Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010; McGuire, 2011). The present study contributes to this literature by exploring how social policies, such as social distancing policies, affect African societies. Secondly, this study contributes to the recent literature on the impact of coronavirus in society (e.g., Chinazzi et al., 2020; Haleem et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2020; Fornaro and Wolf, 2020). The paper contributes to this literature by exploring the socio-economic effect of coronavirus in African countries – a context that has not been explored in the literature.

The rest of the paper is divided as follows. Section 2 presents the literature review. Section 3 reports the study methodology. Section 4 discusses the results. Section 5 concludes.

## 2. Literature review

A body of literature explores the impact of social policies on the well-being of individuals in society. For instance, Lunau et al. (2013) examine the effect of social policies on the health of older employees. They find that work stress is significantly associated with elevated risk of depression among older employees in European countries; however, protective labour and social policies reduced the strength of the association. Jutz (2015) examines the role of income inequality and redistribution in reducing income-related health inequalities in Europe. They find a negative association between social policies and health inequalities, which implies that social policies reduced health inequalities in Europe. They conclude that social policies matter to all individuals regardless of socio-economic position since it is positively linked to overall population health. Acevedo et al. (2014), in a review of literature, examine the pattern of poverty rates and income inequality in El Salvador and find that migration and remittances provided an equalizing effect to mitigate income inequality rather than distributive public social expenditure or other public policies. Li et al. (2016) investigate the impact of social assistance and the introduction of the Rental Assistance Program (RAP) on food insecurity rates among target groups in British Columbia. Using data from the Canadian Community Health Surveys, they find that food insecurity rose significantly among households in British Columbia between 2005 and 2012, and severe food insecurity remained unchanged despite the increase in social assistance benefits. Holt-Lunstad et al. (2010) investigate the extent to which social relationships influence mortality risk. They find that there is a 50% increased likelihood of survival for participants with stronger social relationships, and the finding is consistent across age, sex, initial health status, cause of death and follow-up period. McGuire (2011) shows that social assistance and the public provision of many basic social services improved in Latin America even as the coverage of social insurance programmes fell. Rapp et al. (2018) examine how social policies shape the perceived feasibility of self-employment. They find that the presence of unemployment protection for the self-employed positively influences individual perceptions of the feasibility of self-employment. They also observe that risk-tolerant individuals are more likely to assess self-employment as a feasible option in countries that offer unemployment protection to the self-employed.

A recent body of literature explores the impact of coronavirus on society. For instance, Chinazzi et al. (2020) show that, at the start of the travel ban from Wuhan on 23 January 2020, most Chinese cities had already received many infected travelers. The travel quarantine of Wuhan delayed the overall epidemic progression by only 3–5 days in mainland China but had a more severe effect on the international scale. Haleem et al. (2020) show that COVID-19 has affected day-to-day life and is slowing down the global economy. They argue that the economic effects of coronavirus include: the slowing of the manufacturing of essential goods, disruption of the supply chain of products, losses in national and international business, poor cash flow in the market, significant slowing down in the revenue growth while the social consequences include the cancellation or postponement of large-scale sports and tournaments, disruption of celebration of cultural, religious and festive events, undue stress among the population, social distancing with peers and family members, closure of hotels, restaurants and religious places, closure of places for entertainment such as movie and play theatres, sports clubs, gymnasiums, swimming pools and so on. Chen et al. (2020) show find that cities that suffered from SARS and have greater migration ties to Wuhan in China had early, stronger and more durable public awareness of the outbreak. Fornaro and Wolf (2020), using a simple model, show that the coronavirus trigged a negative supply shock. They suggest that drastic policy interventions – both monetary and fiscal – might be needed to prevent this negative supply shock from severely affecting employment and productivity.

Goodell (2020) suggests that there is need to examine COVID-19 in the context of other past events that in some ways are similar to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ramelli and Wagner (2020) showed that the health crisis transformed into an economic crisis which was amplified through financial channels. Barro et al. (2020) examine whether the 1918–1920 Great Influenza Pandemic led to economic contraction and mortality. They find that higher flu death rates decreased the realized real returns on stocks and short-term government bills. Ozili and Arun (2020) find that the increasing number of lockdown days, monetary policy decisions and international travel restrictions severely affected the level of global economic activities and the closing, opening, lowest and highest stock price of major stock market indices in the world. Also, they observe that the imposed restriction on the internal movement of people and higher fiscal spending had a positive impact on the level of economic activities. Kuckertz et al. (2020) state that the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and the spread of COVID-19 led many governments to take drastic measures. They argue that the lockdown of large parts of society and economic life came as an exogenous shock to many economic actors and innovative start-ups. Oruonye and Ahmed (2020) find that the outbreak and spread of COVID-19 disease in Nigeria led to rapid shutdowns in cities and states across the country which severely affected the tourism industry. Zhang et al. (2020) state that the coronavirus (COVID-19) affected financial markets all over the world. It created an unprecedented level of risk, causing investors to suffer significant loses in a very short period of time. Ozili (2020) analyses the COVID-19 spillovers to Nigeria and finds that the existing structural weaknesses in Nigeria contributed to making the crisis more severe in the country.

## 3. Methodology

This study uses discourse analysis to analyse the socio-economic impact of COVID-19 in Africa. The analysis in this study was conducted using information obtained from several reputable sources such as the World Health Organization (WHO), UNESCO and information obtained from the media and other public sources as shown in Table 1.

The period of analysis is from March to May 2020. Focussing on this narrow period (from March to May) allows us to capture the events occurring at this time and to identify the significant effect of COVID-19 in Africa at a time when many African countries were imposing strict lockdown rules due to the rapidly spreading coronavirus in African countries.

The country selection covers all African countries that have publicly available information on country-specific coronavirus cases and policy response while African countries that did not have such reports or information were excluded from the analysis.

## 4. Discussion of results

### 4.1 Analysis of COVID-19 information from the World Health Organization (WHO)

Data from the WHO suggest that Africa appears to be the least affected region compared to other regions as shown in Table 2 and Figure 1. European region has the largest number of confirmed COVID-19 cases, new cases and total deaths and new deaths on the reporting date. The region of the Americas also has a high number of confirmed cases, new cases, total deaths and new deaths, which is greater than that of the Western Pacific, Eastern Mediterranean and Africa combined. Africa has the lowest number of confirmed cases, new cases, total deaths and new deaths. This implies that the African region is the least affected region on the reporting date.

Table 3 and Figure 2 report a three-month trend for COVID-19 in Africa using the WHO data. The number of confirmed cases, new cases, total deaths and new deaths were lowest in March and highest in May, which suggest that the coronavirus is still rising at an exponential rate, and this will have a negative effect on social interactions in the African society.

Table 4 and Figure 3 show the three-month trend analysis for selected African countries using the WHO data. Nigeria, South Africa and Cameroon had the lowest number of confirmed cases in March while South Africa and Algeria the highest COVID-19 cases in May. The sociological implication is that the rising coronavirus cases in South Africa and Algeria can lead to social separation which can hurt social cohesion in these countries during these times.

Together, the tables and figures show that the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases rose exponentially within 30-day intervals from March to May in the African region, which indicates the rapid spread of the coronavirus during the crisis. The rising cases can lead to social separation which can hurt social cohesion in African countries while the crisis persists.

### 4.2 Analysis of COVID-19 in Africa using information from Worldometer

Real-time data for African countries was collected from Worldometer on the 6th of May 2020. Worldometer is a reliable source of real-time data on world events. Worldometer collects the official COVID-19 statistics reported in each country. The sub-region analyses are discussed further.

#### 4.2.1 North African region

Table 5 shows that the North African countries combined have the largest number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Africa at 39.7% on the reporting date. The North African region also has the highest number of total recovery at 47.3% and the highest number of active cases in Africa at 39.5%. The North African region also has the highest number of infected African countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. This implies that the North African region was the most affected region in Africa on the reporting date with rising confirmed cases and total deaths on the reporting date.

#### 4.2.2 East African region

Table 6 shows that the East African countries combined have 8.9% of the confirmed cases in Africa. The East African region also has the lowest number of total deaths at 5.1% and a low recovery and active cases at 12.9 and 6.9%, respectively. Djibouti, Somalia and Kenya have the highest number of confirmed cases in East Africa while Somalia, Kenya and Tanzania report the highest number of total deaths in the region on the reporting date. Countries such as Rwanda, Madagascar and Uganda did not report any death caused by COVID-19 compared to other East African countries. This suggests that the East African region was moderately affected compared to other African regions.

#### 4.2.3 West African region

Table 7 shows that the West African countries combined have 33% of the confirmed cases in Africa. The total number of deaths in the West African region is 21% which is much lower than that of the North African region. The West African region also has the lowest recovery cases at 2.4%. Nigeria, Ghana and Cameroon have the highest number of confirmed cases in West Africa while Benin, Gambia and Mauritania report the lowest number of confirmed cases and deaths in the region on the reporting date.

#### 4.2.4 Southern African region

Table 8 shows that the Southern African countries combined have 15.7% of the confirmed cases in Africa. The Southern African region accounts for 8.3% of the total deaths and a fairly low recovery and active cases at 16.9 and 15.4%, respectively. South Africa and Zambia have the highest number of confirmed cases in Southern Africa while South Africa and Zambia report the highest number of deaths in the region on the reporting date. Countries such as Mozambique and Namibia did not report any death caused by COVID-19 compared to other Southern African countries. This suggests that the South African region was moderately affected compared to other African regions.

#### 4.2.5 Central African region

Table 9 shows that the Central African countries combined have 8.6% of the confirmed cases in Africa. The Central African region accounts for just 7.3% of the total deaths and a fairly low recovery and active cases at 7.3 and 9.3%, respectively. Cameroon and Gabon have the highest number of confirmed cases in Central Africa while Cameroon has the highest number of deaths in the region on the reporting date. Countries such as the Central African Republic did not report any death caused by COVID-19 compared to other Central African countries. This suggests that the Central African region was moderately affected compared to other African regions such the West African and North African countries.

#### 4.2.6 Country-level analysis

The data, reported in Table 10, shows that some African countries have more severe cases than others. For instance, South Africa, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Nigeria, Ghana and Cameroon have the highest number of total confirmed cases and total deaths in Africa while Comoros, Western Sahara and Mauritania have the lowest number of confirmed cases in Africa on the reporting date.

Overall the findings from the analysis in this section show that countries in the North African region are the most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in Africa on the reporting date while countries in the Central and Southern African regions are least affected by the pandemic. The rising coronavirus cases can hurt social cohesion especially in Northern African countries that share similar cultural values. The lack of trust and social interaction among societal members due to fear of contracting the disease will affect social cohesion in these times (see Figure 4).

### 4.3 Socio-economic impact

#### 4.3.1 Impact on aviation sector in Africa

Several markets reacted to the coronavirus pandemic and a number of industries were affected from the COVID-19 shock (Ozili and Arun, 2020). The global demand for air travel, including travel in and out of Africa, dropped significantly and the resulting loss of revenue was estimated at US$113bn according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA) estimates [1]. African Airlines lost US$400m (£312m) since the outbreak of the coronavirus in China in February, according to the IATA. The pandemic was not as widespread in Africa compared to Europe and Asia, but it led airlines such as South African Airways, Royal Air Maroc, Air Tanzania, Air Mauritius, Ethiopian Airlines, EgyptAir, RwandAir and Kenya Airways to suspend flights to and from China [2].

#### 4.3.2 Financial market reactions in Africa

Financial markets in Africa were also affected by the coronavirus pandemic. In South Africa, the Johannesburg Stock Exchange Top 40 Index, many of which have exposure to China, slumped 3.7% on the 24th of February as investors began to consider short-selling strategies [3]. Figure 5 shows the decline in stock prices in the SA Top 40 Index in March following the announcement of coronavirus cases in South Africa.

In Morocco, the All Shares Index fell in March in response to the announcement of confirmed coronavirus cases in Morocco which led to loss of value in investment equity in the stock exchange as shown in Figure 6. In Kenya, major stocks such as Safaricom and KCB Bank declined by 5.4% and 7% respectively on the first day the first coronavirus case was announced in Kenya. As stock prices continued to plunge on the second day, the Nairobi Stock Exchange (NSE) suspended trading for the NSE 20 index on 13 March 2020 according to its equity trading rules which require trading suspension if there was a drop of more than 5% [4]. In the tourism sector, tourism to South Africa fell by about 80% following the COVID-19 outbreak, and the situation further worsened when a nationwide lockdown was enforced in South Africa. Kenya also witnessed a 55% fall in tourist visits following the coronavirus outbreak.

Interestingly, an African country, Equatorial Guinea, donated a $2m solidarity contribution to China to help the Chinese government in fighting the coronavirus that halted China's economy in February 2020 [20]. Equatorial Guinea became the first and the only African country to donate funds to help an advanced economy to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. The decision of Equatorial Guinea's Council of Minister to financially support China's fight against the virus was due to the long-standing relationship between both countries whose cooperation had grown stronger in recent years. #### 4.5.3 Some reflection and criticism Many African governments have received foreign loans from foreign lenders to help them cope with the economic impact of the coronavirus outbreak. Although such financial support is needed at this time, the foreign loans granted to some African countries are large and exceed 40% of annual GDP for some African countries, which can put these countries at risk by increasing their levels of indebtedness to unsustainable levels, and the economic effects of such high debts levels will be felt when repaying the loans after the pandemic is over. Perhaps, instead of borrowing from foreign lenders, African governments could have looked inwards by borrowing domestically which will help to reduce the public debt burden of the nation, for instance, they can issue long-term bonds or short-term bonds through the sale of treasury bills and other long-term instruments to domestic investors. Generally, there are strong concerns that African countries that have incurred high public debt levels are at risk of severe economic shocks after the COVID-19 pandemic is over, and it is difficult to tell if foreign lenders will consider loan forgiveness or loan restructuring based on the principle of solidarity. ### 4.6 Opportunities created by the COVID-19 pandemic Develop the capacity of health systems. Whenever there is a public health crisis, the first priority in any country is to protect the health of its citizens. For this reason, African countries should consider adopting budgetary liquidity and policy measures to increase the capacity of their health systems to withstand a public health crisis and provide relief to citizens that fall sick during a public health crisis. Strengthen protection for small and medium-sized businesses during crises. The survival of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is crucial during this pandemic. Policymakers should protect and support SMEs by providing guarantees to banks and micro-lenders so that lenders can provide liquidity to at least 50,000 African SMEs. The economic impact of coronavirus on SMEs will vary across industries and firms depending on many factors, including exposure to China. China is the largest source of primary and intermediate raw materials for most SMEs. Also, SMEs that have the greatest exposure to the global supply chain should receive more support than others. Protect jobs and workers. Protecting the critical sectors of the economy, assets, technology and infrastructure is important, and above all, jobs and workers must be protected. African governments should introduce new legislation to protect the livelihoods of citizens which is essential to reboot the economy after a health pandemic is over. New legislations should be created to mitigate unemployment risks during crises. These kinds of legislations can help to sustain families' income, preserve the productive capacity of workers and the human capital of enterprises and the overall economy. Social welfare legislation and programmes. Legislation and programmes should be designed to support those in need especially the poorest who may not survive a health or economic crisis. The government should provide assistance, including food, clothing and other essential items for personal use, for example, shoes, soap and shampoo, to those that are deprived of basic subsistence during a crisis. These provisions will make the delivery of food aid and basic items possible through electronic vouchers, thus, reducing the risk of contracting diseases during a health crisis. Social welfare legislations should be passed in African countries to provide welfare to the poorest. Support for the agricultural sector. One sector where governments should not tolerate any disruption is that of food in the agricultural sector. African government must stand by food farmers. There should be no disruption to the agricultural sector during a crisis. There should be a range of measures to ensure that farmers and other beneficiaries can get the support they need. For instance, there should be agricultural programmes that allow farmers to benefit from a maximum aid of$5,000 per farm while food processing and marketing companies can benefit from a maximum of $20,000. Table 15 reports the suggested opportunities for some African countries after the coronavirus crisis ends. ## 5. Conclusion This article discussed the effect of coronavirus on African countries and suggested opportunities for reforms. The findings reveal that the coronavirus outbreak in Africa affected the social and economic well-being of most citizens in many African countries during the period even though the social distancing measures were temporal. Citizens were not allowed to socialize in large groups as before, and they were not allowed to engage in business activities in the market place due to the imposed social distancing rules during the period examined. The implication of the findings is that social policies can affect the social and economic well-being of citizens. Secondly, the coronavirus outbreak has revealed how a biological crisis can be transformed to a sociological subject. The most important sociological consequence of the coronavirus outbreak for African citizens is the creation of social anxiety among families and households in the region. The outbreak has also shown how vulnerable African societies are in facing health hazards. Policymakers should enforce social policies that unite communities in bad times, to reduce social anxiety. At the moment, it is impossible to fully know how long the coronavirus crisis will last and how many African citizens will be affected. But what we know is that the number of infected people in Africa is much lower compared to those infected in Europe and the United States, and the economic impact is already severe particularly for oil-dependent African countries and for African countries that benefit significantly from the global supply chain. Country-specific measures, such as social distancing and lockdowns, have been adopted by many African countries, and it is possible that, once the pandemic is over, most African countries will enter into an unavoidable recession. This paper argues that African governments should use fiscal policies to immediately address the public health emergency. After that, fiscal resources should be used to provide direct support to affected individuals and businesses in order to protect the productive capacity that will be needed to revive the economy of African countries when the coronavirus crisis ends. Other indirect measure to consider is to provide a sustained general safety net for everyone during the pandemic using social and economic policies. There are several ways of doing this, such as providing free electricity to all citizens during the pandemic and making cash transfer payments to all households. Policymakers in African countries need to also think about measures that will reboot the economy after the coronavirus crisis is over such as reducing the price of energy products such as fuel and gas and provide bailout relief to small and big businesses so that they will not lay-off workers during the crisis and during the recovery process. Central Banks in Africa need to find the right mix of monetary policy tools that will stimulate growth in the economy while the fiscal authorities should do the same using the fiscal tools at their disposal. Social authorities in African countries should ensure that people in local communities have access to effective communication systems so that community members will be able to remotely interact with their family and friends during the crisis, as effective communication is proving to be the most important way to inform citizens about the extent of the spread of the coronavirus and the measures they can take to protect themselves. In the end, this pandemic will provide an opportunity for each African country to rethink its exposure to the global economy and the spillover implication for each African country. We need to ask ourselves: do the negative effects of globalization outweigh the benefits? Will African countries reduce their trade exposures to countries such as China in order to reduce their vulnerability to external shocks in the future? Will African countries such as Angola, Libya and Nigeria reduce their dependence on oil revenue in order to reduce their exposure to significant fall in oil price? Will African governments develop existing infrastructure or create new infrastructure, including healthcare infrastructure, that can help in reducing the impact of future crises? Will African countries do a lot more to build up enough foreign exchange reserves in good times so that they will not rely on foreign loans in bad times? These are questions to reflect on. Perhaps, future studies can provide some answers to these questions. Future research can also examine the direct impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the performance of financial institutions in African countries. Future studies can also examine the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the level of financial inclusion in African countries. This study has two limitations. The first limitation relates to the sample period. A longer sample period is better because it can yield a much richer result and insight. Secondly, the currency of the data is another issue. It is possible that the currency of the data may be overtaken by future events as the coronavirus continues to spread rapidly on a daily basis. ## Figures #### Figure 1 WHO global COVID-19 statistics (06 May 2020) #### Figure 2 COVID-19 in Africa: trend analysis #### Figure 3 Confirmed COVID-19 cases for selected African countries #### Figure 4 Country-specific confirmed cases in Africa #### Figure 5 South Africa Top 40 Index (stock price) #### Figure 6 Morocco all shares (stock price) ## Table 1 Sample and data information Data subjectData sourceData periodAnalysis location COVID-19 casesWorld Health Organization6th May 2020Section 4.1 COVID-19 casesWorldometer6th May 2020Section 4.2 Impact on educationUNESCOMarch–May 2020Section 4.3.6 Policy responseMedia reportsMarch–MaySection 4.4.1 Policy responseOxCGRTMarch–MaySection 4.4.2 Foreign aid spendingReliable media sourcesMarch–MaySection 4.5.2.2 ## Table 2 Regional situation in numbers – May 6, 2020 RegionConfirmed cases (total)New casesConfirmed deaths (total)New deaths Global3,588,77371,463247,5034,102 European Region1,593,82827,179147,7802,178 Americas1,507,14829,70181,0701,480 Western Pacific154,8841,0166,32740 Eastern Mediterranean221,2307,8548,290175 South-East Asia76,9984,3102,821139 Africa33,9731,4031,20290 Source(s): World Health Organization, Situation report, No. 107 ## Table 3 COVID-19 in Africa: a three-month trend analysis COVID-19 Africa regionMarch 06April 06May 06 Confirmed cases (total)196,61633,973 New cases11981,403 Confirmed deaths (total)02431,202 New deaths0790 Source(s): World Health Organization, situation report, No. 46, 77 and 107 ## Table 4 Confirmed COVID-19 cases in Africa: a three-month trend analysis 06-March06-April06-May South Africa11,6557,439 Algeria121,2514,838 Senegal42221,329 Cameroon15552,265 Nigeria12082,950 Source(s): World Health Organization, situation report, No. 46, 77 and 107 ## Table 5 COVID-19 and North African region – 6 May 2020 CountryTotal casesNew casesTotal deathsNew deathsTotal recoveredActive casesSerious, critical Egypt7,201 452 1,7305,019 Morocco5,382+163182+11,9693,2311 Algeria4,838 470 2,0672,30122 Tunisia1,022 43 48249717 Somalia835 38 757222 Sudan778 45 70663 North Africa total20,056 1,230 6,39312,43342 Overall Total50,502+3361,921+417,11831,463128 Proportion (%)39.71 64 47.339.532.8 ## Table 6 COVID-19 and East African region – 6 May 2020 CountryTotal casesNew casesTotal deathsNew deathsTotal recoveredActive casesSerious, critical Djibouti1,120 2 745373 Somalia835 38 757222 Kenya535 24 1823292 Tanzania480 16 1672977 Réunion425+1 3001252 Mauritius332 10 31933 Rwanda261 129132 Ethiopia162+174 9365 Madagascar151 101501 Uganda98 5543 Malawi41 3 9291 Eritrea39 309 Burundi15 1 77 Seychelles11 83 Comoros3 3 East Africa (total)4,508 98 2,2202,19018 Overall Total50,502+3361,921+417,11831,463128 Proportion (%)8.9 5.1 12.96.914.1 ## Table 7 COVID-19 and West African region – 6 May 2020 CountryTotal casesNew casesTotal deathsNew deathsTotal recoveredActive casesSerious, critical Nigeria2,950 98 4812,3714 Ghana2,719 18 2942,4074 Cameroon2,104 64 9531,08712 Guinea1,811 10 4981,303 Ivory Coast1,464 18 701745 Senegal1,329 11 4708486 Niger763 38 543182 Burkina Faso688 48 54892 Mali612 32 228352 Guinea-Bissau475+622+124449 Réunion425+1 3001252 Equatorial Guinea315 3 13299 Sierra Leone199 11 43145 Cabo Verde186 2 37147 Liberia170 20 5892 Chad170 17 43110 Togo128 9 7445 Benin96 2 5044 Gambia17 1 97 Mauritania8 1 61 West African16,629 405 4055,41028 Total50,502+3361,921+417,11831,463128 Proportion (%)32.9 21.1 2.417.221.9 ## Table 8 COVID-19 and Southern African region – 6 May 2020 CountryTotal casesNew casesTotal deathsNew deathsTotal recoveredActive casesSerious, critical South Africa7,572 148 2,7464,67836 Zambia139+14+192431 Mozambique81 1962 Malawi41 3 9291 Zimbabwe34 4 525 Botswana23 1 814 Namibia16 88 Southern Africa (total)7,906 160 2,8874,85938 Total50,502+3361,921+417,11831,463128 Proportion (%)15.7 8.3 16.915.429.7 ## Table 9 COVID-19 and Central African region – 6 May 2020 CountryTotal casesNew casesTotal deathsNew deathsTotal recoveredActive casesSerious, critical Cameroon2,104 64 9531,08712 Gabon397 6 932981 Equatorial Guinea315 3 13299 Sao Tome and Principe174 3 4167 Central African Republic85 1075 Angola36 2 1123 Chad170 17 43110 Congo236 10 26200 Democratic Republic of Congo797+9235+192670 Gambia17 1 97 Central African countries (total)4,331 141 1,2542,93613 Total50,502+3361,921+417,11831,463128 Proportion (%)8.6 7.3 7.39.310.2 ## Table 10 Africa countries – Coronavirus situation in numbers – 6 May 2020 CountryTotal casesNew casesTotal deathsNew deathsTotal recoveredActive casesSerious, critical South Africa7,572 148 2,7464,67836 Egypt7,201 452 1,7305,019 Morocco5,382+163182+11,9693,2311 Algeria4,838 470 2,0672,30122 Nigeria2,950 98 4812,3714 Ghana2,719 18 2942,4074 Cameroon2,104 64 9531,08712 Guinea1,811 10 4981,303 Ivory Coast1,464 18 701745 Senegal1,329 11 4708486 Djibouti1,120 2 745373 Tunisia1,022 43 48249717 Somalia835 38 757222 Democratic Republic of Congo797+9235+192670 Sudan778 45 70663 Niger763 38 543182 Mayotte739 9 3523786 Burkina Faso688 48 54892 Mali612 32 228352 Kenya535 24 1823292 Tanzania480 16 1672977 Guinea-Bissau475+622+124449 Réunion425+1 3001252 Gabon397 6 932981 Mauritius332 10 31933 Equatorial Guinea315 3 13299 Rwanda261 129132 Congo236 10 26200 Sierra Leone199 11 43145 Cabo Verde186 2 37147 Sao Tome and Principe174 3 4167 Liberia170 20 5892 Chad170 17 43110 Ethiopia162+174 9365 Madagascar151 101501 Zambia139+14+192431 Togo128 9 7445 Eswatini119 1 12106 Uganda98 5543 Benin96 2 5044 Central African Republic85 1075 Mozambique81 1962 Libya63 3 2436 South Sudan52 52 Malawi41 3 9291 Eritrea39 309 Angola36 2 1123 Zimbabwe34 4 525 Botswana23 1 814 Gambia17 1 97 Namibia16 88 Burundi15 1 77 Seychelles11 83 Mauritania8 1 61 Western Sahara6 51 Comoros3 3 Total50,502+3361,921+417,11831,463128 ## Table 11 Effect of COVID-19 on education CountryRegionEffect of COVID-19 on educationLockdown duration EgyptNorth AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 MoroccoNorth AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 AlgeriaNorth AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 13 KenyaEast AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 TanzaniaEast AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 19 EthiopiaEast AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 RwandaEast AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 MauritiusEast AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 19 NigeriaWest AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 26 GhanaWest AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 CameroonWest AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 18 SenegalWest AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 LiberiaWest AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 NamibiaSouthern AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 ZimbabweSouthern AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 24 South AfricaSouthern AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 18 ZambiaSouthern AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 20 GabonCentral AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 16 AngolaCentral AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 24 Equatorial GuineaCentral AfricaNational closure of all schoolsFrom March 15 ## Table 12 Policy measures that African countries have already taken (from March to May) S/NMeasuresAfrican countries 1State loans or credit guarantees for companiesNigeria, South Africa 2Income subsidies for affected workersNone, no African country 3Tax deferralsNone, no African country 4Regulatory forbearance to banks and corporate debtorsNigeria 5Social security deferrals or subsidiesNone, no African country 6Central Bank grants debt repayment holidays such as loan moratoriumsEgypt, Nigeria 7Salary donation or pay-cut by top public officials to contribute to coronavirus relief fundingRwanda, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, South Africa 8President takes a pay-cut, donates salaryMali, Algeria, South Africa, Rwanda, Malawi 9Provision of free water supply, food with government bearing the cost during the pandemicGhana, Rwanda 10Tax holidayGhana 11Countries that received support from foreign billionairesaNigeria, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Cameroon 12Countries that sought and received support from local billionairesNigeria, South Africab 13Cash payments to all citizens to help them cope with financial difficulty during the pandemicMalawi, Nigeria 14Corporate bailoutsNigeria 15Seeking debt forgiveness and other debt relief to reduce the economic impact of coronavirussub-Saharan Africa countries 16Adopting accommodative monetary policies by Central Banks such as reducing interest rateCongo, Nigeria, Egypt, Kenya 17Good samaritans and philanthropists donating food suppliesSouth Africa, Nigeria 18Countries that received UN and UNESCO supportAngola 19Releasing prisonersNigeria, South Africa, Cameroon Note(s): aBillionaires that provided financial and non-financial support such as protective gear and test kits to some Africa countries are Jack Ma of Ali Baba Conglomerates, Mike Bloomberg bBillionaires such as Patrice Motsepe, the Oppenheimer and Rupert families in South Africa; Aliko Dangote and Folorunsho Alakija of Nigeria ## Table 13 Stringency of common policy response CountryDateSCWPCCPEROGCPTSHRRISITCIS Angola2020-05-0632241224 Burkina Faso2020-05-06332112240 Djibouti2020-05-06332423240 Egypt2020-05-06322122240 Ethiopia2020-04-30322411220 Gabon2020-04-25332412240 Ghana2020-05-0631231004 Kenya2020-05-0432242324 Morocco2020-04-30332222241 Mali2020-04-30302321231 Mozambique2020-05-0430230102 Mauritius2020-05-0633231214 Malawi2020-05-0630230104 Namibia2020-05-0632240002 Nigeria2020-05-0632232224 Rwanda2020-04-30332423240 Sudan2020-03-13000000000 Sudan2020-04-25312322240 Sierra Leone2020-04-30302301240 Seychelles2020-04-30332422230 Tunisia2020-05-06332412231 South Africa2020-04-30332312241 Zambia2020-05-0130240224 Zimbabwe2020-05-04332 12241 Note(s): SC = School closing; WPC = Workplace closing; CPE = Cancel Public events; ROG = Restrictions on gathering; CPT = Close Public Transport; SHR = Stay-at-home requirement; RIM = restrictions on internal movement; ITC = international travel controls; IS = income support ## Table 14 Foreign aid (from March to May) S/NAfrican countryFunderAmount 1EgyptWorld BankUS$7.9m
2The GambiaThe World Bank's IDA$10m grant 3Sao Tome and PrincipeThe World Bank's IDAa$2.5m grant
4CongoWorld Bank ($47m) and US government ($6m)US$53m 5LibyaUS government$6m
6RwandaWorld Bank$14.25m 7MalawiUK's DFID$2.24m
8KenyaWorld BankUS$60m 9SenegalWorld Bank$20m
10DjiboutiWorld BankUS$5m 11South SudanWorld Bank$7.6m
12SomaliaUS government$7m 13Sierra LeoneWorld Bank$7.5m

## Table 15

COVID-19 opportunities

CountryOpportunities
Tanzania
1. use legislation to pass an economic relief bill into law

South Africa
1. make private health care affordable to poor citizens

Ghana
1. use legislation to pass an economic relief bill into law

Mauritius
1. preserve the existing social welfare system

2. use legislation to pass an economic relief bill into law

3. expand the capacity of the country's health system

Guinea
1. use legislation to pass an economic relief bill into law

2. preserve the social welfare system

Sierra Leone
1. create a well-functioning distance learning education system

2. use legislation to an economic relief bill into law

Kenya
1. improve self-sufficient food production

2. improve the health care system

3. use legislation to pass an economic relief bill into law

Nigeria
1. repair the public health system

2. use legislation to create a national welfare system

3. create a well-functioning digital economy

4. establish a digital learning platform

## Table A1

Africa countries – coronavirus situation in numbers – 6 May 2020

CountryTotal casesNew casesTotal deathsNew deathsTotal recoveredActive casesSerious, critical
South Africa7,572 148 2,7464,67836
Egypt7,201 452 1,7305,019
Morocco5,382+163182+11,9693,2311
Algeria4,838 470 2,0672,30122
Nigeria2,950 98 4812,3714
Ghana2,719 18 2942,4074
Cameroon2,104 64 9531,08712
Guinea1,811 10 4981,303
Ivory Coast1,464 18 701745
Senegal1,329 11 4708486
Djibouti1,120 2 745373
Tunisia1,022 43 48249717
Somalia835 38 757222
Democratic Republic of Congo797+9235+192670
Sudan778 45 70663
Niger763 38 543182
Mayotte739 9 3523786
Burkina Faso688 48 54892
Mali612 32 228352
Kenya535 24 1823292
Tanzania480 16 1672977
Guinea-Bissau475+622+124449
Réunion425+1 3001252
Gabon397 6 932981
Mauritius332 10 31933
Equatorial Guinea315 3 13299
Rwanda261 129132
Congo236 10 26200
Sierra Leone199 11 43145
Cabo Verde186 2 37147
Sao Tome and Principe174 3 4167
Liberia170 20 5892
Ethiopia162+174 9365
Zambia139+14+192431
Togo128 9 7445
Eswatini119 1 12106
Uganda98 5543
Benin96 2 5044
Central African Republic85 1075
Mozambique81 1962
Libya63 3 2436
South Sudan52 52
Malawi41 3 9291
Eritrea39 309
Angola36 2 1123
Zimbabwe34 4 525
Botswana23 1 814
Gambia17 1 97
Namibia16 88
Burundi15 1 77
Seychelles11 83
Mauritania8 1 61
Western Sahara6 51
Comoros3 3
Total50,502+3361,921+417,11831,463128

## References

Acevedo, C., Cabrera, M. and Cornia, A. (2014), “Social policies or private solidarity? The equalizing role of migration and remittances in El Salvador”, Falling Inequality in Latin America: Policy Changes and Lessons, p. 164.

Ather, A., Patel, B., Ruparel, N.B., Diogenes, A. and Hargreaves, K.M. (2020), “Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19): implications for clinical dental care”, Journal of Endodontics, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 584-595.

Barro, R.J., Ursúa, J.F. and Weng, J. (2020), The Coronavirus and the Great Influenza Pandemic: Lessons from the ‘Spanish Flu’ for the Coronavirus's Potential Effects on Mortality and Economic Activity (No. W26866), National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, available at: https://www.nber.org/papers/w26866.

Chen, H., Xu, W., Paris, C., Reeson, A. and Li, X. (2020), Social Distance and SARS Memory: Impact on the Public Awareness of 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak, medRxiv, .

Chinazzi, M., Davis, J.T., Ajelli, M., Gioannini, C., Litvinova, M., Merler, S., … and Viboud, C. (2020), “The effect of travel restrictions on the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak”, Science, Vol. 368 No. 6489, pp. 395-400.

Fernandes, N. (2020), “Economic effects of coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19) on the world economy”, Available at SSRN 3557504.

Fornaro, L. and Wolf, M. (2020), Covid-19 Coronavirus and Macroeconomic Policy, Working Paper, available at: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3560337.

Goodell, J.W. (2020), “COVID-19 and finance: agendas for future research”, Finance Research Letters, p. 101512.

Gössling, S., Scott, D. and Hall, C.M. (2020), “Pandemics, tourism and global change: a rapid assessment of COVID-19”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, pp. 1-20.

Haleem, A., Javaid, M. and Vaishya, R. (2020), “Effects of COVID 19 pandemic in daily life”, Current Medicine Research and Practice, pp. 1-2.

Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T.B. and Layton, J.B. (2010), “Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review”, PLoS Med, Vol. 7 No. 7, pp. 1-20.

Jutz, R. (2015), “The role of income inequality and social policies on income-related health inequalities in Europe”, International Journal for Equity in Health, Vol. 14 No. 1, p. 117.

Kuckertz, A., Brändle, L., Gaudig, A., Hinderer, S., Reyes, C.A.M., Prochotta, A. and Berger, E.S. (2020), “Startups in times of crisis –a rapid response to the COVID-19 pandemic”, Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Vol. 13, pp. 1-13.

Laing, T. (2020), “The economic impact of the Coronavirus 2019 (Covid-2019): implications for the mining industry”, The Extractive Industries and Society, in press.

Li, N., Dachner, N. and Tarasuk, V. (2016), “The impact of changes in social policies on household food insecurity in British Columbia, 2005–2012”, Preventive Medicine, Vol. 93, pp. 151-158.

Lunau, T., Wahrendorf, M., Dragano, N. and Siegrist, J. (2013), “Work stress and depressive symptoms in older employees: impact of national labour and social policies”, BMC Public Health, Vol. 13 No. 1, p. 1086.

McGuire, J.W. (2011), “Social policies in Latin America: causes, characteristics, and consequences”, ACSPL Working Paper Series, Vol. 1 No. 1, p. 1.

Oruonye, E.D. and Ahmed, Y.M. (2020), “An appraisal of the potential impacts of Covid-19 on tourism in Nigeria”, Journal of Economics and Technology Research, Vol. 1 No. 1.

Ozili, P.K. and Arun, T. (2020), “Spillover of COVID-19: impact on the global economy”, Available at SSRN 3562570.

Ozili, P.K. (2020), “Covid-19 pandemic and economic crisis: the Nigerian experience and structural causes”, Available at SSRN 3567419.

Ramelli, S. and Wagner, A.F. (2020), “Feverish stock price reactions to covid-19”, CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP14511. Available at SSRN, Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3560319.

Rapp, C., Shore, J. and Tosun, J. (2018), “Not so risky business? How social policies shape the perceived feasibility of self-employment”, Journal of European Social Policy, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 143-160.

Sadati, A.K., B Lankarani, M.H. and Bagheri Lankarani, K. (2020), “Risk society, global vulnerability and fragile resilience”, Sociological View on the Coronavirus Outbreak, in press.

Wilder-Smith, A. and Freedman, D.O. (2020), “Isolation, quarantine, social distancing and community containment: pivotal role for old-style public health measures in the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak”, Journal of Travel Medicine, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 1-4.

Zhang, D., Hu, M. and Ji, Q. (2020), “Financial markets under the global pandemic of COVID-19”, Finance Research Letters, in press.

## Corresponding author

Peterson Ozili can be contacted at: petersonkitakogelu@yahoo.com