Page 103 - GHES-3-3

Global Health Economics and
Sustainability
Pandemic effects on economy and public health management

The recent pandemic heightened the demand for the to effectively stop the spread of diseases such as cholera,
use of technology to access essential goods and services yellow fever, plague, smallpox, typhus, and relapsing fever.
(Tisdell, 2020). Numerous companies were compelled to These rules were renamed International Health Regulations
implement varied e-commerce strategies to survive but (IHR) in 1969. The IHR advanced the concept of the
disparities in technology access restricted the capacities worldwide monitoring of diseases that could potentially
of certain communities to address the problem (Kanda & become pandemics. The six disease-outbreak stages
Kivimaa, 2020). outlined during pandemics were partially exemplified
by the SARS epidemic of 2002. The 2005 version of the
4. Public health responses to pandemics IHR significantly transformed the management of global
and other global public health emergencies health risks. Member nations are expected to promptly
Europe significantly improved hygiene in the 18 century report public health emergencies of international concern
th
because the region developed a better understanding of the (PHEIC) and must respond with appropriate action.
causes and growth of infectious diseases that could become Smallpox, wild poliomyelitis, novel human influenza, and
widespread. International conferences on sanitation began SARS comprise the four diseases that require worldwide
reporting. Varied other infectious diseases with pandemic
to be organized in 1866. Europe had already established potential, including cholera, pneumonic plague, yellow
a system in the 13 century to examine, separate, and fever, and viral hemorrhagic fevers require thorough
th
contain individuals who were suspected or confirmed to
have contracted certain ailments. However, most such evaluation (Gostin & Katz, 2016). The IHR was tested
operations, whether open or secret, were conducted to during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic and received
safeguard the “civilized West” from the “disorderly and significant negative feedback. The WHO designated Ebola
unpleasant East.” The Epidemic Disease Act of 1897 was and polio as PHEICs in 2014. The criticism levied during
the H1N1 and Ebola PHEIC caused governments to
deemed repressive by several specialists but its enactment implement public health risk communication frameworks
was prompted by the devastating 1896 epidemic that and institute procedures to enhance their reaction speeds.
ravaged Bombay, India. It became crucial to mobilize
soldiers to ensure compliance with the controversial 5. Public health responses to the 2019
sanitary regulations. The British Quarantine Act of 1825 COVID-19 pandemic
became the driving force for the Indian public health
movement. The Vaccination Act was enacted in 1880 Several global public health interventions mirrored
(Kumar, 2022). actions adopted during previous pandemics such as the
H1N1 influenza outbreak in 2009. However, governments
Most diseases that cause pandemics lack targeted
therapies, except for mild cases when symptom responded with increased determination due to the
higher mortality rates and overwhelming burdens
management is employed or severe cases that require only resulting from COVID-19 infections. Moreover, several
supportive care (Kumar, 2022). Thus, the United States countries such as Brazil and the United States experienced
and Europe enforced non-pharmaceutical interventions as significant increases in cases because their governments
public health initiatives, often through legal requirements. did not endorse the WHO’s findings. Numerous nations
Public health restrictive measures encompass diverse implemented travel restrictions and bans once the pandemic
interventions such as compulsory mask-wearing, was announced. Many nations tracked and monitored
maintaining physical distance, practicing good hand individuals traveling to and from overseas destinations
hygiene, notifying authorities of confirmed cases, but with varying success. Several nations such as Australia,
monitoring and tracking cases, shutting down educational New Zealand, and Vietnam achieved significant positive
institutions, closing public venues such as theaters and outcomes by applying comparable policies. Conversely,
malls, and implementing movement restrictions through the absence of proper oversight of overseas visitors
partial or complete lockdowns. Disinfection protocols were arriving in countries such as Brazil, Mexico, India, and
applied as a preventive strategy in public areas and homes other nations caused the disease to spread swiftly among
of individuals diagnosed with the concerned illnesses the local population. Countries implemented domestic
during the influenza pandemics of 1918 and 2002 as well limitations on transportation through rail and road in
as the SARS outbreak. However, the success levels of such addition to imposing cross-border travel restrictions.
measures were not substantiated (Kumar, 2022).
The execution of such policies was also characterized by
The World Health Organization (WHO) functioned a lack of organization as wealthier nations, notably the US,
importantly in establishing the International Sanitary witnessed protests against travel restrictions and lockdown
Regulations of 1951. These regulations were instituted measures (Angus et al., 2020; Pan et al., 2021).

Volume 3 Issue 3 (2025) 95 https://doi.org/10.36922/ghes.4531