3/11/20: COVID19 Update: Nordics

Things are getting more complicated in the Nordics in the wake of the unfolding second wave of the pandemic:

The second wave of the pandemic has started first in the Nordics excluding Sweden, but the same wave is now also beginning to manifest itself in Sweden. Adding to the complexity of analysis, Swedish data is now being reported with significant volatility (multiple consecutive '0' observations per week), making higher frequency comparatives basically impossible.

Nonetheless, Sweden is now catching up, once again, with the rest of the Nordics in terms of new cases.  In the last 7 days, Sweden averaged 1,204 cases per day (up on 627 average daily rate of new cases in the two weeks prior). Nordics ex-Sweden averaged (adjusting to Swedish population) 3,228 daily new cases over thee last 7 days, with prior 14 days average of 2,775.

In terms of daily deaths, Sweden currently performs significantly better than the rest of the Nordics. Sweden's average daily deaths run at 0 over the last 7 days and 0.43 deaths per day average over the prior 14 days period. Nordics ex-Sweden (again adjusting to Swedish population) averaged 17 deaths per day in the last 7 days, and 10.6 deaths in thee prior two weeks period. However, this better performance by Sweden is at least in part due to the later start of the second wave of the pandemic in thee country compared to other Nordics.

Overall, for now, excess deaths count in Sweden compared to other Nordics is shrinking, currently at 2,580.

Only time will tell whether thee current second wave dynamics are going to push Sweden once again into the position of being worse-hit by the pandemic than its Nordic counterparts. 

23/10/20: COVID19 Update: Nordics

My last update on Nordics vs Sweden comparatives was a month ago, although I did post some more recent data trends on Twitter since then. Here are the latest numbers:

New deaths counts are relatively benign, both in Sweden and (at a higher rate) in the rest of the Nordics. However, new daily counts in thee Nordics ex-Sweden are literally out of control as a new, and much larger wave of the pandemic sweeps EU27. 

Sweden entered the second wave of the pandemic with a delay, compared to other European states, so its numbers are still lagging those in other Nordic states. 

I commented on the often-heard argument in favour of Sweden's 'herd immunity' strategy earlier today and you can read it here, if you missed it (bottom of the post): https://trueeconomics.blogspot.com/2020/10/231020-covid19-update-countries-with.html. 

It appears, based on Sweden's (amongst others') experiences, that we really have very limited options in terms of public policy response to the pandemic. My five cents, based on multiple observations of experts' advice: we need 

• Fully enforceable and strongly policed public distancing measures, 
• Mandatory masks in all public places,
• Restricted (though, probably, not banned) access to public commons and public places,
• Effective and wide-spread free testing on demand, 
• Aggressive tracing and strictly enforced quarantines,
• Improved separation of COVID19 patients from all general health facilities (in order to ensure that normal health services provision is not impacted by the pandemic), and
• Significant increase in spending on public health and education so both key sectors of the society can be opened safely and sustainably.

There has to be public and state-level zero-tolerance view toward anyone failing to comply with these measures.  

Anything short of these will result in stop-and-go swings of the pandemic and knee-jerk policy reactions with rolling shutdowns of the entire economies. 

25/9/20: COVID19 Update: Nordics

 

Sweden is not acquiring the fabled 'herd immunity', folks. And other Nordics are now in a full-blown second wave of the pandemic:

As the figures above show, 

• Sweden has been experiencing a reduction in new cases through the first week of September. This resulted in Swedish daily case counts finally dropping below the numbers reported in other Nordic countries. 
• Since the start of September, Nordics ex-Sweden have entered the second wave of Covid19 pandemic, further exacerbating their relative position compared to Sweden.
• However, Sweden itself is now experiencing the second wave of the pandemic, and Sweden's historical troughs of new cases have remained always higher than the troughs reached by the other Nordic states.
• Both Sweden and the rest of the Nordics continue to enjoy low levels of deaths, however, in line with the numbers of new cases, Nordics ex-Sweden are showing signs of the new wave of the pandemic lifting deaths counts relative to the past troughs.

13/9/20: COVID19 Update: Nordics

 I have not updated the controversial comparatives between the Nordics (ex-Sweden) and Sweden in terms of COVID19 pandemic figures for some time now. For those of you who are out of the loop in this controversy, 

• Sweden imposed weak restrictions (basically none) on mobility and work environments in the wake of the pandemic, pursuing the strategy of 'herd immunity';
• Other Nordics imposed severe crack downs on mobility and social and work environments in response to COVID19 pandemic.

There has been a lot of controversy as to the effectiveness of the lack thereof of the Swedish strategy.

So here are the key data trends and points:

Key takeaways from the above:

• As of September 12, Sweden has the total number of 89,377 cases. Nordics ex-Sweden, normalized to the Swedish population size had 35,277 cases, or 39.5% of the total number of Swedish cases. So to-date, Sweden has experienced significantly greater exposure to the virus than its Nordic countries counterparts.
• As of September 12, Sweden has the total number of 5,829 deaths. Nordics ex-Sweden, normalized to the Swedish population size had 2,188 cases, or 37.5% of the total number of Swedish deaths. Sweden also experienced much higher death counts from the pandemic than its Nordic countries counterparts.
• Notably, per first chart above, since 26-27th of August, Nordic ex-Sweden have experienced a rather substantial re-acceleration in new cases, in line with the rest of the EU27 (see more on this here: https://trueeconomics.blogspot.com/2020/09/12920-covid19-update-us-vs-eu27.html). Sweden is only appearing to show signs of such re-acceleration starting with the end of the first week of September.
• The above change in trends for new cases is yet to translate into change in trends in deaths: in the last 7 days, average daily new deaths for Nordics ex-Sweden, adjusting for population differences, was 0.83. The same number fo Sweden was 1.57. In the prior 14 days, the averages were reversed at 1.034 and 0.571, respectively.

Watch the new wave developing in days ahead... 

13/7/20: COVID19 Update: Sweden v Nordics

Updating charts comparing Sweden and ex-Sweden Nordic countries, normalizing population of the latter to that of Sweden:

Nope, no 'herd immunity' in Sweden. But there is a crushed curve for new cases and deaths in the Nordics. 

10/7/20: COVID19 Update: Sweden v Nordics

Sweden has been continuing its uncontested-by-anyone-else march toward thee non-existent 'herd immunity':

And the pipeline of upcoming intensive care patients seems to be un-abating:

In the mean time, the rest of the Nordics have crushed the curve. And this is without inclusion of Iceland. 

Personally, I cannot understand how Sweden's resident are tolerating this, but... who knows... 

20/06/20: COVID19 Update: Sweden v Other Nordics

Sweden is a now a verifiable basket case amongst the Nordic countries when it comes to the country management of the COVID19 pandemic:

The two charts above show that Sweden performance in both daily cases and deaths has been truly shockingly poor, compared to all other Nordic countries combined. The same is true in country-by-country comparatives.

In fact, based on ECDC data, were Sweden to perform as all other Nordics (including Estonia), its total number of cases of COVID19 registered would currently stand at 22,890, against its actual count of 54,443, and its death toll would have been 2,113 against its actual death toll of 4,877.

3/9/16: Innovation policies scorecards: Euro Area and BRIC

An interesting, albeit rather arbitrary (in terms of methodology) assessment matrix for innovation environment rankings across a range of countries, via EU Commission.

Here are the BRIC economies:

All clustered in the “Above Average Harmful Policies” (negative institutional factors) and “Below Average / Average Beneficial Policies” (positive institutional factors). Surprisingly, however, India sports the worst innovation policies environment, followed by China (where “Beneficial Policies” are, of course, skewed by state supports for key sectors). Russia comes in third (where the beneficial policies are most likely skewed to the upside by so-called strategic sectors, also with heavy state involvement). You might laugh, because with Brazil being fourth 'least detrimental' environment for innovation, the EU rankings are clearly at odds with actual innovation outcomes (https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/userfiles/file/reportpdf/GII-2015-v5.pdf) where

• China = rank 29
• Russia = rank 48
• Brazil = rank 70
• India = rank 81

Looking at the contrasting case of key advanced economies with strong supports, one wonders how much of Ireland’s policy environment is due to multinationals’ accommodation and just how on earth can such an ‘innovation-centric’ economy be so ‘average’ in terms of its innovation policies despite hundreds of millions pumped into supporting indigenous innovation. 

Then again, look at Finland with its stellar innovation policies culture and… err… economy in total coma

Makes you think… 

29/1/16: Estonia - A Safer Bet than France?

Euromoney have a good summary article on Baltic states’ economies and sovereign risk ratings (all of which are improving).

My comment toward the end.

http://www.euromoney.com/Article/3524950/Estonia-offers-safer-ption-than-France-or-South-Korea.html

Here is my take on Baltics ratings in full:

Given macroeconomic and geopolitical environment, Estonia's credit rating by all three rating agencies clearly lags overall trends in risks evolution. The geopolitical and external macroeconomic risks these ratings reflect are consistent with early 2015 assessments and are well behind the more recent trends. In simple terms, Estonia is over-due a one notch upgrade across all agencies, as reflective of expected re-acceleration in growth from 1.9 percent estimated in 2015 to 2.6 percent forecast for 2016-2017, and improving labour markets performance and inflation outlook.

Another key driver for the upgrade is significant abatement in geopolitical risks faced by Estonia in the context of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict that has evolved into a localised and frozen conflict with no expected spillover to the broader region.

Estonia also enjoys significant improvements in its terms of trade, via Euro devaluation, which is reflected in its relatively strong current account dynamics.

As far as Latvia and Lithuania ratings go, both countries' present ratings are in line with generally weaker economic, political and social institutions and with long term structural problems at play in both economies. While geopolitical risks have abated for these two countries since the start of 2015, supportive monetary and euro devaluation-driven competitiveness tailwinds are yet to manifest themselves in terms of current account balances and gains in real  productivity.

Unlike Estonia, both Latvia and Lithuania run current account deficits in presence of significantly higher unemployment and continued outflows of human capital. Of the two countries, Latvia is probably closer to a rating upgrade, which can come later in the first half of 2016.

Economics 23/04/2010: As Greece crashes, Finns are talking gibberish

Sometimes, it is wise for policymakers not to speak to the media. This is usually true when the policymakers have no idea what they are talking about. Case in point – FT’s story (here) about the Finnish PM backing German plan for a new treaty on tougher fiscal deficit and debt measures for the Euro area.

“Finland is sympathetic to controversial German proposals for a fresh European Union treaty if necessary to enforce fiscal and economic discipline in the eurozone after the Greek debt crisis.” Mr Vanhanen, PM of Finland, said “the priority should be to look for ways to tighten rules within the existing treaty, including the withdrawal of EU structural funds from countries that ignore official warnings from Brussels over excessive budget deficits”.

So far, so good.

Per FT, “his comments came amid the most serious crisis in the euro’s 11-year history, with Greece on the brink of a bail-out from the IMF and fellow eurozone countries. “Greek debt is not so big but there is a domino threat so we need to isolate the problem as early as possible,” said Mr Vanhanen” (italics are mine, of course).

Oops! Did he really say that? At 117% of GDP at the end of 2009, and pushing toward 130% by the end of this year, Greek debt is ‘REALLY BIG’, folks. This is precisely why Greek bonds are trading now at the yields close to those of junk-rated Pakistan!

Mr Vanhanen “insisted the crisis must not be allowed to disrupt plans by Estonia to join the euro next January and said the eurozone must keep its doors open to aspirant members.” Why not? He warned that “any delay would “send totally the wrong message” to other aspirant members, such as Latvia and Lithuania, which are making tough budget cuts and other reforms to keep alive hopes of euro entry.”

So hold on, Mr Vanhanen. You say that these countries are undertaking reforms only in order to comply with the euro entry rules, not because these are the right things to do? What hope do we, the Eurozone taxpayers, have that once admitted into the club these countries will not turn Greek? None, certainly, judging by Mr Vanhanen remark.

My humble advice – if you are a politician with no expertise in economics or finance, don’t give interviews.