Suchergebnisse

Accompanying the spread of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) across the globe was a proliferation in anti-Asian hate crimes and political rhetoric. These discriminatory actions mirrored the prejudice exhibited towards other groups in past pandemics, such as Jewish populations in Europe during the Black Death between 1346 and 1353. This study aimed to determine similar patterns relating to and underlying the prejudice seen in past pandemics, focusing on three categories: hate crimes, political rhetoric, and religiosity. Prejudice against Jewish people during the Bubonic plague, Immigrants in America during the 1918 Flu, and Asian Americans during COVID-19 were investigated in this study because of the historical record of existing prejudice against these groups before the start of the pandemics. Overall, this study found that there was no general pattern of hate crimes during past pandemics without accompanying political rhetoric. In addition, there was no general pattern in religiosity in the pandemics studied, suggesting that the prejudice was not fueled by religious motivations. Given the small selection of pandemics analyzed in this study, further analysis with more pandemics could present more robust conclusions.

We are at a moment. An inflection point. We are in a moment of interlocking pandemics. Not only the health pandemic sparked by the COVID-19 crisis. But a pandemic of policing, poverty, and protest. George Floyd and Eric Garner were arrested for crimes of poverty. We live in a time of record-breaking unemployment and economic fragility caused by the global health emergency—a crisis that has unmasked structural inequalities baked into the foundation.

This book provides an engaging, jargon-free introduction to the threat of global pandemics, offering an overview of the many origins and triggers of pandemic events. It covers the impacts generated by novel infectious disease outbreaks across various dimensions - from social and ethical to medical and political, from media to economic and legal implications. The author discusses the preparedness strategies developed globally, the lessons learned from various outbreaks and the mitigation measures deployed -- from quarantine and social distancing to data sharing and surveillance systems -- including their unintended impacts. While the risk of global pandemics is certainly intensely debated by the scientific community, and increasingly by policy makers at various levels, the threat is hardly discussed in the public domain. It only permeates the media during crisis events, such as during the SARS outbreak in 2003, the West African Ebola outbreak in 2014-15, and most notably the ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic crisis. This book is thus highly timely and topical. It has a global scope, whilst at times zooming in on the implications of pandemic risk and mitigation for the Global North or the Global South. Given the interdisciplinarity of the topic, this book will be of great interest to a wider non-academic audience, as well as students from a range of subjects including politics, sociology, geography, anthropology, and international development, along with entry-level medical students keen to widen their appreciation of the social dimensions of the medical work they set out to conduct.

Baker & Winkler's critique of Asian elephant tourism and conservation in Thailand has convinced me that this was "an industry with too many victims." Yet I fear that B&W's proposed remedy of returning to past elephant husbandry by Karen hill-peoples has little likelihood of improving the lives of the elephants for long. Who can predict whether the Karen will live up to this hope? B&W advocate for the Karen, but not for "an abolitionist stance on elephant-human relationships." In my view, whether we discuss elephants or the wild mammals that carry SARS-CoV-2, abolition of many human uses of animals is needed to save our planet and ourselves. Are Karen elephant-keepers that different from the bat-hunters who seem to have brought the pandemic to our doorsteps? Both eke out a marginal living in traditional ways exploiting animals. Human survival does not depend on sustaining "wet markets" or elephant tourism or eating meat every day. What we really need is fundamental reform of our relationships with animals, starting with the human governance of the nonhuman world that sustains us all. Elephants and pandemics expose the myth of limitless human freedom.

We provide theory and evidence on the relationship between globalization and pandemics. Business travel facilitates trade and travel leads to human interactions that transmit disease. Trade-motivated travel generates an epidemiological externality across countries. If infections lead to deaths, or reduce individual labor supply, we establish a general equilibrium social distancing effect, whereby increases in relative prices in unhealthy countries reduce travel to those countries. If agents internalize the threat of infection, we show that their behavioral responses lead to a reduction in travel that is larger for higher-trade-cost locations, which initially reduces the ratio of trade to output. (JEL D91, F14, F60, I12, N30, N70, Z31)

Publish date: 10 January 2022 ; The focus starts with the current COVID-19 pandemic, recognized as 'the greatest challenge we have faced since World War II' emerged in Asia in late 2019 and rapidly spread to Europe, Africa, the Americas, and Oceania. It undoubtedly represents the major global health crisis of our time still unresolved after two years, despite the wide range of measures adopted at all levels of governance to respond to it. ; -- Editorial -- SECTION I ESSAYS -- China's Legal Response to COVID-19 -- Critical Review of the Legal Measures Against COVID-19 in Taiwan -- Legal and Regulatory Measures and Responses to Prevent and Control COVID-19 in Indonesia -- Government Responses During COVID-19: a Study from India -- Legal and Regulatory Measures and Responses to Prevent and Control COVID-19 in Uganda -- Summary Report Concerning Responses to COVID-19 in the USA -- Belgian Responses to COVID-19 -- COVID-19 and Government Response in Germany. Building Resilience by Comparison of Experiences -- COVID-19 as a Global Institutional Event and Its Institutional Treatment in Greece -- Civil Rights in Times of Pandemic – A Code of Conduct for Governance -- Italian Response to COVID-19 -- Political Rights in Times of Pandemic – A Code of Conduct for City Governance -- SECTION II LITIGATION -- Global Pandemic and the Role of Courts -- Comparative Survey on Vaccination -- Case Law Survey on Data Protection -- COVID-19 and Freedom to Conduct a Business -- SECTION III REPORTS -- COVID-19 Litigation in Israel -- COVID-19 Litigation in Brazil -- Judicial Review and Restrictive Measures. How Has the Intensity and Scope of And Scope of Judicial Review Changed During COVID-19 in Italy? -- Return to the Facemask Monopoly -- US Response to COVID-19 -- Environmental Protection and Human Rights in the Pandemic -- List of Authors

The beginning of 2020 marked an unexpected turn for the world, the global pandemic of COVID-19 has affected every aspect of life. It has also created an unprecedented opportunity for governments to justify the expansion of their surveillance and collection of data. The foregoing essay, which was first published in Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive of the Columbia Law School focuses on two types of data collection – governmental mass collection of nonanonymized location data and state-collected nonanonymized data on people's health and immunity status. Several countries have applied one or both practices and it is relevant to look into them with legal perspective. Georgia is one of the countries, that also uses technology for the purpose of locating the possible contacts of the virus infected people, thus making the comparative analysis extremely relevant locally as well as globally.