Kiran Kabtta Somvanshi
Dr. Kiran Somvanshi is a data journalist at The Economic Times. She has been a part of the Economic Times Intelligence Group, the research wing of ET since the past 15 years - writing extensively on Indian companies especially in the healthcare and consumer goods sectors. Telling insightful stories from data is her forte with corporate governance, gender, corporate social responsibility and public policy being her prime areas of interest. Kiran is a Salzburg Global Fellow and has been a Fulbright Humphrey Fellow as well as a Chevening Fellow. Kiran has had short stints with the World Bank, UNDP and also collaborated on research published in the Brookings Institution. She has a PhD from TISS and is a qualified Company Secretary, Cost Accountant with a bachelor's degree in Law and Psychology. Twitter handle: @Kiran_ET
Thanks to Omicron, 2022 has a déjà vu feeling to it. Uncertainty regarding Covid has been made worse due to capricious measures such as night curfews, weekend lockdowns and ‘odd-even’ closure of shops, accompanied by warnings of more stringent actions. All this leads to misgivings about the overall administrative response to the third wave.
While the evidence regarding Omicron being a ‘mild’ variant is still inconclusive, the administrative machinery, having faced two Covid waves, should be able to douse the uncertainty by being clear on what people should expect in terms of curbs on mobility and economic activity. Compared to 2020, when there was no vaccine available, over 60% of India’s adult population is now fully vaccinated, and inoculation of 15-18-year olds is well underway. Besides, there is now clarity and consensus on the medical management of Covid.
Shouldn’t, then, the restrictions be less arbitrary and harsh compared to the previous years? In 2020, India was among the earliest large countries to enforce one of the strictest lockdowns but was slower than most others in lifting those restrictions. Doesn’t the Indian public deserve swifter and more dynamic policymaking this year?
Two consecutive years of uncertainty is not something small businesses in an emerging economy like India can withstand. The bulk of India’s businesses are MSMEs, along with a multitude of unorganised players. The pandemic has triggered one of the biggest consumption shifts from unorganised to organised businesses. The jury is still out on whether the affected unorganised businesses have found an equally remunerative new calling. Most will be less worried about having to be quarantined than about their livelihoods being suspended. An income-generating household is more capable of facing a pandemic than one staring at no source of income.
The handling of the pandemic has also emerged as a litmus test for upholding rights. The right to life and public safety came at loggerheads with the right to livelihood and freedom of movement, making it tough for governments the world over to frame Covid-appropriate policies. Should a public safety measure such as vaccination be made mandatory? Shouldn’t adequate compensation be provided to the hawkers, shop owners and rickshaw-walas, among others, whose livelihoods stall due to lockdowns? Should retail establishments and restaurants be asked to curtail their business even as political rallies remain allowed?
Shouldn’t the information about the number of businesses permanently closed, livelihoods lost, nature of compensation awarded and number of children losing access to education also form part of the Covid information dashboard? Even after two years of battling the Covid scourge, there has been little innovation in the way communication is disseminated to quell misinformation and anxiety among the public. The plethora of contrary and contradictory information and opinions available in social media only make the situation worse. Instead, scaring people to obedience has emerged as a tool of choice. During a pandemic, there is greater need for policymaking to be compassionate, equitable, consistent and people-friendly.
The administration should have the people’s back, and not become the cause for their anxiety. The recent strike of resident doctors is a case in point. Despite the crucial role of healthcare workers during the pandemic, there has hardly been a concrete effort to treat frontline personnel any better. As the governments at various levels are gearing up to mobilise emergency healthcare infrastructure, policymakers can think and plan a little longer-term towards creating healthcare capacities that can be sustained beyond the pandemic.
Can’t some of the jumbo Covid hospitals built from disaster relief funds and philanthropic sources be permanently converted into public hospitals? Can the medical education system be overhauled to fasttrack the generation of a greater number of better-skilled healthcare professionals? Why should universal health coverage remain an ambitious goal, and not an immediate target to be achieved? For now, 2022 seems more like 2020 than a year that is close to putting Covid anxiety behind it.
While the evidence regarding Omicron being a ‘mild’ variant is still inconclusive, the administrative machinery, having faced two Covid waves, should be able to douse the uncertainty by being clear on what people should expect in terms of curbs on mobility and economic activity. Compared to 2020, when there was no vaccine available, over 60% of India’s adult population is now fully vaccinated, and inoculation of 15-18-year olds is well underway. Besides, there is now clarity and consensus on the medical management of Covid.
Shouldn’t, then, the restrictions be less arbitrary and harsh compared to the previous years? In 2020, India was among the earliest large countries to enforce one of the strictest lockdowns but was slower than most others in lifting those restrictions. Doesn’t the Indian public deserve swifter and more dynamic policymaking this year?
Two consecutive years of uncertainty is not something small businesses in an emerging economy like India can withstand. The bulk of India’s businesses are MSMEs, along with a multitude of unorganised players. The pandemic has triggered one of the biggest consumption shifts from unorganised to organised businesses. The jury is still out on whether the affected unorganised businesses have found an equally remunerative new calling. Most will be less worried about having to be quarantined than about their livelihoods being suspended. An income-generating household is more capable of facing a pandemic than one staring at no source of income.
The handling of the pandemic has also emerged as a litmus test for upholding rights. The right to life and public safety came at loggerheads with the right to livelihood and freedom of movement, making it tough for governments the world over to frame Covid-appropriate policies. Should a public safety measure such as vaccination be made mandatory? Shouldn’t adequate compensation be provided to the hawkers, shop owners and rickshaw-walas, among others, whose livelihoods stall due to lockdowns? Should retail establishments and restaurants be asked to curtail their business even as political rallies remain allowed?
Shouldn’t the information about the number of businesses permanently closed, livelihoods lost, nature of compensation awarded and number of children losing access to education also form part of the Covid information dashboard? Even after two years of battling the Covid scourge, there has been little innovation in the way communication is disseminated to quell misinformation and anxiety among the public. The plethora of contrary and contradictory information and opinions available in social media only make the situation worse. Instead, scaring people to obedience has emerged as a tool of choice. During a pandemic, there is greater need for policymaking to be compassionate, equitable, consistent and people-friendly.
The administration should have the people’s back, and not become the cause for their anxiety. The recent strike of resident doctors is a case in point. Despite the crucial role of healthcare workers during the pandemic, there has hardly been a concrete effort to treat frontline personnel any better. As the governments at various levels are gearing up to mobilise emergency healthcare infrastructure, policymakers can think and plan a little longer-term towards creating healthcare capacities that can be sustained beyond the pandemic.
Can’t some of the jumbo Covid hospitals built from disaster relief funds and philanthropic sources be permanently converted into public hospitals? Can the medical education system be overhauled to fasttrack the generation of a greater number of better-skilled healthcare professionals? Why should universal health coverage remain an ambitious goal, and not an immediate target to be achieved? For now, 2022 seems more like 2020 than a year that is close to putting Covid anxiety behind it.