Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism.
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
Just$1.99
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); } //

Hasan Sheikh is an emergency and addictions physician and a lecturer at the University of Toronto who also holds a master’s degree in public administration from Harvard Kennedy School. Munir Sheikh is a research professor at Carleton University in Ottawa and a former chief statistician of Canada.

Ontario is entering another lockdown, mere weeks after restrictions lifted. Undoubtedly, we opened too early. The number of COVID-19 patients admitted to hospital when we eased restrictions in February was 10 times what they were when we reopened in the summer.

This is an obvious failure of public policy-making. But the real question is: Why did it happen?

Story continues below advertisement

Some will point to a failure of understanding public health. But most politicians seem to understand the importance of physical distancing, wearing masks and hand sanitizing.

Others will point to a failure of understanding economic policy. But it appears that leaders generally understand that there is no long-term trade-off between public health and the economy – that the cycle of lockdown, premature reopening, and lockdown is bad for both public health and the economy.

The true failure of our COVID-19 response is one of politics. It is rooted in the false belief that there is a “middle ground” policy that can balance restricting individual freedom, harming businesses in the short-term, and preventing the need to ration intensive-care unit beds and ventilators. That, plus the truism that politicians are scared of upsetting you – the electorate – have directed them down a path that harms public health, the economy and individuals.

This is a failure of basic behavioural economics. If politicians understood it, they would realize that their best chance of personal success and re-election is to lockdown once, and only once – and make sure it works.

Behavioural economics is a field that appreciates that human beings do not follow textbook economic theory in their day-to-day lives – that our complex decisions are affected by psychological, emotional and social factors, among others. One of the early and most powerful concepts in behavioural economics is “prospect theory,” which posits that our satisfaction and dissatisfaction is not linearly related to our gains or losses. Instead, human beings are affected by “loss aversion.” We feel the dissatisfaction of a loss more than the satisfaction we feel from a similar gain. Put another way, we are happier not losing $100 than we are if we gain $100.

Prospect theory also holds that we have a diminishing sensitivity to gains and losses. That means that we don’t get twice the satisfaction from gaining $100 than we do from gaining $50; we get slightly less. Similarly, we don’t get twice the dissatisfaction from losing $100 than we do from losing $50; we tend to be slightly less than twice as upset.

The implication is that people are happier when they separate gains and aggregate losses. You’re happier winning $50 twice than $100 all at once, and you’re happier losing $100 all at once than losing $50 twice. Hence the phrase, “Rip the Band-Aid off.” It’s best to aggregate your losses in a one-off instance of quick pain, because it’s better than drawing it out over time.

Story continues below advertisement

So, what does prospect theory tell us about the political response to COVID-19?

People are loss-averse. They’re going to feel public-health restrictions intensely. And it’s going to hurt, no matter what you do. The most compassionate answer is to aggregate those losses, ensure that those public-health restrictions work, and drive down cases as close to zero as possible.

Then, make sure you only reopen once, because if you do have to impose a second (or in this case, third) lockdown, the gains from reopening are less than the pain from the lockdown. Reopen only when you can ensure that your test-trace-isolate capacity is able to handle new cases and quickly isolate COVID-positive individuals and their contacts to prevent uncontrolled spread. That will mean harsher restrictions in the short-term, but fewer total lockdown days in the long run.

Both public-health and economic theory point in the same direction: toward a substantive, stricter and highly effective lockdown. But politicians appear to have misjudged the correct political answer, believing that multiple light closings would help their political fortunes when, in fact, the growing popularity of world leaders who have dealt with COVID-19 effectively has demonstrated that politicians can have it all: better public health, a faster economic recovery, and stronger political support. It just requires courage, and for politicians to overcome their own loss aversion when it comes to their jobs.

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies