When UNSW Economics Professor Gigi Foster appeared on ABC’s Q & A program in late July, she triggered a storm of criticism. 

Sitting alongside medical experts, Foster advanced the argument that lockdown measures would hurt the economy and individuals’ mental health so much that it would  – in the longer term – lead to poorer quality lives, reduced labour productivity and health complications that could burden the health system and lead to early death. In short, the situation could be worse and a particular number of people may have to die to avoid this scenario.

Unsurprisingly, some panelists and community members interpreted Foster’s argument as an attack on the sanctity of human lives, with one panelist calling her argument "abhorrent".

To explore this debate further, Campus Review spoke to another economist about this highly controversial issue - Glyn Wittwer, a professor at the Centre of Public Policy at Victoria University. While he acknowledges that locking the economy down for a period of time will inevitably lead to economic losses, he argues that “COVID-19 deaths are a very high price to pay”. 

For Wittwer, the virus presents “a trade-off” and Australia “may have to learn to live with manageable levels of the virus in the absence of a vaccine”. Wittwer also discussed a number of economic theories that can evaluate the risks of completely opening up the economy, including opportunity costs, comparative advantage and putting a "value on human years lost".

For the economist, neither completely locking down nor completely opening up is the appropriate thing right now: it’s all a matter of degrees of trade-offs.

When UNSW Economics Professor Gigi Foster appeared on ABC’s Q & A program in late July, she triggered a storm of criticism. Sitting alongside medical experts, Foster advanced the argument that lockdown measures would hurt the economy and individuals’ mental health so much that it would – in the longer term – lead to poorer quality lives, reduced labour productivity and health complications that could burden the health system and lead to early death. In short, the situation could be worse and a particular number of people may have to die to avoid this scenario. Unsurprisingly, some panelists and community members interpreted Foster’s argument as an attack on the sanctity of human lives, with one panelist calling her argument "abhorrent". To explore this debate further, Campus Review spoke to another economist about this highly controversial issue - Glyn Wittwer, a professor at the Centre of Public Policy at Victoria University. While he acknowledges that locking the economy down for a period of time will inevitably lead to economic losses, he argues that “COVID-19 deaths are a very high price to pay”. For Wittwer, the virus presents “a trade-off” and Australia “may have to learn to live with manageable levels of the virus in the absence of a vaccine”. Wittwer also discussed a number of economic theories that can evaluate the risks of completely opening up the economy, including opportunity costs, comparative advantage and putting a "value on human years lost". For the economist, neither completely locking down nor completely opening up is the appropriate thing right now: it’s all a matter of degrees of trade-offs.

Campus Review

When UNSW Economics Professor Gigi Foster appeare…

Advertisement