What are you looking for?
34 items found for ""
- How has the Pandemic affected the Communication Strategies for Businesses? Part 2 Walmart
The largest health and economic crisis of Covid-19 has forced economies and businesses to take extraordinary measures of survival in order to protect their people and continue with their operations. In order to emerge stronger from the pandemic, effective and efficient communication plays a vital role. It increases the operational resilience of a firm and ensures quick decision-making. A good communication rapport builds effective relationships both with the employees and the customers. With the pandemic in place, there are new challenges and risks at every step of the business. It has had an enormous impact on the means and mode of communication. The biggest gainers of this pandemic have been technology and innovative means of communication and marketing, and the biggest question faced is how does one amalgamate both of them together to build up a resilient business in these desperate times? It is indeed true that different companies have different strategies, but COVID-19 has changed the way corporations look at communications in their organization. There are three pillars of effective communication within an organization: Speed, Transparency, and meeting people where they are. The digital era has already changed the way the third pillar works. It is important to focus on getting the information delivered to people where they are, instead of them having to hunt for it. Internal communication implies the way in which companies interact with their employees and external implies the way it interacts with its target audience. Both internal and external communication constitutes an important part of the third pillar. The Case of Walmart: Walmart is regarded as the world’s largest retailer. Today, it is not just a company but an economic force. With current operations across 28 countries and employing around 2.3 million associates worldwide. (BrightSpot, 2020). The power of storytelling and effective communication is what has made Walmart a more engaging brand. In a covid-19 environment, people are supposedly looking towards corporations to be truthful and transparent. Walmart is a retail store that was expected to be at the center of things, providing the necessary goods. The responsibility had definitely increased for Walmart. Protection and safety of not only the customers who visited the store but also of the employees working there had to be taken care of. The level of corporate communication had to be precise and clear to the audience during these times. The three levels of the audience at Walmart are the executives, the associates, and their core customers. Communication for all three has to be congruent in nature and answering the pandemic needs. There are chances of having a communication gap in remote working, to avoid this from happening, Walmart built an ecosystem where the two levels of audience, the executives and the associates were in daily contact. They made sure that the message reaching their customers was not ambiguous and was assuring to them as well. Out of all the three pillars talked about earlier, Walmart specifically warned its employees, associates, to not get caught up in the speed because it can lead to more mistakes in the transfer of information. It is better not to be the first one but to be the right one when it comes to communication during times like these. A typical Walmart work environment was filled with discussions, direct mails, stand-ups, and daily conversations ranging from a wide variety of topics. Now that all of it had shifted virtually, the employees felt more connected with their executives in a remote work environment. Their current virtual room is filled with a diversity of thought, more people and has now become more transparent. This also ensures a speedy way to effective communication internally. In order to ensure awareness and safety about the virus, Walmart has created interactive videos, podcasts that showcase the work done by them across their stores. This is done to assure their customers that Walmart is a safe buyer zone. Transparency in their communication channels was safeguarded through the company’s fast and speedy network. Be it their corporate website, social media channels, or even their associates who passed it on. Listening to what the people have to say is also an important part of communication. Making sure that we understand the difference between a pause and a halt. The company created a COVID-19 resource hub internally for its employees and associates that focussed on benefits, physical and mental well-being, what the company was doing for them, and their employment policies as well. Making sure that the information was at their fingertips, easily accessible for them as well as for their families. Understanding what their employees and associates are demanding and then adhering to those needs. Walmart’s strategy has been quite clear and focused on the purpose of them utilizing social media channels and the internet. This does not mean carbon-copying things across all the channels. For example; a message on LinkedIn is different from a message on Instagram. The way of communicating a message has to change according to the medium you are using. Executive or enterprise-wide communication means how much engagement does the company gets on one single message or mail put up. It is very difficult to measure it but if ricocheted correctly it can do wonders. For example; a direct message of assurance and trust from the CEO of the company to its employees and associates makes a huge difference. Walmart has extensively used digital communication and realized its importance to connect and bring in organic traffic to its corporate website, social media handles, and its offline stores. Covid has forced companies to think differently and jump into arenas never explored before. The biggest change that will stick around is the ability to be able to react to situations quickly. The strategy that Walmart plans to take forward into the future is, taking care of the people who create stories for them and bring in customers. There was quite some time during the pandemic which made them turn a blind eye towards a work-life balance but it plans on maintaining that in the near future. It believes that the key to a successful business is the happiness of the people working there.
- How has the Pandemic affected the Communication Strategies for Businesses? Part 1 Microsoft
The changes brought about by COVID-19 in today's world have been tremendous and the domain of business communication is no exception to it. The various strategies and traditional methodologies of communication which were prevalent in corporate firms and organizations before the pandemic has now become a thing of the past today. Gauging the importance and the need for digital strategies is synonymous with the corporate strategies of a successful firm. The Digital Revolution, also known as the Third Industrial Revolution, saw the shift from mechanical and analog electronic technologies to a digital era with the proliferation of computers and digital record keeping. Digital platforms had recast the relationships between customers, employees, and employers in a firm by enabling faster communication between different hierarchies and work structures. Thus, the pandemic isn't the first tipping point for technology adoption and digital disruption in companies is not new. But the pandemic has led to digital adoption to a much larger extent and has taken a quantum leap in terms of industrial and organizational growth. The Case of Microsoft: Microsoft, undoubtedly is one of the giants in the information technology sector, operating globally and running multiple businesses in various domains of technology. Adhering to its mission plan, which is based on the practical implications of the constantly changing world of technology, Microsoft realized that they must up their communication game during the pandemic when the world was socially distancing. Effective communication is absolutely necessary for an unobstructed flow of information, both internally (within the organization, employee management communication) and externally (with the customers and stakeholders). Microsoft offers several services for digital transformation, and hence has a competitive advantage in this domain, which is made use of right from within the organization. In this study, we see how Microsoft strategizes its communication both internally and externally. Microsoft Core Services Engineering and Operations (CSEO) has started using Yammer, an enterprise social networking site used for private communication within an organization, in response to the remote working conditions in place owing to the pandemic. Yammer plays a key role in the effective communication of its parent organization Microsoft, by communicating changes, promoting IT Services, receiving feedback to get insights on end-user experience, and also improving the manager-employee relationship. The pandemic also necessitated the organization to come up with innovative programs to encourage communication. One such initiative was the Ask CSEO, through which anyone within the organization can ask questions, get support, connect to expertise and best practices, and provide feedback on any of their operations. This promotes the community learning experience within the organization, which can go a long way for the organization as it minimizes time for problem resolution. External communication is just as important when the world has shifted to the virtual domain. In order to increase engagement with customers and stakeholders, they sprang up to the action, to provide the support needed to make those digital transformations. They strive towards working with customers to reimagine what’s possible and create successful solutions and experiences for all. Microsoft has an established Social Command Center which helps the organization monitor all interactions and disseminates data to different sectors of the company. It also manages all social media interactions in the U.S. – gathering real-time insights and responding directly to customers as needed – and forwards social media messages to other parts of the organization, such as customer care, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence. The Social Command Center can help benefit all sectors of the business. Social media can help track and identify anything from customer concerns to sale issues. Microsoft also integrates the application of social media with employee involvement, customer engagement, and product development and design. Microsoft shares its customer stories on its blog post. Inpex, a leading energy company that caters to the energy needs of Japan and countries all around the world. As part of the company’s communication reforms, INPEX is switching from its old IP phones to Microsoft Teams phones. Microsoft. (2020a, March 22).This helps in creating a work environment that is unconstrained by location and thus promotes innovation in work style and communications. Microsoft reported an increase in business demand for phones that can be used by employees from anywhere, at any time, as if they were in the office. Demonstrated by the need for remote work due to COVID-19, many companies realized they need flexibility in their business infrastructure. Using Microsoft Teams has also helped companies for seamless telecommuting during COVID-19. Microsoft Teams and phones for Teams are rising in popularity as essential platforms for new ways of working in a changing world. Microsoft has also contributed remarkably to the community since the very beginning of the global pandemic, which reinforces its assurance and social responsibility as a corporate entity. It supported government efforts to combat the virus, by collecting data, designing apps, and using technology to reduce the spread of the virus. They developed an app to enable drive-through covid testing centers and also maintain data of the samples collected. Microsoft closely coordinated with the US Department of Health by developing a healthcare bot as a tool for self-assessment. As far as the marketing strategies are concerned, Microsoft has been focusing on humanizing the brand and following a customer-centric approach. (Research-Methodology.2019b, February 3) However, we have observed that the commercials for all target nations are highly standardized. Having a localized brand image can help them connect to the customers at a deeper level. The organization also came to the forefront to support the cause of education, by offering free trials of virtual classrooms and teams to support teachers and students for remote learning. This experience was further enhanced by the broadband infrastructure development which ensures better internet connectivity. Lastly, they also offered financial support to several nonprofit organizations, schools, and community groups to lend a helping hand in these trying times. Microsoft. (2020a, March 22). In the words of Mr. Satya Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft, “COVID-19 impacts every aspect of our work and life. We have seen two years’ worth of digital transformation in two months. There is both immediate surge demand, and systemic, structural changes across all of our solution areas that will define the way we live and work going forward.”
- The Fault in Our Divorces
Divorce has been debated Ad nauseam. To its virtue, unconformably so. In fitting the shape of the vessel, divorce has garnered an assortment of furore. It has been antagonized, romanticized, politicized, and penalized across cultures and legislations. Sample the Hollywood classic Kramer vs. Kramer which punishes both its leads who have mistaken parenting for a zero-sum game. Intellectuals and social scientists have been hard done by in their attempt to pick patterns beyond platitudes. While considerable success has been achieved in simplifying separation ethics for policy planners, taming lions of morality is no mean feat. Fault or No-Fault, divorces are intrinsically stinging. Mutual or Contested (barring extreme cases of abuse and ill-treatment), separation is a crushing defeat of one’s value judgment. It is therefore without question that a nation’s central legislation overwhelmingly presses for divorce to be the last resort. Yet, in hindsight, this discussion seems incomplete. A sensitive mind would ponder the extent to which improved divorce laws stonewall against bad marriages. Not to any palpable extent and more importantly, not least in comparison to solid marital investment in terms of emotion, attention, time, and money. Ron Howard’s eternal classic, A Beautiful Mind, beautifully examined a staggering marital bond between Jon Nash and his wife Alicia where divorce stood defeated by marital commitment. Their will to separate (and eventually get back) was never clause-led. Besides, rolling off the back of universal unanimity is the fact that divorce decisions, fraud, and abetment notwithstanding, are seldom governed by law. The case is clear. It’s not singularly a debate concerning the nastiness of separation procedures, as may be implied by various researchers. Divorces, by any measure of prudence, can never follow a universal separation code. More so since they are functions of socio-cultural belief, wealth sentiments, and the prevailing idea of social acceptance in a given country. Behold the United Kingdom for instance which makes a great case for legislative experimentation pertaining to separation. The UK was one of the first countries to put an end to marriages, mutually decided to be “irretrievably broken”. Prior to the Labour government’s Divorce Reform Act of 1969, a couple had to sit through tens of confrontational meetings, disputing over custody and finances. The meetings were founded in unrequited resent; crying foul over adultery, insanity, and desertion to euthanize a marriage was the only way to end it. No law in any country had yet provided for incompatibility. Come 1969, things changed. The terms of separation were made mellow by dropping these actions as compulsory determinants of a capsized relationship. It was a welcome change, one that came across as a truly well-intentioned move to do away with accusatory bitterness, until it wasn’t. Of England and Wales, nearly 44% of marriages throughout the 80s fell to divorces, estimates Office of National Statistics (UK). In an attempt to suit the familial requirements of the young, eagerly clinging to new economic morals, Harold Wilson had unwittingly opened doors to a ‘Divorce Revolution’. Even after that, the sun ceased to set on British Empire’s marital woes, arching from history to contemporary politics. Shook by a decade that threatened to hurt the moral fabric of British society, Conservatives dissolved any further additions to the no-fault debate by dismissing The Law Commission’s findings in 1990. 20 years forth, after heavy campaigning, the same party assented the Divorce Dissolution and Separation Bill by a thumping 231-16 in the lower house. The argument finds its power when similar legislation in India is contrasted in line with the UK’s consequence. The Marriage Laws Bill, amended in 2013, sought to exterminate fault-based marriages in India. The legislation was designed very proficiently; after either spouse contests, a 3-year separation window is allotted to debate arrangements at the end of which, a clear verdict settles. All knots tied under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act (1955) and Special Marriage act (1954) would have been contestable for separation citing damage to both sides. The bill also held an overwhelming premise in acknowledging the wife’s contribution towards building a family by granting her equal share of jointly created assets. Sadly, yet not surprisingly, it lost power in the lower house of the parliament and was eventually canned in 2016. The then Law Minister, Sadananda Gowda, had come under pressure from socio-familial organizations like Save Indian Family and Centre for Reforms that reckoned this bill to be an “Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile”. A missile that has piqued the airs of Men’s Rights groups. Their concerns, although overblown, arise from some glaring lacunas in a clause. For instance, a split might result in the wife acquiring husband’s immovable ancestral property as compensation while the converse is unaccounted for. Countries following a no-fault system have similar-looking legislations in this regard wherein both spouses are in a position to owe compensation and ancestral gains are untouched on either side. The billion-dollar question would be: Does a low marriage termination rate (around 1%) imply better familial strength? Separated entities in India do not file for divorce to avoid the hassle. Does this not spell further trouble for those pursuing newer relationships? All in all, a perfectly healthy no-fault law was lost on parliamentarians’ notions of justice delivery. Lawmakers failed to read in between the lines of prevailing norms of gender roles by covering for and conforming to them. They failed to see how this bill would have raised stakes for marriage and commitment instead of making divorce easier. India’s jurisprudence is put into question and significant doubts are raised regarding the legislature’s understanding of the same. Nevertheless, this tragedy provides much clarity. Economies growing at different rates have different societal and familial requirements. The argument is driven home by the consideration that it is in the best interest of citizens that divorce legislations go unassumed, unenforced, and sensibly influenced by international advancements. Until the time, most countries reach a relative economic uniform (which is as far as the eye can see), all social institutions are in dire need of commitment and real-time involvement. Efficient and accessible family justice systems are a pre-requisite for any developing nation. Canada wins this a mile ahead of its contemporaries. With its new Bill C-78, it provides decentralized dispute resolution services and has made phenomenal breakthroughs in making separation less expensive. It has done away with a one-size-fits-all form of governance by including ethnolinguistic considerations in deciding custody. So why don’t more countries take the same route as that of Canada? It’s obviously not a simple end game. The national agenda is set with polls in mind. Foreign lobby and special interest groups often overstep bullyingly. Centrally constituted legislative commissions cannot be assumed to be bereft of bias. As for federal administration, political differences between the center and states are factored in as a constant. Amidst all of this, a robust family law not only safeguards the haves and the have-nots equally but also delivers appropriate socio-economic impetus for healthier families. Having said that, stronger marriages should always be more of an individual priority and less of a legal one.
- From Long Before ‘Thou Art’ to ‘You Are’
Tracing the Journey of the Most Profoundly Spoken Language Among the many things that changed in the year 2020, is the composition of the language spoken by a majority of the global population. Each year, the Oxford Dictionary commemorates a ‘word of the year’. The year 2020 however, set itself a class apart by being indescribable in just one word! Such yearly additions to the English vocabulary certainly hint at the gradual development of the language. However, the sweeping changes witnessed in the wake of 2020 perk interest in the very evolution of the language. It is no surprise that the language spoken by a majority worldwide; across seas and continents, has had a dynamic evolution. The primary question to answer before delving into the journey of the English language is-how does a language really evolve? It is often claimed that the evolution of language is as convoluted as the evolution of the human race. There is no doubt that language originated from the need to communicate; the need to communicate is an intrinsic biological quality and ability. Despite the agreement on this fact, the variation in the inquiry into its origin, evolution, and genetics has varied intensely. The speculations around its flourishing outpaced hard evidence, giving birth to this inherent variation in inquiry, which caused the Société de Linguistique de Paris to ban the very inquiry into the evolution of language in 1866. Language and its evolution have mainly been studied in two lights; that of the biological sense and that of the cultural. The biological understanding acknowledges language as the outcome of the human ability to piece together object-associated interpretations in order to create complex structures. In this light; speech, sign, and caricature form the semantics of a language. Evolution then, in this sense, largely relies on the hinges of articulation. Using the suffix /ed/ to enunciate on the past tense of a verb; including those that aren’t conventional verbs, is a case brought about by articulatory association. The next time someone says ‘googled’, it’s because they knew that the past tense to ‘type’ was ‘typed’. This ability to draw association comes from the ability of articulation, a shard of biological evolution. The cultural evolution of language is largely a reflection of social traits and the changes within them from a time to its subsequent. The evolution that the English witnessed came from changes in power; within monarchs and within classes of society. English, much surprisingly, didn’t really originate from Britain. It comes from the Angles, a tribe during the 5th Century AD, from the regions of present-day Denmark and Northern Germany, which spoke a language known as Englisc. This set the edifice for what we now know as Old English. Following the base established by the Angles, the subsequent Viking and French invasions had multiple contributions to make. With the Viking invasion, their Language of Old Norse mingled with that of Old English to produce words as simple as ‘give’, ‘take’, ‘egg’, ‘knife’, ‘run’ and of course, ‘Viking’ itself! The French invasion reduced English to the language of the peasants and herdsmen. It grew under the French influence, the then language of the royals, to accommodate words such as ‘people’ and ‘city’, the months of the year, and other words with Latin roots. The French concepts of Liberté and Justice became ‘Liberty’ and ‘Justice’ in English. The era of Early Modern English, was by far the most rewarding period for the English Language. What began with the end of French rule in the British Isles, saw an enriched victory with much development of the language spearheaded by William Shakespeare. Shakespeare alone invented almost 1700 words. The Middle Modern English era gave shape to the English we use today. Marked by changes in pronunciation; linguistically acknowledged as the Great Vowel Shift, the era witnessed the renaissance of classical learning. New words and phrases entered the language and the invention of printing saw a prerequisite in standardization. The London dialect became the benchmark, while there now was a right and wrong to spellings and grammar! The Late Modern English era saw a boost in vocabulary. The industrial revolution, along with Britain being the center of technical progress and scientific advances added much more to the basket of English words. In addition to scientific influence, the many waves of colonialization inflicted by Britain itself gave rise to the influx of cultures. This only meant that practices, rituals, and even the cuisine from the colonialized countries now had English names, or rather, were adopted into English from their local languages. Industrial development led English to go global and going global brought with it the need to accommodate. The profound influence of colonialization on the language can be well gauged from the fact that there are only 22 countries in the world that haven’t been colonialized by Britain! English has moved with times; from the Angles, the Vikings, the French, and the Industrial revolution, to 2020’s very own Covid-19, amongst other present-day rulers! It is an irrational expectation then, that the language most spoken in the world would undergo no change. The Oxford dictionary forgave the annual tradition of adding just one word a year in 2020. Its report titled “Words of an Unprecedented Year” details the most important words used during this truly ‘unprecedented’ year. From ‘bushfire’, ‘lockdown’, ‘cancel culture and ‘mailing, to ‘covid-19’, ‘moonshot’ and even ‘superspreader’, the list does serve as a journey down the year. As English speakers amassed new vocabulary over the course of the year, it becomes evident that a language is nothing but a reflection of the events it witnesses. Just as a man is nothing, but a sum of his memories; a language is no more than the sum of its times!
Causality refers to the relationship between cause and effect, and that of the ‘Why’ and its answer. Traditional Economics has taught us the three basic questions of an economy, i.e., what to produce, how to produce, and how much to produce. These questions form the foundation of any economic problem and its solution. However, the question of ‘Why’ and its significance in Economics has never been answered directly. Thus, this article emphasizes the ‘Why’ of an economic problem and how it shall never be avoided. This article is based on individual assumptions and is subjective to an individual’s perspective towards economic problems and their solutions. Traditional Economics has always ascertained that there are various traditional economic problems that economists and businessmen have to encounter while achieving their goals. The goal can be anything, ranging from earning profit to maximizing utility. Throughout history, there has been a debate over which question is the most important and transcends all conditions and boundaries, with the underlying assumption of Ceteris paribus. The first question we have is ‘What to produce?’. While this question addresses the need for what is being produced by the producer according to his goals and aims, we have the second question as ‘How to produce?’.This question particularly addresses the production technique to be adopted in order to reduce costs and maximize profits. Another question that we have is the problem of ‘How much to produce?’. This problem looks at the amount or the number of goods/services to be produced in order to maximize profits and minimize costs. These are the traditional questions and the problems of Economics. According to my perspective, many economists cannot ascertain the ‘Why’ and address the reason to produce. In every other aspect of human life, the question of ‘WHY’, is given utmost importance and weightage. It’s considered the essence of the activity to be undertaken or performed, but not with economic problems. In their case, this question gets ignored like the moon in broad daylight, hardly a few economists acknowledge the ‘WHY’ to produce as another traditional and basic problem of economics. This is critical at present and in the future, where sustainable development is considered being an integral part of every activity undertaken regardless of an economic or non-economic motive. We have seen that the excessive industrial development in the last 50 years has given an unexpected boost to global warming and the exploitation of natural resources. Today we see business conglomerates, digging holes, nearly to the center of the earth just in search of metals. This is the reason for the question of ‘Why?’ needs to be answered as quickly as possible. Answering the question of why covers details like, need the activity being undertaken, the impact it will have on the entire ecology, are the potential returns satisfactory for the activity to be undertaken because we know that the original basic problems were developed during a period when there was no shortage of resources. The opportunity cost of items has to be weighed carefully before any activity can be undertaken. Hence, it’s essential to address the question of WHY on a much greater scale. There might be economists that argue this topic is covered in WHAT and HOW questions. However, it’s only considered as a part and as a fragment of the questions, and not an individual entity. Hence, the integral parts of the question go unattended, if only, the question was treated as an important one. In conclusion, treating the WHY as a major component of the basic problems is critical and important, since sustainable development is the future. Treating the problem of what and how to produce will not be enough, reasoning as to, is the production of that commodity a requirement or just a conglomerate’s attempt at expanding their business to earn profits, because from what we can see, sustainable development and use of resources in a manner such that its available for the future generation in ample quantities is going to become the priority, and elimination of all those goods and services that isn’t important is going to be an essential part of it. Hence the sooner we address the problem of WHY, the better it will be for ourselves.
- (Un)ending Hunger
The world, as of, 2020 has seen 17 major famines and innumerable smaller ones. The most recent one occurred as a fallout of the humanitarian crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2007 costing 5.5 million lives. Famines unfortunately only provide a subnormal case for absolute hunger and can be deduced as a clear case of extraordinary geopolitical failure. Ironically, those facing undernourishment and partial starvation in growing countries are shrouded in the smoke of economic neglect. Spanning 100 years is an elite impression that steeps our understanding of hunger as less of an economic problem and more of a socio-institutional one. Sure, this may be the case with war-torn economies, but it’s unfair to assume the same for comparatively stable societies. This understanding has been farmed over years of media outlook. When Liam Neeson, UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador, narrates the plight of stunted kids in Yemen, it’s hard not to equate hunger with drought, famine, and foreign aid. Similarly, it’s also harsh to equate hunger with the non-availability of food. As civilizations evolve, the yardstick for the cost of food (and therefore hunger) should not be fixated by approaches like ‘Jail Cost of Living’ (JCL). Ingenuine for its time, the JCL counts only in survival basics where a balanced diet may not be a necessity. Many go hungry during a famine, but not all who are hungry are fighting a famine. This essential difference lends a voice to those not under the ‘UN gaze’. Marginal farmers, slum dwellers, factory workers, day-wage laborers, rag pickers, security, and maintenance personnel, and even traditional artisans have met the fate of deprivation. The problem assumes form amidst the hesitation to define hunger as a systemic loophole. Sample India’s premier food policy National Food Security Act (2013). Brought about with many premises to deal with rural indebtedness and procurement distress, the NFSA in its rolling span strengthened the distribution system by establishing decentralized supply-chains and centralizing procurement systems. Off late, however, food security hasn’t piqued the center’s interests. Under-provisioning of food subsidy is a major misfire, having led the Food Corporation of India to borrow profusely from NSSF (National Sample Savings Fund) to continue procurement operations. While history stands witness to a billion sufferings, it’s a shame that its scholars have hardly put it to use. The preceding instance merely steals a look at the center’s faltering responsibility towards extremely promising interventions. Of evidence is the contention that only a few political incumbencies at the center have strived to better a praised policy. Standing atop the founding stones of availability, accessibility, and affordability, the Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS) came into effect to reduce the number of hungry people on an aggregate level. The NSSO (National Sample Survey Organisation) in many of its survey exercises attempts at defining ‘hungry’ to be that percentage of the aggregate population that sleeps without two square meals a day. With its commendable track record in muzzling poverty below the one-fourth mark, TPDS now covers more than 81 crore beneficiaries. A nine-state survey conducted by EPW even found that the purchase-entitlement ratio (PER) has shown marked improvement. It is not bereft of serious glitches, albeit. The scheme is a magnet to ground-level corruption. It has taken flak for leakages amounting to a third, sometimes half, of the entitled amount. These, however, are systemic bugs all policies encounter. The real deal is an upgrade. With the noble intention of making the beneficiary experience smoother, Aadhar-based biometric authentication for PDS was implemented on a trial basis in Ranchi in 2016. It got an almost immediate retort. The PDS profile and the Aadhar account should be linked to the same mobile number if the fingerprint fails to authenticate. At the dispense of strong cellular connectivity and an unrelenting power supply, food grains depend on a One Time Password (OTP), at the failure of reception of which, the farm tiller walks without food. Reliance on governance is cherished in policy-making, however, finding the right economic suite to accompany such a mammoth change is slightly more indispensable. It’s the evolving nature of hunger that is causing all the chaos. Hunger encompasses a diverse gamut of issues. Having something to eat does not ensure dietary balance, the fulfillment of calorie requirements or even purchasing power in the least. Access, equality, affordability health, and nutrition are just some of the many facets. A vast chunk of the reason why social, administrative, and governance aspects of Poverty and Hunger might have an upper hand over hard economic analogies is that they are locked out of schemes designed for them. Martin Burt, the rising social entrepreneur and author of Who Owns Poverty writes that experts pay little heed to the fact that the poor are rational decision-makers, that they are excellent optimizers. As Martin puts it, policies make them “passive recipients of someone else’s poverty definition” by fitting them into a framework instead of building a framework around them. The argument, therefore, does not confine itself to amendments and changes specifically. A case in point is established by pitting two policies against the pandemic background. The Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) and the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS). Aimed at issues with similar genesis, both policies warrant changes in the standard of living of the rural poor. Both policies have had historical significance. Former had been mandated by economists for quite some time before it was materialized in 2013. Latter was a welfare policy that addressed nutrition, natal care, health, and education by establishing Anganwadis. The Center is involved in dealing with adversities in transfer payments via the DBT. In fact, according to National Informatics Centre (NIC), around 2.2 crore transactions were reported on the Government of India’s online fund tracking software Public Financial Management System (PFMS). Evidently, transfer payments are not enough for villages that suffer erratic procurement and seasonal availability of dietary supplements. As a result, problems such as micronutrient deficiency and fortification of food grains were found to be compounded further. Even so, the Anganwadis, generally underfed and grossly understaffed, experienced absenteeism and flouted food procurement in many states. The COVID stimulus package did only so much as to increase the allocation of food grains under such programs but failed to see that basic nutrition economics will break if Anganwadis stop functioning altogether (like they have in many states) Hirokazu Koreeda’s masterpiece The Shoplifters talks of quiet desperation of unaffordability in Japan. In The Florida Project, Sean Baker powerfully portrays the dismal state of affordable housing in the US. Capernaum by Nadine Labaki is a thumping portrayal of scrounge workers, one that has more depth than some of the books written on the same issue. Amartya Sen pensively wrote about “a profound confusion between famine prevention, which is a simple achievement, and the avoidance of endemic undernourishment and hunger, which is a much more complex task”. These pieces of literature stand tall to the fact that understanding modern-day privilege (or the lack of it) comes with a pre-requisite of understanding the dynamics of being resourceless. It’s the unfreedom that entails a lack of choice. Even so, the limited opportunities for redemption. It is, therefore, an incredible requirement of economic policy-making to carefully tread the tightrope of infallible economics and credible governance.
- When monopolies paid off no more: The case of South Korea’s brush with good governance
There is some truth perhaps in considering that history’s core lesson is “Politics first”— that political foundations are decisive in shaping economic institutions and with them, the course of innovation and investment in the pursuit of it culminating into a developed society. Good governance is a metric of gauging how public institutions handle public affairs and manage public resources in an ideal way. It serves as a quality check on public institutions and the government and whether they prove effective; in terms of fairness, trust, and integrity, amongst many other factors under consideration. While the concept of good governance births the system that identifies inefficiencies and specs of ineffectiveness in political bodies, it hinges on inter-institutional comparisons in order to enable improvements and the addressing of inconsistencies. Despite this conventional foundation of the concept, intra-institutional comparison proves beneficial by bringing out certain lessons. After all, history has witnessed volumes of discussion about the key institutional changes needed to bring societies to the point where they should be capable of controlling corruption and achieving good governance. The question that arises is plain, can they? The events that took place in South Korea from 1999 to 2005 make contributions to answering this golden question. South Korea saw a transition from the overarching influence of the Chaebols in nearly every aspect of national decision making to a period of state-led governance. Prior to this transition, theSouth Korean fabric was gripped by the aftermath of the Korean War, spiced by a state of authoritarianism. Its transition was laced with an autonomous middle-class despite state capture, the achievement of universal literacy, and a shift from an agrarian economy to that of a highly industrialized one. This positive transition paved way for a culture of public responsibility with a tinge of E-Governance. The Chaebols, in an undeniable statement, were responsible for building up the South Korean economy. The profound influence of these cartels of family businesses has proven instrumental in the progress of the country’s economy from that of an agrarian to one based on industries. Samsung, considered as the largest Chaebol, once accounted for more than 14% of South Korea's GDP owing to its rapid diversification in industries as far-ranging as electronics, insurance, ships, luxury hotels, hospitals, amusement parks, and even an affiliated university! Although the Chaebol presence proved propitious for the South Korean economy, the trade-off between economic development and equity had to be addressed. The country progressed economically at the costs of a flawed system of privatization, the formation of monopolies, and rampant corruption. Highly corrupt, the Chaebols had involvement in literally everything-scandals of political finance, policymaking, and even public opinion; almost as bribes to feed them with monopoly power in order to gain fruits from the economic development factored in by their operations. In response, a strong need for policies that curtailed this power was felt; instigating South Korea to tread along the path of improved governance. South Korea’s transition was spearheaded by the outcome of its 1998 presidential election. For the first time, a Presidential candidate was elected sans the big Chaebol support. Kim Dae-Jung, an opposition candidate from the Democratic Party since 1954, fortunately, won in 1998. After winning the elections in 1998, President Kim was under immense pressure from the IMF. This was due to the fact that South Korea had accepted a $58 Billion Loan from the IMF. In response, President Kim and his government, along with the IMF, instrumented five principles to weaken the Chaebols and thus partially do away with corruption in South Korea, aiming at good governance. Together with the IMF, he instilled the principles to form a democratic government that rested on stilts encompassing the reduction of cross-shareholdings, the introduction of external managers beyond the owner family, the abolishment of nearly 50% of the prevailing business regulations, and liberalizing interest rate policies along with improved access to foreign banks which ultimately strengthened the Korean Free Trade Commission (KFTC). These principles drove a domino effect of positive economic implications. The total market share in the hands of the top three biggest companies (Chaebols) in the South Korean Market decreased from 68% to approximately 60% during the Kim-IMF joint policy, the top three in 1997 being Hyundai, Samsung, and LG. The effectiveness of the policy was reflected in the steep rise in fines levied on unfair business practices. Setting the above policy measures in motion generated externalities that gave rise to supplementary benefits along the South Korean paradigm. These included the institution of the Infomation Disclosure law which gave citizens the right to access government records and documents; high-level public officials were mandated to disclose assets. Banking transactions were made more transparent to eradicate corruption and cronyism, accompanied by amendments made to the Office of Ombudsman which was pre-established with the objective of addressing citizen complaints against government agencies. The National Human Rights Commission was established to ensure the accessibility of human rights and civil liberties to each individual. The success of these transitory policies, however, do not remain unmarred by inconsistencies and irregularities. The South Korean government can certainly be proclaimed as an electoral democracy, however, it remains far from accommodating certain elements of liberal democracy. The Central Election Commission looked into ensuring free and fair elections. Since Kim’s policy, the competitiveness of public power has improved, and all elections have been easily and fairly conducted along with two alternations of political parties in power. This attests to the effectiveness of institutions of vertical accountability which proves that outcomes of South Korean elections reflect in the formation of its government. Amendments were made which made business contributions to parties and campaigns illegal, allowed public funding for significant parties, and imposed tight accounting obligations. This hints at improved electoral fairness and competitiveness. Electoral broadcasts came under the broadcasting Debate Commission and free access to media was granted to all stakeholders of society, making it fair and transparent alongside bringing in an element of inclusiveness. With this, the limits of political and civil rights greatly expanded and basic social rights began to be protected. In 2006, South Korea received a positive rating in six dimensions of governance– Voice and accountability, Political stability, Government efficiency, Regulatory Quality, Rule of law, and control of corruption, in celebration of the foundations laid down by the democrats Kim Dae-Jung, followed by Roh.
- Impact of Covid-19 on Employment in India
The Covid-19 pandemic has literally brought the world to its knees. All the sectors of the global economy have been hit hard. Job loss is the most severe impact of the pandemic. In this article, an attempt has been made to examine the impact of Covid-19 on Employment in India. The Situation in India According to a joint report by the International Labour Organization and the Asian Development Bank, over 41 lakh youth in India have lost their jobs, accounting for 46% of all job losses. However, the situation is not so bleak for middle-aged Indians, as approximately 9 million people in this category were able to find jobs during the pandemic. Undoubtedly, the worst affected were the migrant workers who work in the unorganized sector. Impact on the Organized and Unorganized Sector Organized Sector: This sector has been hit hard, but is not as badly affected as the unorganized sector. Over 10.8 million salaried employees have been laid off in the private sector. Government job aspirants are also facing the brunt as recruitments to the coveted posts have reached an all-time low. Unorganized Sector: More than 400 million informal workers are at the risk of being pushed into abysmal poverty due to the pandemic, of which a majority are migrant workers. The latter has faced several hardships ever since the lockdown was imposed in March 2020. Major issues faced by them were loss of income, food shortages, and uncertainty regarding the future. The Hygiene Industry in India: Beneficiary of Covid -19 The Hygiene Industry in India provides a glimmer of hope in an otherwise dreary situation - the demand for products like hand sanitizers and masks has risen exponentially, thereby generating greater employment opportunities. Production of other products such as surface disinfectants has also received a boost due to the pandemic. This sector shows some promise in terms of employment. India’s current position: The Atma Nirbhar Bharat scheme initiated in providing employee benefits for people who lost jobs between March and September contributed towards employees and employers’ provident fund, introduced Corona Relief Fund ofRs. 15,000 Crores for construction workers and Rs.10,000 for selected street-vendors to resume their activities. A few private participants handed in to support the Atma Nirbhar Bharat 3.0. Companies like Apple and Paynearbycame up with applications called ‘APNA’ and ‘Jobsnearby’ respectively to help the migrant workers connect to organizations. Such initiatives have assisted in finding jobs for lakhs of people in the unorganized sector. All these measures helped to relieve the shock of people to a certain extent in the initial days of the pandemic but lost their relevance when India entered into the recession, where promising jobs is not the same as providing jobs. Apart from this, it is important to note the youth employability in the country. According to the World Bank data, the youth unemployment rate in India surmounted to 23.3% in 2019 which just got amplified due to the pandemic. Therefore, in the status quo, with a blooming unemployment crisis, the real concern is jobless growth. Jobless growth is when the country’s increase in GDP is not accompanied by an increase in employment. The revival of the economy post-COVID-19 needs to boost the informal sector of the country which accounts for two-thirds of the total employed. This can be achieved by increasing private consumption and demand by urban households. Therefore, the revival of the economy resisting jobless growth, will require the strengthening of India’spolicy matrix. Some key factors that need to be included in the policy formulation include: The rise in income and jobs of people under the middle-income category and to stop them from falling into poverty. Facilitating the restart of the informal sector in the country. The reduction of disguised unemployment in agriculture tending to a larger increase in urbanization. Though the situation in India is not promising at the moment, there is hope that soon, there will be considerable improvements concerning employment. Post-recession, policies by the government are bound to increase the employment and growth in the country. Keeping in mind the implications of the above-suggested measures, the government may be able to create a suitable policy that can help the economy to overcome the twin problems of recession and jobless growth. References https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.UEM.1524.ZS?end=2020&start= 1991 https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/jobs-and-careers/story/4- https://www.bloombergquint.com/economy-finance/41-lakh-youth-lose- jobs-in-india-due-to-covid-19-impact-ilo-adb-report https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/jobs/job-loss-most-severe-immediate-impact-of-covid-19- https://www.businesstoday.in/current/economy-politics/aatmanirbhar-
- Impact of COVID-19 on the European Union’s Tourism
With the uncertain outbreak of COVID-19 across the globe, after the global economy USA, the European Union was badly affected. No doubt that it has slowed down the economy across the globe. Speaking of the economy it has been forecasted that the economy will shrink by 3% which is worst affected after the great depression of the 1930s. Today there are 51 countries in Europe out of which the worst affected are Russia, Spain, France, UK, Italy, etc. with the most cases. The tourism industry has been badly hit by the prevailing lockdown and COVID-19 situation across the globe for the past 9 months, the industry is trying to revive with the current ease given by the government. The first confirmed case was found in France, which was on January 25th. As of October 2020, the total number of novel coronavirus cases in the EU is 40,856,197 including 1,125,756 deaths. The death rate is highest in the UK which is 65.9% followed by Italy at 60.59% and France at 50.23%. Europe is everyone’s favorite destination and the global leader in international tourism known for its mixed culture, history, art, fashion, food, etc. Having the best and the most wonderful heritages of the world attracts 538 million global tourists which accounts for 50% of the world tourist population which also accounts for the rise in EU’s GDP. The top destinations are France, Spain, Italy and yes these are the countries that have been badly affected by the novel coronavirus with the highest number of death tolls that peaked in March 2020- May 2020. The losses faced due to COVID-19 by the tourism industry is huge! The government is trying to support through financial assistance. A report from the Eurobarometer paper revealed that around one in 165 people from the population in Europe engages in the tourism industry. According to the recent report released by the United Nations, only 5% of the tourist population visited Paris, one of the popular destinations in Europe. The world tourism organization also predicted that there will be a decrease in 60- 80% of tourists visiting Europe in 2020. The EU accounts for half of the world’s tourist arrival. Revenue is expected to decline in the hotel industry, restaurants, and tour/ travel agents by 50-70%. Several livelihoods are dependent completely on tourism and COVID-19 has impacted many such livelihoods across all the continents of the world. “120 million direct jobs are at risk related to the tourism industry both in a developed and developing country. “ For women, rural communities’ tourism is a part of their empowerment, integration, and source of generating income. To aid for the loss several organizations are putting forward the ways of recovery – The recovery could be done by 4 key recoveries as suggested by a report of ADB: 1. Local tourism can be boosted in such a way that will bring better conditions along with safety precautions to be followed even after the post-COVID-19 situations. 2. Ecological protection – In the COVID-19 times, it has been evident that there was a recovery in climate change and ecological change due to nationwide lockdowns that were followed across the globe. 3. Improved Infrastructure – Improved infrastructure management and preparedness of local bodies for unforeseen situations. 4. Rethinking flying – Tax reforms in such a way where it levied on people who are frequent flyers as even aviation companies are bankrupting. Protecting key assets of any region is a fundamental pillar of any recovery ensuring that to end one problem, another doesn’t pop out. When planning and implementation are done strategically tourism sector can match the potential for the wellbeing of socio-economic and environmental welfare.
- India’s “Look East” policy and relations with the South East
In recent times, India and South East Asia have witnessed an unprecedented rise in foreign trade... Pushkar Risbud an FY student of MSC. goes on to explain to us the reasons and the history behind it. When it comes to the geographical location of our nation, India has occupied one of the most strategic positions in world trade and markets. The Indian landmass has a central location between East and West Asia. India is a southward extension of the Asian continent. The trans-Indian Ocean routes, which connect the countries of Europe in the West and the countries of East Asia, provide a strategic central location to India. The Deccan Peninsula protrudes into the Indian Ocean, thus helping India to establish close contact with West Asia, Africa, and Europe from the western coast and with Southeast and East Asia from the eastern coast. No other country has a long coastline on the Indian Ocean as India has and indeed, it is India’s eminent position in the Indian Ocean, which justifies the naming of an Ocean after it. India’s “Look East” policy has been one of the major pillars of the Indian Foreign Policy since the 1990s. The formation of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is an outcome of significant changes in global political relations and India’s economic liberalization. India’s search for economic space resulted in the formulation of the “Look East” policy. The “Look East” policy has today matured into the “Act East” policy. Apart from the ASEAN, India has taken other policy initiatives in the region that involve some members of the ASEAN such as BIMSTEC, MGC, etc. We have also upgraded our relations to a strategic partnership with Singapore in November 2015. Thus, we now have strategic partnerships with Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Singapore, and of course, the ASEAN and forged close ties with countries in the Asia - Pacific region. Further apart from ASEAN, ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), and East Asia Summit (EAS), we have also been actively engaged in regional fora such as the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), Asia Cooperation Dialogue (ACD), Mekong Ganga Cooperation and Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA). India’s relationship with ASEAN is an important element of our foreign policy and the foundation of our Act East Policy. The up-gradation of the relationship into a strategic partnership in 2012 was a natural progression to the ground covered since India became a Sectoral Partner of the ASEAN in 1992, dialogue partner in 1996, and Summit Level Partner in 2002. There are in total 30 dialogue mechanisms between India and ASEAN, cutting across various sectors. India has set up a separate mission dedicated to ASEAN and EAS in Jakarta in April 2015 with a dedicated Ambassador to strengthen engagement with ASEAN and EAS. India and ASEAN observed a 25-year dialogue partnership, 15 years of Summit level interaction, and 5 years of Strategic Partnership throughout. In 2017, India undertook a wide range of 60 commercial activities both in India and through our mission in ASEAN member states, which culminated in the India - ASEAN Commemorative Summit - January 25, 2018, in New Delhi. The commemorative activities included an ASEAN-India Regional Diaspora event in Singapore, a Youth Summit, a Music Festival, an Artists’ Retreat, Port calls by Indian Naval Ships, a Workshop on Blue Economy, a Connectivity Summit, a meeting to reinforce our Network of Think Tanks, a Dharma-Dhamma Conference, a Hackathon, and Startup Festival, a Global SME Summit, a Business and Investment Meet, and Expo, a Textiles Event, an ICT Expo, a Business Council Meeting, a Film Festival and the inauguration of an India-ASEAN Friendship Park in the heart of our national capital, New Delhi. The astonishing variety and breadth of these activities laid a firm foundation for an enduring partnership for the future. The question at the heart of this topic is now - why is India’s relation with the South East more significant than what it was a decade ago. The answer is quite simple: cultivating, economic, social, and cultural ties. India has much to do in common with South Asia than any other part of the world. Common cultures, common legacy, and destruction caused by the colonization, agrarian-based economy, and the growing dependency of developing countries on the developing and emerging ones. Though India is experiencing a slowdown, it’s neighbors and other economies in the Indo-China are booming up. Bangladesh is currently a growing economy at GDP growth predicted to reach 8% by March 2020. The Asian Development Bank says that Bangladesh has the fastest growing economy in the Asia - Pacific Region. Since 2009, Bangladesh's economy has grown by 188%. At a time when many countries are looking inwards and closing their doors, Bangladesh is open for business. Thus, on a concluding note, India should further continue to strengthen its ties with the SouthEast Asian countries. India is already like a “big brother” for the South Asian Nations. India should, thus, come up with more collective agreements on socio-economic and environmental cooperation. References: Mea.gov.in. 2015. From Looking East To Acting East. [online] [Accessed 27 November 2020].
- The Economic Cost of Homophobia
The exclusion of the LGBTQ people from participation in society has a long history and is a violation of human rights recognized by various national as well as international bodies. Studies by international institutes concluded that human rights violations experienced by LGBTQ people diminish economic output and cost humongous numbers to the Economic capacity of the country. The impact of exclusion can be studied both at the microeconomics and the macroeconomic level. LGBTQ people are targets of violence, bullying, and discrimination. They are denied access to education and are discouraged from pursuing jobs. Hence, their contribution to the whole economy reduces holding back the advancement of the national economy. This exclusion leads to a low standard of living for the community, which further leads to a low level of income, consumption, and aggregate demand. Thus, the economy enters into a vicious cycle which in due course results in a low level of the country's GDP. The economic cost of homophobia in India is 0.1% to 1.7% of the GDP calculated at $30.8 billion. According to a report released by the LGBTQ foundation, if the LGBTQ community was a country, it would be the world’s fourth-largest economy. India is not the only country bearing the cost of homophobia. Other 71 countries criminalize same-sex relationships and lose a portion of their GDP. The exclusion costs more to the developing countries since they lack skilled human resources and anti-gay laws exclude the experienced LGBTQ people from utilizing their potential. Today, all the major economies are globalized and there are numerous opportunities in the world. Countries that have strict discriminating laws such as anti-gay laws, experience emigration of skilled and talented human resources. 61% of the African countries criminalize homosexuality and lose 10.8% of its highly educated youth to OECD countries, while 92.7% of Guyana’s highly refined youth emigrate to OECD countries. According to the report published by the William Institute, an anti-discriminatory law can add up to USD 1,763 in the GDP per capita for emerging economies. We can say that the economic development in emerging economies surfaces with LGBTQ rights; therefore, liberal emerging economies promoting LGBTQ rights have a higher per capita income. The Government of India is striving to achieve the target of USD 5 trillion economies but lacks adequate policy measures for inclusiveness. GOI, in its policy measures, should include and, eventually, implement the concept of the Pink Economy. In the Pink economy, there is systematic inclusion of the LGBTQ community. For instance, the addition of the LGBTQ community-owned bars, nightclubs, and restaurants in society. LGBTQ tourism and specialized culture consumption are still untapped opportunities, and Indian businesses have the chance to make profits out of it. This strong positive concept could lead to more open appeals to LGBTQ consumers in India. Multinational companies have various diverse inclusion policies and campaigns for inclusiveness at an international level but don’t abide by them in India because of their prejudice and anti-gay laws. The times are changing and India is progressing, especially after the landmark decision of the supreme court which scrapped Section 377 of IPC. This decriminalization has opened a lot of new doors for the people of the LGBTQ community as more and more people are coming out and are joining the workforce with pride. The decriminalization of homosexuality in India has led to a significant economic change within the country, especially regarding the growth of international businesses in India. Now, there are several restaurants run by transgender people. While same-sex marriage is still illegal in India, the legalization of same-sex intercourse is a monumental step in the movement towards total inclusivity. The policies of the Government of India should be inclusive, and the steps should encourage the concept of the Pink Economy to reduce the economic cost of homophobia in India. Homophobia has cost us billions of dollars and total inclusivity will make sure that our economy does not suffer because of the orthodox prejudice and laws.
- Covid-19: Not only an economic but also an environmental curse?
We all have seen and witnessed the economic impact of covid-19 across the globe, on international economic relations and individual finances We all noticed the short-term environmental benefits that the pandemic caused lockdown offered such as 11% reduction in Carbon Emission, but the reality is something else entirely, this is what we shall be discussing in the article that, not only was the global economy hit badly, the the environment is in for a fight too. The most important economic curse that the global economy witnessed would’ve been the loss of employment for nearly 200 million full-time workers across the globe from all sorts of field, we saw that people from all walks of life were out of a job and lost their livelihood, this endangered the life nearly 100 million people, who worked on daily wages. Moreover, the industries that functioned on day to day means basis, that that they spent nearly all that they earned in a day on livelihood were nearly destroyed, the Indian Handicraft industry is an example of such an industry. Another section of people who took a grave hit due to the pandemic were laborers working on the basis of daily wages, with no work going on and no need for labor, a large number of families have been pushed to the brink of starvation. This was the largest impact of covid-19 on the global economy. Now let’s talk about the largest environmental benefit. According to Environmentalists, the important thing to note is that all the environmental effects are in the long term and not the instant or immediate future, unlike the economic effects. Next up we see the the greatest effect of Covid-19 on the Environment, this effect goes slightly hand in hand with an economic boom, the scenario wherein the industries will reopen greater and bolder post-pandemic, this is because we have seen that governments all over the world have started granting sanctions and rights to all those corporations that promise fast recovery of the economy and reduction in unemployment, that will be the greatest mower or destroyer of the relaxation, the environment has received in these last 7-9 months. The implication goes like this, a scene wherein the industries function without any leash, because they have to not only cover their costs and earn profits for themselves but also for the national and global economy as they are a coherent part of it. This is uncontrolled freedom is what will give them the power and resources to cut down anything and everything in their path to achieving their goals. This scenario can already be seen in the crude oil industry, wherein the giants are already gathering international investors for funds, to grow and expand their businesses post-pandemic/lockdown, with the government relaxing on certain segments of the law, that kept a shrewd check on their activities, and, there is nothing to stop the Corporate World from functioning as dictators in their respective industries and destroying anything that stands in their path, namely the environment. We can illustrate this theory by taking the United States’ example, the government has already granted the industry access to its $600 Billion reserves for Main Street Lending Program, thereby providing not only judicial but also economical aid. This is a distinct example of the above-mentioned theory. Onto the second greatest impact of Covid-19 on the two halves of the ecology. We initially saw that the pandemic caused a fall in the global employment levels, henceforth we’ll see the other side of that coin, the fall of the global economy since both of them go, hand in hand. The global economy saw a gross fall of nearly 10%, which is equivalent to $12.7 Trillion. The net loss is expected to be around $9 trillion, greater than the economies of Germany and Japan combined, as such the global economy is seen to see a the shrink of -8%, stating a gigantic loss of not only money but also employment, specific handicraft industries and much more. Handicraft industries and artisans that survived on daily wages have reached a near-extinct level unless they catered to a patron and their patron helped them economically during the pandemic. Onto the second Environmental After-effect of covid-19, this also goes hand in hand with the first impact, we noticed that the industries are bound to bounce back harder and stronger than before, due to relaxed federal pressure, and growing strengths of lobbyists, to accumulate a wealth of investors for their clients will give them the economic reserves they need to claw and mow their way through the pressure than the pandemic will have imposed on them, this will increase emissions from industrial emissions, from activities like: mineral extraction, increased processing of raw materials, resuming the automotive industries(air travel, cabs, oil drilling), etc. All these activities will have long term health impacts on not only human health but the entire ecology. To conclude we can safely say that long-term environmental curses, combined with the economic effects will make recovering from Covid-19 an extremely difficult task. Developed countries and countries on the verge of becoming developed won’t have that much difficulty in recovering as compared to the following developed and underdeveloped countries, such as most of the African Continent. This will also lead to overexploitation of the underdeveloped nations of Africa by the developed nations to reduce the economic burden that is on their shoulders. Hence, the Covid-19 brings nothing but darkness for the entire ecology.