Publication: Mozambique Economic Update, February 2021: Setting the Stage for Recovery
Loading...
Files in English
2,181 downloads
Other Files
711 downloads
Published
2021-02
ISSN
Date
2021-03-04
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
The global pandemic has taken a heavy toll on Mozambique’s economy. In 2020, the country experienced its first economic contraction in nearly three decades. COVID-19 (coronavirus) hit the economy as it was attempting to recover from the slowdown triggered by the hidden debt crisis and the tropical cyclones in 2019. Real gross domestic product (GDP) contracted by 1.3 percent in 2020, compared to a pre-Covid estimate of 4.3 percent, as external demand declined, domestic lockdown measures disrupted supply chains and depressed domestic demand, and liquified natural gas (LNG) investments were delayed. COVID-19 has caused a sudden income loss for enterprises and households, worsening living conditions, especially for the urban poor largely engaged in the informal sector. According to the National Institute of Statistics, as of June 2020, about 120,000 jobs were lost and 63,000 employment contracts suspended, with women being the most affected. Around 3 percent of the firms affected were forced to cease their activity. Services activities are the hardest hit. The tourism and hospitality industries have particularly suffered a steep decline in revenues. COVID-19 has jeopardized years of hard-won development gains, with about one million people estimated to have slipped into poverty in 2020 (as measured by the international poverty line of 1.90 US Dollars per day). While there is great uncertainty about the path of the pandemic, the economy is expected to gradually recover from 2021 as aggregate demand rebounds and LNG investments and extractive production gain momentum. Despite the expected recovery, the widespread deployment of COVID-19 vaccines will be at the core of a resilient recovery. This Economic Update explores the implications of COVID-19 for the economy, businesses and households. It makes recommendations for moving forward—in the short-term relief phase, as well as over the medium and longer term in order to 'build back better'.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“World Bank. 2021. Mozambique Economic Update, February 2021: Setting the Stage for Recovery. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/35214 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Mongolia Economic Update, February 2021(World Bank, Ulaanbaatar, 2021-02)Strict implementation of social distancing, mobility restrictions, and quarantine measures have helped Mongolia contain the worst health effects of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, though the country remains in the midst of a significant outbreak. The economic impact of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been severe and widespread. The Coronavirus (COVID-19) shock also affected the structure and conditions of the labor market. Mongolia, like other countries, will need to transition from policies focused on short-term economic relief to accelerating recovery and building resilience. The challenge Mongolia faces in this regard is that the fiscal space to continue the generous support policies enacted during 2020 is quite limited, while their rapid withdrawal as long as the economy remains weakened by public-health-related mobility restrictions could create significant difficulties for households and firms. Another priority is to prevent the Coronavirus (COVID-19) shock from undermining financial stability. Finally, Mongolia should adopt an integrated and fiscally sustainable approach to boosting medium-term economic prospects and job creation.Publication Turkey Economic Monitor, April 2021(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2021-04)COVID-19 (coronavirus) has taken a heavy toll on Turkey, as it has across much of the world. New estimatesof total COVID-19 cases indicate that the epidemic grew rapidly over November and into December, before a new round of restrictions were put in place to control the spread of the virus in late December. The expansion of COVID-19 in late 2020 followed a similar path to many European countries. Turkey’s economic growth performance in 2020 was strong compared to other countries, but poverty spread, and unemployment became more prevalent. Turkey’s GDP grew by 1.8 percent in 2020, which was the fastest amongst G20 countries in 2020 aside from China. This was on the back of one of the strongest economic rebounds in the second half of 2020, largely achieved in the third quarter, but with positive growth continuing into the fourth quarter. Despite measures to support jobs and households, labor market and poverty outcomesnevertheless deteriorated. Indicators of domestic demand showed some signs of economic growth cooling early in 2021, although supply side measures such as industrial output remainedrobust. Turkey responded to COVID-19 with a large economic stimulus program, focused on credit channels. In fiscal terms, Turkey’s COVID-19 stimulus package amounted to nearly 12 percent of GDP when including tax deferrals and contingent liabilities. This is larger than the average for emerging market, G20 countries, and is similar in size to the stimulus packages of the United States, Australia and Canada. While the program utilized a broad range of fiscal tools, uniquely amongst G20 countries, Turkey’s support was overwhelmingly provided through the banking sector, and was not realized as direct fiscal costs on the budget, but ascontingent liabilities to the government in future. Credit stimulus, loose monetary policy, andother regulatory measures to promote credit expansion drove a sharp increase in economicactivity in late 2020. In addition to government measures to recapitalize a partial credit guarantee fund and state banks, policy interest rates were maintained below inflation and a series of financial regulatory measures introduced that incentivized banks to increase lending activities. The combined effect of these policies was to generate one of the largest credit expansions that the world saw in 2020.Publication Kazakhstan Economic Update, Summer 2020(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2020-07-20)The COVID-19 pandemic has turned the world economy upside down. As recently as January 2020, analysts and various institutions projected that, this year, the global economy would haverecovered from the lowest growth since post-global financial crisis. But instead, developed and developing countries are fighting against the fallout from the pandemic. The global economy entereda serious recession in February, and global commodity prices tumbled. The earlier failure of OPEC and its allies to agree on a production cut amplified the impact of weakening global demand onoil exporters like Kazakhstan. Weaker activity, travel restrictions, and reduced mobility are projected to reduce global demand for oil by 9 percent in 2020. The pandemic, the economic slump,and the stress on the corporate and financial sectors are mutually dependent, and the longer the crisis, the more destructive is the impact on human suffering. The Kazakh government acted early to contain the spread of COVID-19. Following the announcement of a state of emergency, a state commission was set up to coordinate the efforts to fight the pandemic, impose quarantine control,and provide support to those whose livelihood was affected by the coronavirus or by the emergency restrictions. The authorities implemented a fiscal package to provide support to firms and households affected by the crisis. This effective approach to control the pandemic and improve access to health services should be continued and strengthened. But deployment of resources and reforms are also needed for Kazakhstan to navigate out of the crisis. The authorities may want toredeploy some resources from state programs toward improving access to and quality of education and healthcare, and for temporarily supporting workers and employers. Having a medium-termreform program can also help leverage resources from the private sector and better enable it to adjust and respond to new opportunities. The Kazakhstan Economic Update (KEU) is a semiannual report analyzing recent economic developments, prospects, and policy issues in Kazakhstan. The report draws on available data reported by the government, the National Bank of Kazakhstan (NBK), and additional information collected as part of the World Bank Group’s regular economic monitoring.Publication Kazakhstan Economic Update, Summer 2021(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2021-06)Kazakhstan’s economy started to recover in the second half of 2020, although real GDP is still lower than pre-COVID-19. After suffering the worst contraction in the past two decades, Kazakhstan’s real GDP rebounded in the third quarter of 2020, and growth has extended to the first quarter of 2021. Real GDP in Q1 2021 grew moderately at 1.9 percent in seasonally adjusted terms relative to the Q4 last year. The external environment has generally improved and lifted the value of Kazakhstan’s exports by about 5.8 percent in Q1 2021 compared with Q4 2020 in seasonally adjusted terms. In Q1 2021, China experienced a faster-than-expected economic rebound, while the euro area suffered another dip due to the COVID-19 resurgence. This update features findings on factors affecting the slow productivity growth among Kazakh firms, one of the critical development challenges. Productivity matters to sustain long-term growth and improve the standard of living. Findings from firm-level data analysis suggest a muted contribution of firms’ upgrading capability (innovation, managerial), poor allocative efficiency, and limited contribution from entry and exit dynamics. The authorities should consider coordinating policies to improve productivity growth by ensuring competition in the product market, reducing barriers for firms to entry in sectors dominated by state-owned enterprises, improving the effectiveness of investment policy and promotion, and boosting firms’ capability to innovate. Also, revisiting distortive support programs for firms should be reconsidered to avoid perpetuating inefficiencies in firms.Publication Zimbabwe Economic Update, June 2021(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2021-06)This third edition of the Zimbabwe Economic Update (ZEU) aims to provide both a current and historical background covering the pre-pandemic (2019) and pandemic (2020 to April 2021) period. The 2019-2020 period marked a very difficult time for the country as 2019 was clouded by a prolonged drought, unprecedented cyclone and turbulent economic reform period; while 2020 and early 2021 coincided with a global Coronavirus pandemic that further dampened prospects at both global and local levels.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.Publication Breaking the Conflict Trap : Civil War and Development Policy(Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003)Most wars are now civil wars. Even though international wars attract enormous global attention, they have become infrequent and brief. Civil wars usually attract less attention, but they have become increasingly common and typically go on for years. This report argues that civil war is now an important issue for development. War retards development, but conversely, development retards war. This double causation gives rise to virtuous and vicious circles. Where development succeeds, countries become progressively safer from violent conflict, making subsequent development easier. Where development fails, countries are at high risk of becoming caught in a conflict trap in which war wrecks the economy and increases the risk of further war. The global incidence of civil war is high because the international community has done little to avert it. Inertia is rooted in two beliefs: that we can safely 'let them fight it out among themselves' and that 'nothing can be done' because civil war is driven by ancestral ethnic and religious hatreds. The purpose of this report is to challenge these beliefs.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.