The economic impact of SARS: how does the reality match the predictions?

OBJECTIVES: To perform a retrospective analysis of the macro-economic impact of the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak. METHODS: As several years have now passed, it is possible to interrogate national statistics that have become available since the outbreak to provide a more accurate estimate of the actual macro-economic impact of SARS. National statistics were examined for anomalies that corresponded to the timing of the SARS outbreak and, where possible, the size of any gain or loss found estimated. RESULTS: Estimates and models produced at the time of the outbreak suggested that SARS could have a catastrophic effect on the global economy. Our analysis suggests that the scale of the SARS impact on affected economies was far smaller than suggested by contemporary media reports and model estimates. CONCLUSIONS: This exercise holds important lessons for estimating the economic impact of future outbreaks -- such as pandemic influenza -- and measures to control or prevent them. We suggest that further work is needed to develop a more comprehensive macro-economic model able to more accurately estimate the relative cost and effect of a global response to outbreaks of international concern. The implications of our findings are discussed in the light of a prospective influenza pandemic.

The macroeconomic impact of pandemic influenza: estimates from models of the United Kingdom, France, Belgium and The Netherlands.

The 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) showed that infectious disease outbreaks can have notable macroeconomic impacts. The current H1N1 and potential H5N1 flu pandemics could have a much greater impact. Using a multi-sector single country computable general equilibrium model of the United Kingdom, France, Belgium and The Netherlands, together with disease scenarios of varying severity, we examine the potential economic cost of a modern pandemic. Policies of school closure, vaccination and antivirals, together with prophylactic absence from work are evaluated and their cost impacts are estimated. Results suggest GDP losses from the disease of approximately 0.5-2% but school closure and prophylactic absenteeism more than triples these effects. Increasing school closures from 4 weeks at the peak to entire pandemic closure almost doubles the economic cost, but antivirals and vaccinations seem worthwhile. Careful planning is therefore important to ensure expensive policies to mitigate the pandemic are effective in minimising illness and deaths.