Globalization mitigates the risk of conflict caused by strategic territory.

Globalization is routinely blamed for various ills, including fueling conflict in strategic locations. To investigate whether these accusations are well founded, we have built a database to assess any given location's strategic importance. Consistent with our game-theoretic model of strategic interaction, we find that overall fighting is more frequent in strategic locations close to maritime choke points (e.g., straits or capes), but that booming world trade openness considerably reduces the risks of conflict erupting in such strategic locations. The impact is quantitatively sizable, as moving one SD (1,100 km) closer to a choke point increases the conflict likelihood by 25% of the baseline risk in periods of low globalization, while reducing it during world trade booms. Our results have important policy implications for supranational coordination.

Ethnolinguistic diversity and urban agglomeration.

This article shows that higher ethnolinguistic diversity is associated with a greater risk of social tensions and conflict, which, in turn, is a dispersion force lowering urbanization and the incentives to move to big cities. We construct a worldwide dataset at a fine-grained level on urban settlement patterns and ethnolinguistic population composition. For 3,540 provinces of 170 countries, we find that increased ethnolinguistic fractionalization and polarization are associated with lower urbanization and an increased role for secondary cities relative to the primate city of a province. These striking associations are quantitatively important and robust to various changes in variables and specifications. We find that democratic institutions affect the impact of ethnolinguistic diversity on urbanization patterns.

Combating COVID-19 with charisma: Evidence on governor speeches in the United States.

Using field and laboratory data, we show that leader charisma can affect COVID-related mitigating behaviors. We coded a panel of U.S. governor speeches for charisma signaling using a deep neural network algorithm. The model explains variation in stay-at-home behavior of citizens based on their smart phone data movements, showing a robust effect of charisma signaling: stay-at-home behavior increased irrespective of state-level citizen political ideology or governor party allegiance. Republican governors with a particularly high charisma signaling score impacted the outcome more relative to Democratic governors in comparable conditions. Our results also suggest that one standard deviation higher charisma signaling in governor speeches could potentially have saved 5,350 lives during the study period (02/28/2020-05/14/2020). Next, in an incentivized laboratory experiment we found that politically conservative individuals are particularly prone to believe that their co-citizens will follow governor appeals to distance or stay at home when exposed to a speech that is high in charisma; these beliefs in turn drive their preference to engage in those behaviors. These results suggest that political leaders should consider additional "soft-power" levers like charisma-which can be learned-to complement policy interventions for pandemics or other public heath crises, especially with certain populations who may need a "nudge."

Impact of COVID-19 and intensive care unit capacity on vaccination support: Evidence from a two-leg representative survey in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Overcoming coronavirus disease (COVID-19) will likely require mass vaccination. With vaccination scepticism rising in many countries, assessing the willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 is of crucial global health importance. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to examine how personal and family COVID-19 risk and ICU (intensive care unit) availability just before the pandemics influence the acceptance of future COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: A two-leg survey was carried out for comparing vaccination attitudes pre-and post-COVID-19. UK residents were surveyed in October 2019 about their vaccination attitudes, and again in a follow-up survey in April 2020, containing the previous questions and further ones related to COVID-19 exposure and COVID-19 vaccine attitudes. The study combined survey results with local COVID-19 incidence and pre-COVID-19 measures of ICU capacity and occupancy. Regression analysis of the impact of individual and public health factors on attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination was performed. RESULTS: The October 2019 survey included a nationally representative sample of 1653 UK residents. All of them were invited for the follow-up survey in April 2020, and 1194 (72%) participated. The April 2020 sample remained nationally representative. Overall, 85% of respondents (and 55% of vaccine sceptics) would be willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Higher personal and family risk for COVID-19 was associated with stronger COVID-19 vaccination willingness, whereas low pre-COVID-19 ICU availability was associated with lower trust in medical experts and lower COVID-19 vaccine support. Further, general vaccination support has risen during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Support for COVID-19 vaccination is high amongst all groups, even vaccine sceptics, boding well for future vaccination take-up rates. Vaccination willingness is correlated with health care availability during the COVID-19 crisis, suggesting a powerful synergy between health care system performance during crisis and the general population's trust in the medical profession - as reflected in vaccination support.

Acceptability of COVID-19 Vaccine Among Hospital Employees in the Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics in the University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: COVID-19 vaccination has been in the spotlight for almost a year now, both within the scientific community and in the general population. The issue of healthcare workers' (HCWs) hesitancy is particularly salient, given that they are at the forefront of the fight against COVID-19. Not only could unvaccinated HCW spread the disease, but HCWs are also critical messengers in building confidence towards COVID-19 vaccines. The goal of this study was to examine the perception of COVID-19 risk and of its vaccine acceptance among employees (i.e., HCW plus administrative staff) in the Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics at the University Hospitals of Geneva, for the purpose of drawing lessons on the determinants of vaccination morale. METHODS: We conducted an anonymous online survey comparing vaccination attitudes among vaccinated and unvaccinated workers in June 2021. It included questions on perception of COVID-19 risks and COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccination was not mandatory in our institution but was strongly recommended. RESULTS: In June 2021, 66% of the 1,800 employees of our department had received two doses of COVID-19 vaccine by the time of the survey. Among the employees, 776 participated (43%) to the survey, and among them 684 (88%) had chosen to be vaccinated. Participants working for longer in a hospital, with a chronic disease and a household contact with chronic disease were more likely to be vaccinated. Doctors were twice as likely to be vaccinated than nurses. Among unvaccinated hospital employees, 48 (52%) responded that they would not change their mind. Further, 35 (38%) were not feeling in danger of contracting severe COVID-19, and 32 (35%) had fears about possible side effects of COVID-19 vaccines that they wanted to discuss with a specialist. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that, while two-third of the employees had been vaccinated, quite many were still hesitant. The unvaccinated explained their choice by not feeling at risk of complicated COVID-19, and because of fear of possible side effects associated with the vaccine. Investments in COVID-19 vaccine education is a critical component for increasing vaccine acceptance among the unvaccinated.

COVID-19 and Conflict: Major Risks and Policy Responses.

The COVID-19 pandemic entails a medium- and long-run risk of heightened political conflict. In this short essay we distinguish four major consequences of COVID-19 that may fuel social tensions and political violence, namely i) spiking poverty, ii) education under stress, iii) potential for repression, and iv) reduced inter-dependence. After discussing them in turn, we will formulate policy recommendations on how to attenuate these risks.