The Covid-19 pandemic lead to large reductions in GDP in countries all around the world. While some countries introduced less restrictive measures, most countries implemented a lockdown of some sort at one or more times. Lockdowns, and other measures, have various economic consequences that have severely reduced GDP worldwide, including the effects of international border closures, quarantine-on-arrival, and the closure of hospitality businesses and visitor attractions. These tourism channels of impact are clearly only part of the reason why GDP has declined so dramatically, as lockdowns have impacted economies in many other ways.

Using a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of the world economy, based on data from the Global Trade Analysis Project and World Tourism Organisation, this paper uses simulation techniques to estimate the GDP reduction caused by different channels of impact. These channels often overlap, for example where visitor arrivals were restricted and hotels closed, the resultant loss of earnings for hotel employees could have resulted from either measure. They also work differently for domestic and international tourism, and by purpose of visit, and in different countries depending on levels of Covid-19 infections and government policies.

The CGE model estimates the economic impact of all channels combined, giving GDP results for each country that can be compared against actual changes in GDP. It can also estimate the economic impact of each channel, allowing the calculation for each country of the proportion of lost incomes that were driven by tourism channels of impact.

Decomposing the GDP impacts of Covid-19

The emergence of the Covid-19 shifted restaurant customers’ behavior from contact-based consumption (i.e., dining-in) to contactless consumption (i.e., food delivery, carry-out, curbside pick-up, and drive-through), and Online restaurant food orders have generated the biggest rate of increase in online sales (Ahorsu et al., 2020; Feber et al., 2020; Vinci, 2020). During the pandemic, restaurant consumers become habituated to a new norm, which is contactless consumption, implying that even when the restaurants fully open up after the pandemic, customers can possibly continue the contactless consumption, rather than going back to the pre-pandemic contact-based consumption.

Inertia is known as an emotional state that urges the individual to abide in the present, making them have repeat purchases even though better alternatives exist (Kuppens et al., 2010; Yanamandram & White, 2006). Similarly, nostalgia is theyearning for a return to a past period or places visited, making individuals have repeat purchases (Davis, 1979). The common outcome of these two constructs is that they generate repetitive consumption behavior (Wang et al., 2019). However, there is a temporal distinction between them. Inertia centers around maintaining the existing emotional state (De Longis, Alessandri, & Ottaviani, 2020), but nostalgia focuses more on the past (Belk, 1990).

This study aims to explore the relationship between restaurant customers’ inertia and their behavioral intentions, moderated by the level of nostalgia. Specifically, this study is expected to provide empirical implications in terms of how to utilize the newly developed infrastructure by examining the impact of inertia on restaurant customers’ continuance intentions. Further, this study can provide a guideline on how to attract people to the restaurant as a pre-pandemic period by examining the moderating role of nostalgia. Theoretically, this study examines the similarities and differences between inertia and nostalgia, and the influence of each construct on behavioral intentions.

The role of inertia and nostalgia on restaurant customers’ continuance intentions

The importance of collaboration and openness in basic science and research publication

Accelerated publishing by journals in the pandemic – what should authors know?

International research collaboration in the post-COVID era

Future Perspectives of Research

A Guide on US Funding Opportunities for International Research

A session with Editor-in-Chief: The four rules of writing for publication

Across geographical contexts, youth from marginalized communities are often rendered objects of moral and political concern (Comaroff & Comaroff 2005). Seen to be in socially and economically precarious positions, these young people are often the targets of various humanitarian and policy interventions. These interventions are frequently aimed at improving their educational outcomes and supporting their meaningful participation within society as productive citizens. Implicit within these projects are highly contested, ever-shifting, and deeply politicized understandings of education, schooling, and success, many of which are entangled in utilitarian, neoliberal, white supremacist, and colonial visions of the world and marginalized youths’ proper place within it. This panel brings together papers that examine how marginalized youth engage, negotiate, and contest normative visions of their education and the types of futures that their formal and informal schooling are envisioned to generate. Drawing from a wide array of geographic contexts and institutional settings, these papers build upon works that have probed how racialized assemblages have disciplined humanity into full humans, not-quite-humans, and nonhumans (Weheliye 2014), and youth as a category that is constantly remade in sociopolitical practice (Durham 2004). Whether through their participation in formal and elective educational settings, their embodied protests on university campuses, or their use of social media to organize and disseminate knowledge, this panel examines how young people from marginalized backgrounds strive to reassert their status as fully human. We ask, how do youth stake their own political claims in educational processes amidst persistent global inequality? How are youth unsettling normative discourses about education, schooling, and success, and making space for the knowledge paradigms and epistemologies that allow them to articulate their own truths and envision alternative futures? In exploring these moves, this panel seeks to generate insights about how young people are engaging in and beyond a world that denies/defies their humanity.

Contested Education: Making Space for New Knowledge Paradigms and Alternative Futures

Land & Labor Across the Rural-Urban Divide I This panel will explore land, labor, and the constantly shifting relationships between the rural and urban. We hope to examine contemporary processes that inextricably link rural and urban even as they produce unevenness and separation between them. There are many, among them financialization and consolidation of farmland (Fairbairn 2020); real estate and development moving into formerly agricultural spaces and changing both economies and forms of land tenure (Berry 2000; Levien 2018; Rabie 2021); and powerful infrastructures of commodity production and circulation whose new geographies transform patterns of land use and control (Arboleda 2020; Cowen 2014; Khalili 2020; Plonski n.d.). The transformation of agricultural production and the displacement of rural populations that characterizes the expansion of capital accumulation (Marx 1992) shapes the contemporary trajectories of labor migration, employment, and unemployment (Elyachar 2005; Ferguson 1999; Neel 2018). Such processes cross urban and rural spaces in and across national borders (Buckley 2012; Chalcraft 2009; Mezzadra and Neilson 2013) and have cultural, political, legal, and ideological impacts (Harvey 1990; Lefebvre 2003; Said 1993; Smith 1984; Williams 1973). We are interested in papers that think across the rural-urban divide and develop concepts appropriate to contemporary political, social, and environmental challenges. How do settler colonialism, racial capitalism, and fixed capital (Bhandar 2018; Coulthard 2014; Gilmore 2007; Rickford 2017; Robinson 2000) shape the distribution of land and labor as well as the law and ideology of ownership, rights, and community? How might we draw on traditions of anti-imperialism and agrarian political economy (Arrighi 1970; Mintz 1973; Stoler 1986; Wolf 1955) to understand contemporary struggles around dispossession and exclusion (Ajl 2020; Hall et. al. 2014; Li 2014; Levien, Watts, and Yan 2018). Such struggles include both organized movements (Edelman 1999) and collective forms of surviving, perhaps even flourishing, in places that might constitute interstices of capitalist ruins (Tsing 2015). We wish to explore how families, kinship, and social reproduction are changing (Crehan 1997; Katz 2001); the resources people draw on in times of dispossession and upheaval (Chang 2010; Sayigh 1979); and how emerging practices of growing food, organizing care, sustaining ecologies, and creating durable modes of belonging to place blur distinctions between rural and urban (Aistara 2018; Hoover 2017; Jacobs 2018; Lyons 2020).

Speculative Futures: Migration, Real Estate, and Post-Agrarian Imaginaries in Nepal

We are convening this panel • on the many linkages between Catholicism and political economy • in light of three tendencies. The first denotes a re-engagement with Weberian scholarship and its century-long legacy of probing relations between politico-economic activity and religious practice. The second is the 2013 election of Jorge Mario Bergoglio to the papacy, who • as Pope Francis • stated in 2017 that “capitalism gives a moral cloak to inequality.” The panel’s final tendency points to the contemporary politico-economic moment in many Catholic-majority countries • such as France, Philippines, Chile, among others • where sustained contestation has caught elites and media commentators off guard. While the ideological and contextual bases of these protests are diverse and fluid • some Catholic in origin, others not • their protagonists nonetheless cite a number of common grievances, including firm opposition to austerity, inequality, privatizations, and corruption. It is in this conceptual, religious, and political space that we situate our panel. Influenced by both classic (Asad 1986; Holmes 1990; Ekelund, Hebert, and Tollison 2012) and recent (Napolitano and Norget 2011; Muehlebach 2012; Bautista 2015; Norget, Napolitano, and Mayblin, eds. 2017) scholarship, our panel seeks to bring the historically marginalized analysis of Catholicism to the attention of economic anthropology. In this light, our goal here is two-fold. Not only are we presenting ethnographic studies of contexts understood as “socialist,” “post-socialist,” or “neoliberal” • across all of which Catholicism is prominently woven • but we also suggest what some possible Catholic-influenced futures might look like, both for contemporary political economies and for anthropology itself.

Underline digital video library

Decomposing the GDP impacts of Covid-19

The role of inertia and nostalgia on restaurant customers’ continuance intentions

The importance of collaboration and openness in basic science and research publication

Accelerated publishing by journals in the pandemic – what should authors know?

International research collaboration in the post-COVID era

Future Perspectives of Research

A Guide on US Funding Opportunities for International Research

A session with Editor-in-Chief: The four rules of writing for publication

Contested Education: Making Space for New Knowledge Paradigms and Alternative Futures

Speculative Futures: Migration, Real Estate, and Post-Agrarian Imaginaries in Nepal

Catholicism as a Bridge from Black Chattel Slavery to Racial Capitalism

Can the Talibe Speak?: Black Muslim Youth and Educational Futures

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES