If you start strongly punishing countries for revealing data about local epidemics you soon don’t have that data anymore.
The effect of “punishing” is not linear, it only matters if it reaches a threshold. So as long as any travel ban comes with more aid (which seems likely), the info will be revealed as before.
The effect of “punishing” is not linear, it only matters if it reaches a threshold.
No. Even a little amount of punishing can weaken relationships and reduces the amount of information that gets transferred. It can also produce time lags.
Fear of punishment is also not the only reason why a politician might want to prevent knowledge of a local epidemic in a remote village from spreading. There can also be inner political reasons.
If you look at the original article by the CDC person, they speak about lack of trust that might make it hard to distribute vaccines. While trust is a resource that doesn’t really grow linearly it’s not about threshold effects.
So as long as any travel ban comes with more aid (which seems likely), the info will be revealed as before.
Still each decision to reveal critical information would become a though political decision, where politicians would have to assess whether it would cause more harm than good. This could lead to delays and downplaying.
Also, no matter what politicians do, individuals also respond to incentives: People who visited a blacklisted country might lie about it in order to travel, people from a blacklisted country could travel to a neighboring non-blacklisted country and then travel using forged documents. Once they travelled illegally, they may delay getting medical assistance when they get sick, lie about where they have been, lie about people they have been in contact with, etc.
It looks like an iterated prisoner’s dilemma: if you start defecting, then other players will defect against you, yielding a worse outcome for everybody.
The effect of “punishing” is not linear, it only matters if it reaches a threshold. So as long as any travel ban comes with more aid (which seems likely), the info will be revealed as before.
No. Even a little amount of punishing can weaken relationships and reduces the amount of information that gets transferred. It can also produce time lags.
Fear of punishment is also not the only reason why a politician might want to prevent knowledge of a local epidemic in a remote village from spreading. There can also be inner political reasons.
If you look at the original article by the CDC person, they speak about lack of trust that might make it hard to distribute vaccines. While trust is a resource that doesn’t really grow linearly it’s not about threshold effects.
Still each decision to reveal critical information would become a though political decision, where politicians would have to assess whether it would cause more harm than good. This could lead to delays and downplaying.
Also, no matter what politicians do, individuals also respond to incentives:
People who visited a blacklisted country might lie about it in order to travel, people from a blacklisted country could travel to a neighboring non-blacklisted country and then travel using forged documents. Once they travelled illegally, they may delay getting medical assistance when they get sick, lie about where they have been, lie about people they have been in contact with, etc.
It looks like an iterated prisoner’s dilemma: if you start defecting, then other players will defect against you, yielding a worse outcome for everybody.