Supply Chain Due Diligence Risk Assessment for the EU: A Network Approach to estimate expected effectiveness of the planned EU directive

Globalization has had undesirable effects on the labor standards embedded in the products we consume. This paper proposes an ex-ante evaluation of supply chain due diligence regulations, such as the EU Corporate Sustainable Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). We construct a full-scale network model derived from structural business statistics of 30 million EU firms to quantify the likelihood of links to firms potentially involved in human rights abuses in the European supply chain. The 900 million supply links of these firms are modeled in a way that is consistent with multiregional input-output data, EU import data, and stylized facts of firm-level production networks. We find that this network exhibits a small world effect with three degrees of separation, meaning that most firms are no more than three steps away from each other in the network. Consequently we find that about 8.5% of EU companies are at risk of having child or forced labor in the first tier of their supply chains, about 82.4% are likely to have such offenders at the second tier and more than 99.1% have such offenders at the third tier. We also profile companies by country, sector, and size for the likelihood of having human rights violations or child and forced labor violations at a given tier in their supply chain, revealing considerable heterogeneity across EU companies. Our results show that supply chain due diligence regulations that focus on monitoring individual buyer-supplier links, as currently proposed in the CSDDD, are likely to be ineffective due to a high degree of redundancy and the fact that individual company value chains cannot be properly isolated from the global supply network. Rather, to maximize cost-effectiveness without compromising due diligence coverage, we suggest that regulations should focus on monitoring individual suppliers.Comment: see also the visualization under https://vis.csh.ac.at/scdd-exposure-indicator

Agent-based simulations for protecting nursing homes with prevention and vaccination strategies

Due to its high lethality amongst the elderly, the safety of nursing homes has been of central importance during the COVID-19 pandemic. With test procedures becoming available at scale, such as antigen or RT-LAMP tests, and increasing availability of vaccinations, nursing homes might be able to safely relax prohibitory measures while controlling the spread of infections (meaning an average of one or less secondary infections per index case). Here, we develop a detailed agent-based epidemiological model for the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in nursing homes to identify optimal prevention strategies. The model is microscopically calibrated to high-resolution data from nursing homes in Austria, including detailed social contact networks and information on past outbreaks. We find that the effectiveness of mitigation testing depends critically on the timespan between test and test result, the detection threshold of the viral load for the test to give a positive result, and the screening frequencies of residents and employees. Under realistic conditions and in absence of an effective vaccine, we find that preventive screening of employees only might be sufficient to control outbreaks in nursing homes, provided that turnover times and detection thresholds of the tests are low enough. If vaccines that are moderately effective against infection and transmission are available, control is achieved if 80% or more of the inhabitants are vaccinated, even if no preventive testing is in place and residents are allowed to have visitors. Since these results strongly depend on vaccine efficacy against infection, retention of testing infrastructures, regular voluntary screening and sequencing of virus genomes is advised to enable early identification of new variants of concern.Comment: Supplementary material is included in the manuscript PD

Epidemic modelling suggests that in specific circumstances masks may become more effective when fewer contacts wear them

Abstract Background The effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 depends on many contextual factors, including adherence. Conventional wisdom holds that the effectiveness of protective behaviours, such as wearing masks, increases with the number of people who adopt them. Here we show in a simulation study that this is not always true. Methods We use a parsimonious network model based on the well-established empirical facts that adherence to such interventions wanes over time and that individuals tend to align their adoption strategies with their close social ties (homophily). Results When these assumptions are combined, a broad dynamic regime emerges in which the individual-level reduction in infection risk for those adopting protective behaviour increases as adherence to protective behaviour decreases. For instance, at 10 % coverage, we find that adopters face nearly a 30 % lower infection risk than at 60 % coverage. Based on surgical mask effectiveness estimates, the relative risk reduction for masked individuals ranges from 5 % to 15 %, or a factor of three. This small coverage effect occurs when the outbreak is over before the pathogen is able to invade small but closely knit groups of individuals who protect themselves. Conclusions Our results confirm that lower coverage reduces protection at the population level while contradicting the common belief that masking becomes ineffective at the individual level as more people drop their masks

Meteorological factors and non-pharmaceutical interventions explain local differences in the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in Austria

The drivers behind regional differences of SARS-CoV-2 spread on finer spatio-temporal scales are yet to be fully understood. Here we develop a data-driven modelling approach based on an age-structured compartmental model that compares 116 Austrian regions to a suitably chosen control set of regions to explain variations in local transmission rates through a combination of meteorological factors, non-pharmaceutical interventions and mobility. We find that more than 60% of the observed regional variations can be explained by these factors. Decreasing temperature and humidity, increasing cloudiness, precipitation and the absence of mitigation measures for public events are the strongest drivers for increased virus transmission, leading in combination to a doubling of the transmission rates compared to regions with more favourable weather. We conjecture that regions with little mitigation measures for large events that experience shifts toward unfavourable weather conditions are particularly predisposed as nucleation points for the next seasonal SARS-CoV-2 waves