Premature lifting of restrictions would cost the economy more in the long run.
Elimination of community transmission of the virus would lead to a stronger economic recovery because business and consumer confidence would be higher than if there were spikes in the number of infections among other reasons.
Economic activity under elimination vs controlled adaptation:
Economic loss under elimination vs controlled adaptation:
Number of infections under elimination vs controlled adaptation:
Images from the Group of Eight (Go8) "A Roadmap to Recovery- A Report for the Nation" available at https://go8.edu.au/
I would propose opening up the economy in stages where we lift restrictions where the virus has been eliminated first before the rest, thus opening up one by one of the areas or states/ territories of the country rather than all at 1 go. Borders must remained closed between areas that still have infections and those where it has been eliminated.
For example, Western Australia has regions with travel restrictions between them, if a region does not have new community transmitted cases for 28 consecutive days, it can be reopened but the border shall remain closed to regions which still have community transmitted cases and if the whole state has eliminated the virus then the whole state can be opened up.
Eventually as the virus is contained region by region, more and more of the country is opened up but the country's borders remains closed.
Also an example, South Australia has had more than 28 consecutive days without any new community transmitted cases, therefore restrictions can be relaxed far earlier than in Victoria but travel restrictions between the 2 states must be strict.
Mass testing and contact tracing must be rolled out and every single infected patient must be quarantined with enforcement and monitoring.
3 options:
Elimination option:
Controlled adaptation option:
From the Group of Eight (Go8) "A Roadmap to Recovery- A Report for the Nation" available at https://go8.edu.au/
