Pandemic amnesia: Have we forgotten what we learned about PPE shortages?

Although things have improved following the national vaccination program, we are still far from the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. India is recovering from a massive surge; Israel, which seemed to be completely out of the water, just announced that face coverings again will be necessary while indoors, even for those fully vaccinated; and the Delta variant now accounts for half of all new U.S. cases. Yet, many state mask mandates are ending, a bipartisan group of senators wants the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to lift the mask mandate for travelers, and some factories that manufacture masks are starting to shut down amid waning demand. 

With a year and a half of the pandemic behind us, are we forgetting some of the hard lessons we learned, such as problems that arose from shortages of masks and personal protective equipment (PPE)?

The initial shortage of masks — coupled with the persistent and significant shortage of semiconductor chips — raises important questions about the role of governments, entrepreneurs and consumers in the free market system. And while governments around the world, including the U.S., are paying more attention to the fact that through their supply chains they have become less independent, it’s time to have a more thoughtful discussion about our role as consumers within the market.

Initially we witnessed a surge in demand for masks, which led to a significant shortage of supply. Consumers needed masks and thus placed orders wherever they could find them, stocking up on as many as they could. Manufacturers saw the demand, knew it was somewhat inflated, but took a bet. They built capacity and hired people. Other players also built capacity or started importing products, driving supply levels up. Then, the music stopped. Vaccinations began, cases started declining, mask orders slowed. Now, rather than building inventory for a future need, manufacturers are shutting down. 

And with the manufacturing process rooted in China — as is the case for many PPE manufacturers — it likely will take another crisis of pandemic magnitude to bring the process back to American shores. We should be using this time to build inventory and support the businesses that supported us during a time of extreme crisis, but many of the American businesses that stepped up to manufacture masks and respirators in the U.S. are on the verge of financial collapse. They are laying off workers and they can’t wait until the next crisis. According to NPR, “Business owners say they feel abandoned by the same government that relied on them to help save American lives during the COVID-19 pandemic.” The market and its inability to match supply and demand created opportunities for businesses and entrepreneurs — and that same market is now taking the opportunities away.

When it comes to supply chains, we play two roles: as consumers and as citizens. The consumer in us likes to pay low prices and wants immediate availability. On the other hand, the citizen in us cares about our community. We want our neighbor to have a job, and the neighborhood store owner to be able to afford housing in the same neighborhood. We would like our country to have the ability to manufacture things such as PPE and semiconductor chips.

There is, however, tension between the two roles. There is no simple answer on how to align them, and the notion of comparative advantage, as first conceived by David Ricardo as the foundation of free international trade, doesn’t address the issues related to community building and collective goods. But as the pandemic has shown us, manufacturers need to continue to make sure they have viable capabilities for some products — such as PPE and semiconductor chips — even if they don’t have a competitive advantage in them.

We tend to blame the entrepreneur and the firm, who operate at the market level and not at the political, moral level. When entrepreneurs are trying to profit from a situation, they are shamed by the community for not being responsible, but when they are left with the losses, they are expected to shoulder them alone. As in the case of masks and PPE, for example, we blame the government for its inability to prepare and react, but we rarely blame ourselves.

COVID-19 will continue to affect our lives on several levels; it has us questioning vital decisions such as where we really want to work or live. But it’s also important for us to start questioning the products we buy and from where we buy them, to question our role as customers, citizens and community members. We must decide which products we would like to prioritize. Maybe we could buy from a local store, rather than Amazon, or support a business that demonstrates long-term thinking as opposed to one that builds its entire business model on cutting costs at the expense of its business partners. 

Can we build a community of responsible citizens who are taking action as consumers? Can we use the pandemic as an opportunity to start asking these questions? If we want to change the market for the better, it shouldn’t be a question of “Can we,” but rather, “How will we?” 

Gad Allon is the faculty director of the Jerome Fisher Program in Management & Technology at the University of Pennsylvania.