Coronavirus in Nordic Countries

Image source: Wikipedia

In this project, I focused on the Nordic countries. These nations are known for high living standards and low-income disparity. They usually are models in education, prision systems, closing gender inequality gaps, and work-life balance, to mention a few.

Considering that Nordic countries perform well in many measures of well-being relative to most other countries, I wondered how they handled the current COVID-19 pandemic and what their results have been.

The Nordic countries consist of Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and the Åland Islands. Given the limitations of data, I focused on the most prominent five countries: Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Iceland.

Context

In the following tables, I present general economic, demographic and health indicators fro the selected locations.

Table 1. Nordic country’s economic and demographic indicators
Nordic country's economic and demographic indicators
Current COVID period summary1
Country Economic indicators Demographic indicators
HDI GDP per capita Extreme poverty Life expectancy Median age Population aged 65 or more percentage Population aged 70 or more percentage Total population Population density
Norway 0.957 64800.06 0.2% 82.40 39.7 16.8% 10.8% 5421242 14.462
Iceland 0.949 46482.96 0.2% 82.99 37.3 14.4% 9.2% 341250 3.404
Sweden 0.945 46949.28 0.5% 82.80 41.0 20.0% 13.4% 10099270 24.718
Denmark 0.940 46682.51 0.2% 80.90 42.3 19.7% 12.3% 5792203 136.520
Finland 0.938 40585.72 0.6% 81.91 42.8 21.2% 13.3% 5540718 18.136
Source: Data on COVID-19 by Our World in Data

1 From February 13, 2020 to March 24, 2021

Table 2. Nordic country’s health indicators
Nordic country's health indicators
Current COVID period summary1
Country Hospital beds Diabetes prevalence rate Cardiovascular death rate Female smokers percentage Male smokers percentage
Norway 3.60 5.3% 14.3% 19.6% 20.7%
Finland 3.28 5.8% 53.5% 18.3% 22.6%
Iceland 2.91 5.3% 18.0% 14.3% 15.2%
Denmark 2.50 6.4% 14.8% 19.3% 18.8%
Sweden 2.22 4.8% 34.0% 18.8% 18.9%
Source: Data on COVID-19 by Our World in Data

1 From February 13, 2020 to March 24, 2021

I pulled general health indicators to keep them fresh in mind. Different representations of those indicators will be the main focus of this story.

Coronavirus data

In the context of the above’s information, this section shows amounts related specifically to COVID-19.

Showing the numbers

To display amounts, I start off by a table with indicators related to COVID-19 for each country

Table 3. Coronavirus indicators per Nordic countries

Coronavirus indicators per Nordic countries
Current COVID period summary1
Country Total cases2 Positive rate average Total deaths2 Cases and deaths proportion Reproduction rate average New tests2 Stringency index3
Sweden 765,984 0.1% 13,460 1.8% 1.2% 12,154,246 55.7
Denmark 234,838 0.0% 2,701 1.2% 1.1% 20,188,333 54.2
Norway 90,255 0.0% 734 0.8% 1.2% 4,642,557 52.3
Finland 73,515 0.0% 951 1.3% 1.1% 4,386,051 43.3
Iceland 6,735 0.0% 99 1.5% 1.0% 318,090 44.4
Source: Data on COVID-19 by Our World in Data

1 From February 13, 2020 to March 24, 2021

2 Accumulated over the specified period

3 The index is shown as the response level of the strictest (from 0 to 100 where 100 = strictest)

From the table above, it is possible to visualize amounts using graphs like bar charts. To make the amounts comparable, I display the total positive cases and total deaths.

The raw sums for people who got COVID-19 per country are shown above.

Also, raw sums for people who died from COVID-19 per country are shown above.

Showing distributions

Showing single values from a gives a limited amount of information Please note the distribution of variables, is at the aggregate level for the Nordic region. We want to have a general insight and is highly right-skewed in some cases.

Showing associations

n

Stingency Index, per Our World in Data site, it’s defined as: This is a composite measure based on nine response indicators including school closures, workplace closures, and travel bans, rescaled to a value from 0 to 100 (100 = strictest). If policies vary at the subnational level, the index is shown as the response level of the strictest sub-region.

This time, we’ll see the evolution of stringency index month by month in Nordic countries. In a future combination with the cases (or deaths) reported, we could appreciate each country’s response to the numbers. Did they increase they level of strictness while facing a harder time?)