777
edits
Changes
no edit summary
</ul></div>
Another relevant analysis for assessing how the crisis impacted the labour market is shown on the map depicting the [[:File:Europa_Tasa-de-paro-en-la-Union-Europea_2020_mapa_18102_spa.jpg|'' Unemployment rates in the European Union in 2020'']]. Figures were clearly high for Spain, Greece and some Scandinavian and Baltic States. The Eastern States, Belgium, the Netherlands, Ireland and Portugal, however, had lower unemployment rates. Generally speaking, unemployment increased to a greater extent in States that previously had fragile labour markets and were therefore more exposed to the crisis. It is also worth mentioning that these high figures for Scandinavia could be linked to the fact that these States tend to have better social protection schemes for unemployed than the rest of the European Union. Lastly, it shall be noted that the temporary ‘Job Retention Schemes’ succeeded in tempering the final figures for all EU Member States.
The last map related to the labour market shows the [[:Archivo:Europa_Tasa-de-ocupacion-en-la-Union-Europea_2020_mapa_18103_spa.jpg|''Employment rates in the European Union in 2020'']]. The highest employment rates were registered in the north and the lowest in the south. This map shows certain structural behaviours, such as the greater or lesser insertion of women in the labour market. Figures for 2020 were heavily influenced by the furlough schemes that most States introduced to counteract the pandemic’s impact on the labour market. The States with the highest employment rates were Sweden and the Netherlands, where full employment of both men and women in the context of a moderately ageing population may be pointed out. By contrast, Spain, Italy and Greece had the lowest employment figures, with high ageing and fewer women and young people in the labour market.
{{ANETextoEpigrafe|epigrafe=Environmental impact}}
The COVID-19 pandemic had some effects on environment as well. The initial lockdowns and consequent reductions in business activity had a direct impact on air and water pollution as well as on greenhouse gas emissions in many developed countries.
Water quality in rivers and seas clearly improved due to a drastic reduction in industrial discharges. The difference was particularly remarkable in North America and Europe, where, for example, clear water in Venice’s canals could be seen. Wild animals were also quick to take advantage of the absence of humans on the streets and could be spotted roaming the avenues in some major European cities.
Energy demand fell globally by 4% and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions decreased by 5.8% in 2020, a fall the likes of which had not been seen since the Second World War. This prompted several international organisations, such as the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), to revise their projections for greenhouse gas emissions during the third decade of the 21st century downwards from their pre-pandemic figures.
Unfortunately, however, if data are analysed by country or world region, there is not much cause for optimism. In China, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions dropped drastically during the first half of 2020 but began to recover before summer. In fact, figures for 2020 show a 5% increase in CO<sub>2</sub> emissions and polluting particles into the atmosphere in large cities, such as Beijing and Shanghai, compared to 2019. In the European Union and the United States, the fall in polluting emissions was very notable from March to May 2020 (between -20% and -25%), and also the remainder of the year also stayed below 2019 values.
The analysis by economic activities shows that the pollution caused by industry and energy decreased in the first half of 2020 and increased again during the second half of the year. By contrast, CO<sub>2</sub> emissions due to land and air transport also fell during the first half of 2020 but did not recover towards the end of the year.
