 Hi everyone. So I would like to present my study, the measuring the impacts of the COVID-19 lockdown and the eight package in Vietnam. So this is the outline of my presentation. So first I present the objective and the data and the country context and the method mainly the regression method and the empirical result and finally the conclusion and policy implication. The objective of this study is very straightforward. We know about the adverse impacts of the COVID-19 on the health and also the economic outcomes. And to cope with this crisis, the government they have the policy on the lockdown and also provide the eight package, provide the cash transfer and support to the household, to the people. So in this study, I look at the impact of the lockdown time and also the eight package on the number of the outcomes in Vietnam. So I try to measure not only the economic outcomes, but also the opinion of the people to see where the people they are satisfaction with the government policy in response to the pandemic. So the objective is a very straightforward. The contribution either I try to provide the findings for Vietnam and also focus on the impacts of the lockdown and also the impact of the support to the household opinion about the government's response to the pandemic is that the main contribution. In order to answer this question, I use the data from the three rounds survey data in the three years. So in Vietnam seen 2009, the UNDP United Nations Development Programmes and the Vietnam Fatherland Front, they conduct their, they call the Opinion Survey. They collect information from the 14,000 citizens throughout the country and collect their experiences and their opinion about the government and the public administration. So in this study, we use a survey in the 2019 as a sampling frame and I use a survey that conducted by the Mekong Development Research Institute and UNDP and they conduct the survey in the 2020 and 2021. They use a 2019 survey as a sample frame and they randomly select the respondent from that survey and to survey in the 2020 and 2021. They conducted the phone survey in the September and October in the two years, 2020 and 2021. And the final observation in this study is the 4,500 and 24, and considering the 1,688 in the 2019 and around 1,400 citizens in the following years, 2020 and 2021. And in the survey, they contain the data on the respondent employment and their income and their knowledge about the COVID-19 and also their opinion and assessment of the government's responses and whether they receive their cash transfer, the support from the government. So this is some overview of Vietnam. Vietnam in the 2021 is quite successful in containing the COVID. So at that time, the COVID was quite spread in other countries but in Vietnam, it's very low and the mortality rate in that time is very small. However, in the 2021, the COVID was spread throughout the country and at that time they know the vaccine. So a lot of the people they affected and more than 40,000 people died because of COVID in that time. And in order to control the COVID in the 2021, the government they have to implement that it's a longer lockdown time. So the time of the lockdowns mainly from the June to October and eventually in the provinces with higher number of COVID cases. So this map shows the geographic variation in the number of COVID and in the number of months of the lockdown and the proportion of the people they received the cash transfer from the government. You can see that in the north of Vietnam, the number of COVID is smaller than in the south and also the number of lockdown time is also lower because they don't have the medical cases. So the government they impose the shorter time of lockdown. However, in terms of the receiving the expected, so it's quite equal over time across provinces, the people in the north they also receive similarly in terms of the cash transfer like the people in the south. So the government they provide nearly 3 billion US dollar in 2020 to support the household and the enterprises and in the 2021 they also provide the eight package but the smaller amount to the people and to the firms. So this is summary of the beneficiary from the eight package. So basically they provide the cash transfer to the people, to the workers who lost their job and that in the formal sector. Normally the people in the formal sector when they lost their job they can report. For the people in the more informal sector or the household business, if they report that the revenue and the business has been closed and then they can also allow for the cash transfer and finally another group is the social policy and the poor household. They also receive some kind of cash transfer. Though the cash transfer is equal about it's not very much. The people they can receive maximum three months. So for example here the monthly allowance is a high gift for the people they lost their job and the smaller for the poor people. For the poor people they can receive the cash transfer even they didn't lose their job. So that's why they receive the smaller amount of money. This is a percent the proportion of their citizens they receive their cash transfer in Vietnam. So we can see that in the 2020 in the 21 percent of the people they receive the cash transfer and the rate decreased to the 30 percent in the 2021. Even in the 2021 the the effect of COVID is higher but at that time the people in the the government they they have the smaller resources. So that's why in the 2021 the proportion of the people in the receive the cash transfer is smaller. And one one one one one thing you can see from the ZIT graph that in the 2021 because at that time the effect is quite small. So most of the groups they receive the similar cash transfer and the poor they receive the highest because at that time the government they target to the poor and to the policy household. So that's why who are poor who are ethnic minorities they are more likely to receive the cash transfer. But in the following year in the 2021 the people in the south of Vietnam they affect heavily. So last time the people living in the southeast and the Mekong River Delta they are more likely to receive the cash transfer than other reasons. So now to the methodology. So the main research question is whether the longer term of the lockdown and whether household and the people they receive the cash transfer. So whether that can affect their economic outcomes employment and affect their opinion about the government. So we run the question like that we have the why is a dependent variable measure different outcomes of the individuals and we had the dummy to measure where the just the people that receive the the the cash transfer or not and we have the lockdown that's the number of months just provinces implemented the lockdown. So in Vietnam we have the 63 provinces so the variation in the lockdown time is very at the provincial level and we control for characteristic of the individual we control for the province dummy and the year dummy. So see these are the main reason from the discussion. So we look at the effect of the lockdown and the age package on their economic outcomes. So we see that if the people they receive their cash transfer they are more than reported income in last year is about the 8% higher than the people who did not receive in the first column and we see the strong impact of the lockdown and the income. So one additional month of lockdown increase so they can reduce the per capita income by the 8%. So the second you can see the second round column one and for the effect on the employment the impact on the employment is smaller we do not see the impact of their cash transfer on the employment but we see some impact of the lockdown time on the employment. Specifically you can see that for the people who are living in the province it's a longer time of lockdown they are more likely to lose their job mainly unskilled short that's in the labour market and they have to move to the self-employee non-farm work that's been been fighting. And next I look at the effect on their opinion of the people about their government. So we measure the assessment of the people and ask them to to to rank the performance of the local people and the performance of the provincial government and the central government and they can rank from the one that is a very bad performance to two bad to three is a normal four good and five very good performance performance in response to the pandemic. Here we can see that receiving the eight package they have the positive impact on the opinion of the provincial governments the column four in the column four I simply measure the dummy variable where the that respondent they report the good and very good performance of the governments we see that receiving the eight package they can increase the assessment the positive opinion of the respondent to the provincial government and to the commune governments there's no effect on the central government and the lockdown they have the negative correlation negative impact so longer time of the lockdown so people they have the they're more likely to to lower the rank of performance of the provincial level. In the paper I conducted several estimates and several robust checks and basically the estimates are robust to different samples different variables and different control levels and we also try to look at to explain the impact of the cash transfer on the citizen assessment of government and we try several ways and our finding simply such as that so receiving the cash transfer or the eight package so simply increase their citizen trust in the government so that is the main idea. Finally we conduct several heterogeneous effect to see where the effect of the eight package and on the on the opinion about the government different across different groups of people so here we see that the effect is lower for the mail and lower for the young people so we can see that interaction in the column one and column two three that are the negative meaning that the effect is smaller for the mail respondent and smaller for the young people so that is the the main finding. Finally the conclusion so in terms of the coverage we see that the eight package they cover quite well the vulnerable groups like poor people ethnic minority so they can reach these people very well. The main finding that the lockdown helps the negative effect on the economic outcomes including the income and also they reduce the the employment for the unskilled worker in the formal sector and they move them to the self-employed non-farm work that the main finding. Receiving the eight package they do not have effect on the employment but they have the effect on the per capita income so people they receive the eight package they're more likely to increase the higher income however we see that the positive effect of the eight package they cannot compensate for the negative as a lockdown so that why in the total the people owned the people they affected seriously. One point is that the lockdown they can improve the sorry the lockdown they decrease the citizen positive opinion about the government while the cash transfer they can improve the opinion of the citizen about their government. So it also suggests that during the crisis and pandemics so the most important for the government is they can produce they can provide the timely support and it basically cash transfer for the people vulnerable so that that can help to increase the trust in the government performance so that is the main presentation so thank you.