Hubbry Logo
New normalNew normalMain
Open search
New normal
Community hub
New normal
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
New normal
New normal
New normal
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A new normal is a state to which an economy, society, etc. settles following a crisis, when this differs from the situation that prevailed prior to the start of the crisis (the "old normal"). The term has been employed retroactively in relation to World War I, World War II, the September 11 attacks, the 2008 financial crisis, the aftermath of the Great Recession, the COVID-19 pandemic and other events.[1]

Usage history

[edit]

World War I

[edit]

In 1918, Henry A. Wise Wood posted a dilemma,

To consider the problems before us we must divide our epoch into three periods, that of war, that of transition, that of the new normal, which undoubtedly will supersede the old. The questions before us, therefore, are, broadly, two: How shall we pass from war to the new normal with the least jar, in the shortest time? In what respect should the new normal be shaped to differ from the old?[2]

Dot-com bubble

[edit]

The phrase was extensively used by Roger McNamee in his 2003 interview to Fast Company while describing the new normal in technology development in regards to business and finance after the dot-com bubble bust,

Forget about the Next Big Thing, the next thing has started. It’s called the New Normal, and 2003 will be the first full year of it. The New Normal isn’t where you wait for the next boom. It’s about the rest of your life. ... There was so much urgency that every standard — for due diligence, leadership, recruiting, and investment — was relaxed. The New Normal is about real life — and real time. Getting things right the first time is more important than getting things done quickly.[3]

2005 avian influenza

[edit]

The phrase was used in 2005 by Peter M. Sandman and Jody Lanard in relation to methods of manipulation of attitudes of the public towards avian influenza. They explained that the initial, typically temporary, fearfulness of a novel risk such as a flu pandemic is something to be guided, that this initial period is a "teachable moment" and offers the opportunity of establishing a "new normal".[4]

2008 financial crisis

[edit]

The phrase was used in the context of cautioning the belief of economists and policy makers that industrial economies would revert to their most recent means after the 2008 financial crisis.[5]

The 29 January 2009 edition of the Philadelphia City Paper quoted Paul Glover referring to the need for "new normals" in community development, when introducing his cover story "Prepare for the Best".[6]

The 2010 Per Jacobsson lecture delivered by Mohamed A. El-Erian at the International Monetary Fund, was titled "Navigating the New Normal in Industrial Countries". In the lecture El-Erian stated that "Our use of the term was an attempt to move the discussion beyond the notion that the crisis was a mere flesh wound...instead the crisis cut to the bone. It was the inevitable result of an extraordinary, multiyear period which was anything but normal".[5][7] El-Erian's lecture cites a 18 May 2008 Bloomberg News article written by journalists Rich Miller and Matthew Benjamin for first using the term: "Post-Subprime Economy Means Subpar Growth as New Normal in U.S."[8]

The phrase has subsequently been used by ABC News,[9] BBC News,[10] the New York Times, and formed part of a question by Candy Crowley, the moderator of the Second U.S. presidential debate of 2012.[11]

2012 China's economic slowdown

[edit]
Main article: New normal (China)

Since 2012, China's economy has shown a marked slowdown, with growth rates declining from double digit levels (before the 2008 financial crisis) to around 7% in 2014. In 2014, a statement by Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, indicated that China was entering a 'new normal' (Chinese: 新常态).[12] This term was subsequently popularised by the press and came to refer to expectations of 7% growth rates in China for the foreseeable future. It was indicative of the Chinese government's anticipation of moderate but perhaps more stable economic growth in the medium-to-long term.

COVID-19 pandemic

[edit]

During the earlier parts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the term new normal was used to refer to changes in human behavior during the pandemic or speculated changes after the pandemic.[13][14][15][16][17][18][19]

In May 2020, physicians at the University of Kansas Health System predicted that daily life for most people would change during the pandemic after the lifting of lockdowns. This would include limiting person-to-person contact, like handshakes and hugs, as well as maintaining distance from others, known as social distancing. They predicted things would change again after vaccines became available.[20]

In Europe, the term "new normal", first conceptualized in 2018 by Austrian philosopher and political scholar Paul Sailer-Wlasits, has become a popular buzzword in contemporary politics.[21][22] Initially introduced in the German-speaking world, Paul Sailer-Wlasits associated the term with various phenomena, including political populism and the 45th U.S. administration under Donald Trump, which he critically dubbed the "new global normal".[23] Since then, the phrase has gained traction among politicians in Austria, Germany, and Spain.

In Austria, Chancellor Sebastian Kurz incorporated the term into his rhetoric typically based on a few catchy buzzwords from mid-April 2020, establishing it as a new political buzzword.[24] The Austrian media reacted critically to this, questioning whether this was intended to convey a permanent erosion of civil liberties.[25][26]

Criticism

[edit]

Some commentators objected of overuse and misuse of the phrase by the media while describing atypical situations or behaviors, which turned it into a cliché.[27][7][1] Sociological research has also shown this terminology does not adequately capture societal shifts that occur during times of major disruption, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.[28]

[edit]
  • Robert A. Heinlein used the phrase in his 1966 novel The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, with a character telling lunar colonists:

    Citizens, requests may reach you through your comrade neighbors. I hope you will comply willingly; it will speed the day when I can bow out and life can get back to normal — a new normal, free of the Authority, free of guards, free of troops stationed on us, free of passports and searches and arbitrary arrests.[29]

  • The New Normal is an American sitcom that aired on NBC from September 10, 2012, to April 2, 2013.
  • A dramedy produced by Nigerian filmmaker Teniola Olatoni Ojigbede in 2020.[30]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

New normal

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The "new normal" refers to the altered economic, social, or behavioral equilibrium that emerges following a profound , supplanting prior conventions with patterns expected to endure as the standard. The term was popularized in 2009 by economist Mohamed A. El-Erian, then at , to depict the protracted period of subdued growth, low yields, and structural challenges in advanced economies after the 2008 global financial crisis. During the , it reemerged prominently to frame anticipated lasting shifts, including accelerated , digital dependency, and modified behaviors like persistent masking or distancing in select contexts. Key applications and empirical patterns. In economic contexts, the "new normal" has described transitions like the post-dot-com adjustment or the aftermath, where recovery proved uneven and slower than historical precedents, prompting adaptations in policy and investment strategies. Post-COVID analyses reveal a hybrid outcome: while and online platforms saw uptake— with surveys indicating sustained hybrid models in some sectors—many predicted wholesale permanences, such as a full pivot from in-person higher education or universal work-from-home, have shown limited persistence, with reversion toward pre-crisis attendance and office utilization as restrictions eased. Data from 2024-2025 studies underscore this partial normalization, attributing durability more to technological accelerations (e.g., ) than to enforced protocols, which largely dissipated without causal evidence of necessity for indefinite retention. Controversies and critiques. The phrase has drawn for implying inevitability in transient disruptions, with critics arguing it fosters undue or excuses , as seen in El-Erian's own later reflections that the "new normal" proved illusory in recovering economies like the U.S. In the era, it faced accusations of rhetorical overreach, framing temporary measures as irreversible to justify expanded state controls or , amid opposition movements decrying it as a mechanism to entrench restrictions lacking robust long-term empirical backing. Such debates highlight tensions between adaptive realism—rooted in observable rebounds—and narratives amplifying crisis legacies, often amplified by institutional sources prone to precautionary biases. By , geopolitical frictions have layered additional dimensions, suggesting "new normals" may reflect broader realignments like supply-chain reshoring rather than isolated health or tech shifts.

Etymology and Conceptual Foundations

Origins of the Phrase

The phrase "new normal" first appears in English-language print sources in the mid-19th century, denoting adaptation to altered circumstances amid industrial and social shifts. Linguistic data from the Ngram Viewer indicate sporadic occurrences starting around the , though the term's frequency remained low, suggesting it functioned as an occasional descriptor for baseline changes rather than a fixed . These early attestations typically involved non-catastrophic contexts, such as personal or economic recalibrations to technological progress, distinct from later associations with global crises. Pre-World War I literature and journalism employed the phrase to capture evolving norms in , including responses to and , without linkage to warfare or epidemics. Usage patterns in digitized corpora confirm its presence in such materials, prioritizing evidence of organic linguistic development over retrospective inventions. Frequency escalated notably in , reflecting widespread application to post-disruption stabilization, particularly economic reconfiguration after the 1929 crash. Attributions crediting modern figures, such as venture capitalist Roger McNamee's self-reported coining during the 2000–2002 dot-com aftermath, fail to account for these documented antecedents and represent ahistorical revisionism. Etymological priority lies with verifiable pre-20th-century print from corpora, underscoring the phrase's in descriptive rather than proprietary .

Definitions and Semantic Evolution

The phrase "new normal" denotes a transitional phase wherein pre-existing norms, behaviors, and equilibria are displaced by adapted alternatives deemed viable in the aftermath of an exogenous shock, aligning with economic models of structural shifts toward new steady states. In this framework, shocks—such as financial disruptions or changes—perturb system parameters, prompting reallocations that establish a revised baseline for growth, productivity, and resource utilization, rather than mere cyclical fluctuations. Semantically, the term originated as a neutral descriptor for empirically observed adaptations, capturing the stabilization into altered equilibria without implying permanence or endorsement. Over time, its usage has progressed to prescriptive connotations, portraying the post-shock state as an inexorable endpoint that societies must embrace, often reinforced by institutional and media framings that discourage of reversibility. Emergent variants like "post-new normal" reflect critiques emphasizing causal reversion to antecedent equilibria when foundational conditions allow, revealing the phrase's fundamentally rhetorical character over technical precision in denoting transient disequilibria rather than immutable paradigms.

Historical Usages Prior to the

Pre-World War I Instances

The phrase "new normal" appears only sporadically in English-language texts prior to , reflecting its limited currency amid slower paces of societal transformation before widespread industrialization. Corpus data from digitized books indicate initial attestations around , often in descriptive contexts denoting adjusted standards or equilibria following incremental changes, rather than abrupt upheavals. One documented pre-1914 instance occurs in educational materials, such as the 1894 textbook The New Normal First Reader by Albert N. Raub, published by the Werner Company as part of a series aimed at standardizing primary instruction . This usage aligns with contemporaneous reforms in teacher training and , where "normal schools"—institutions for educating educators—evolved to incorporate new pedagogical methods suited to an expanding industrial workforce. Such references highlight the phrase's early association with institutional adaptations to modernization, including shifts in demands driven by technologies like the steam-powered press and expanding rail networks, which compressed time and space in daily life without invoking permanent disruption. These pre-World War I examples differ markedly from subsequent politicized applications, employing the term neutrally to describe transitional states rather than to advocate for the entrenchment of altered conditions. The empirical scarcity of attestations before the late —peaking modestly only after 1900—suggests the phrase's emergence paralleled accelerating rates of in industrialized economies, serving as a linguistic tool for denoting to evolving norms in , , and urban routines.

World War I Aftermath

Following the on November 11, 1918, the phrase "new normal" appeared in contemporary discourse to characterize the anticipated enduring shifts in economic and social structures amid the demobilization of approximately 4 million U.S. servicemen by 1919 and the reconversion of wartime industries to civilian production. This usage reflected expectations of lasting alterations, such as sustained intervention in markets and expanded female labor participation, driven by wartime necessities like labor shortages and munitions demands. However, these changes proved largely transient, as market adjustments—including sharp from wartime peaks of 17.3% in 1917—facilitated rapid reequilibration rather than entrenching a fundamentally altered state. Economic indicators underscored this reversion dynamic: U.S. gross national product contracted by about 17% during the , triggered by demobilization-induced supply surges and policy shifts like the Federal Reserve's initial rate hikes, yet rebounded to by 1923 through expansion and reduced union influence post-war. By 1925, real GDP per capita had surpassed pre-war 1913 levels, reaching approximately $6,000 (in 1929 dollars) amid the onset of boom, with industrial production exceeding 1919 peaks by 50% via gains in sectors like automobiles and . These metrics illustrate how war-distorted equilibria—such as inflated prices and redirected capital—resolved through price signals and entrepreneurial adaptation, not perpetual structural novelty. Social reintegration further evidenced normalization over permanence: women's labor force participation, which climbed from 18% in to 21% by 1920 amid wartime entry into factories (e.g., 1 million in munitions), subsequently stabilized near pre-war proportions as returning veterans displaced many, with overall reverting toward domestic norms by the mid-1920s despite pockets of persistence in clerical roles. policies, including vocational training for 300,000 ex-servicemen under the Soldier Rehabilitation Act of 1918, accelerated absorption into peacetime jobs, mitigating prolonged unemployment spikes that peaked at 11.7% in 1921 before falling below 4% by 1923. Cultural adjustments, like era's loosening , coexisted with foundational reversions to family-centric patterns, underscoring that WWI disruptions induced temporary disequilibria corrected by endogenous social and economic forces rather than birthing an indelible "new normal."

Mid-20th Century Contexts

During the of the 1929–1939 period, U.S. policymakers under President implemented the , a series of programs aimed at economic stabilization through , financial reforms, and , which adapted to prolonged rates peaking at 24.9% in 1933. These measures denoted temporary policy shifts rather than a permanent reconfiguration, as evidenced by the incomplete entrenchment of subdued growth; mobilization from 1941 onward drove real GDP growth of 72% between 1940 and 1945, achieving and restoring production capacity. Postwar data further illustrate resilience, with personal consumption expenditures surging in the late 1940s amid pent-up demand, suburban expansion, and rising automobile ownership, effectively resuming and surpassing pre-Depression patterns of high consumer-driven expansion seen in the 1920s. In literary contexts of the , author referenced the "new normal" in his 1966 novel The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, depicting a lunar colony's post-revolutionary state as "the new normal, free of the Authority, free of guards, free of troops stationed in Luna City." This usage framed the concept speculatively, as a hypothetical equilibrium following upheaval, without prescriptive endorsement of enduring transformation, reflecting mid-century optimism in technological and societal adaptability amid Cold War-era cultural shifts toward individualism and . Unlike subsequent ideological applications, mid-20th-century invocations avoided heavy politicization, emphasizing pragmatic adjustments to economic dislocations or fictional futures, with empirical postwar recovery—marked by average annual GDP growth exceeding 4% from 1946 to 1960—undermining narratives of irreversible decline.

Economic and Health Crises

(2000-2002)

The phrase "new normal" gained traction in investor discourse amid the dot-com bubble's collapse, referring to a anticipated era of moderated growth, valuation discipline, and selective tech innovation following the unsustainable hype of internet stocks. , a venture capitalist who invested in early tech firms like , popularized the term to frame the post-burst environment as one demanding realistic assessments of profitability over speculative exuberance, as detailed in his 2004 analysis of the sector's pivot. This usage contrasted with pre-burst optimism, highlighting how overleveraged dot-com ventures—often unprofitable yet commanding sky-high multiples—faced inevitable correction when market realities asserted themselves. The bubble's deflation stemmed primarily from speculative excess, where valuations detached from fundamentals due to abundant , low interest rates (at 4.75% in early 2000), and FOMO-driven investments in any ".com" entity regardless of earnings. By mid-2000, as capital inflows reversed amid rising rates and profit scrutiny, the plunged 78% from its March 10, 2000, peak of 5,048.62 to an October 9, 2002, trough of 1,114.15, wiping out trillions in market value and triggering over 100 tech IPO failures or bankruptcies annually in 2001-2002. Causal analysis reveals this as a classic reversion to mean: hype inflated non-viable models, but the burst pruned excesses without eradicating underlying infrastructure, allowing survivors like Amazon and to adapt via cost controls and revenue focus. Post-burst adaptations were selective rather than systemic, with adoption continuing (U.S. household penetration rising from 4% in to 50% by ) but employment norms reverting—tech job losses exceeded 200,000 in alone, stabilizing only after broader economic recovery. disbursements cratered 90% from 's $100 billion peak to under $20 billion in 2002-2003, yet rebounded to $30 billion by 2004 without entrenching a permanent slowdown, as investors prioritized scalable models yielding positive long-term returns exceeding 20% annually for surviving funds. The NASDAQ's eventual surpassing of its high in 2015 at 5,056.06 underscored market-driven resilience, countering early claims of enduring stagnation by demonstrating that disciplined capital allocation restored growth trajectories grounded in actual productivity gains.

2005 Avian Influenza Outbreak

In 2005, the (WHO) issued repeated warnings about the H5N1 strain, which had caused sporadic human infections primarily through direct contact with infected poultry, raising fears of a potential global similar to historical influenza outbreaks. These alerts prompted discussions in and risk communication circles about heightened vigilance as a "new normal," with experts like Peter Sandman advocating for sustained public attentiveness to the threat without descending into panic, framing it as an adaptation to ongoing risk rather than a transient crisis. However, this rhetoric emphasized preparedness measures such as surveillance and poultry culling, without calls for broad societal disruptions like lockdowns or mandatory behavioral shifts. Empirical data revealed limited human impact: by December 2005, WHO reported approximately 142 confirmed human cases worldwide since the outbreak's escalation in 2004, with over 70 deaths, mostly in where poultry markets facilitated zoonotic transmission. relied on targeted interventions, including mass culling of infected birds and enhanced agricultural surveillance, which prevented sustained human-to-human spread despite the virus's high case-fatality rate exceeding 50% in affected individuals. Predictions of a catastrophic , extrapolated from the virus's pathogenicity and modeled on past events like the 1918 influenza, proved overstated, as genetic barriers to efficient among humans persisted. The absence of widespread structural changes underscored the outbreak's failure to deliver lasting shifts: global supply chains for and related goods demonstrated resilience, with localized disruptions not cascading into economic or behavioral "locks." The "new normal" phrasing, invoked in , quickly faded as case rates declined post-2006 without necessitating permanent overhauls, highlighting how risk assessments can amplify perceived threats beyond causal realities of transmission dynamics and human adaptability. This episode illustrated the pitfalls of precautionary overreach, where institutional emphasis on worst-case scenarios from bodies like WHO did not align with observed outcomes, fostering temporary alertness rather than enduring transformations.

2008 Global Financial Crisis

The phrase "new normal" gained prominence during discussions of recovery from the 2008 global financial crisis, particularly as articulated by economist Mohamed El-Erian, then co-chief investment officer at . In the aftermath of the crisis, triggered by the collapse of on September 15, 2008, and widespread in financial institutions, El-Erian described a "new normal" characterized by slower , higher , and structural shifts away from pre-crisis leverage-driven expansion. This framing, elaborated in his 2010 IMF lecture and earlier analyses, posited that multi-year processes and policy responses would establish lower baselines for GDP growth and productivity in advanced economies, contrasting with the high-growth era before 2007. Central to the crisis response was the U.S. Federal Reserve's initiation of (QE) in November 2008, involving large-scale purchases of mortgage-backed securities totaling $600 billion initially, which expanded the Fed's to inject liquidity and stabilize markets. Complementary legislative measures, such as the Dodd-Frank Reform and Consumer Protection Act signed into law on July 21, 2010, introduced incremental banking reforms including enhanced oversight of systemic risks and the to limit , though these were critiqued for increasing compliance costs without fundamentally altering core lending dynamics. U.S. , which peaked at 10.0% in October 2009 amid 8.8 million job losses from December 2007 to February 2010, began reverting as recovery took hold, falling gradually through the . Real GDP in the contracted at an average annual rate of 3.5% from Q4 to Q2 , reflecting the depth of the downturn, but resumed expansion thereafter, with annual growth averaging around 2% in the subsequent decade driven by monetary stimulus and adaptation rather than permanent stagnation. Empirical outcomes across major economies, including rebounding output in and emerging markets by the mid-, contradicted early pessimism about a "lost decade" akin to Japan's experience, as innovation in technology sectors and fiscal adjustments facilitated cyclical normalization over entrenched low growth. El-Erian's , while influential in highlighting deleveraging's drag, underestimated the resilience enabled by policy interventions, with most indicators reverting toward historical trends by the late .

2010s Economic Slowdowns (e.g., )

In the early , 's decelerated from double-digit GDP growth rates, with annual expansion dropping from 10.6% in 2010 to 7.7% in 2013 and further to 6.9% by 2015, reflecting structural shifts rather than cyclical downturns alone. This slowdown prompted the Chinese leadership to frame the period as the "new normal," a term first used by President in May 2014 during a visit to province to describe moderated but sustainable growth around 7%, emphasizing quality over quantity. and officials positioned this as a deliberate transition from the prior export- and investment-heavy model, which had driven rapid expansion but accumulated imbalances like overcapacity and . Central to this "new normal" was a policy-driven reorientation toward consumption-led and innovation-focused growth, initiated amid post-2008 global demand weakness that exposed vulnerabilities in export reliance. Efforts included supply-side structural reforms starting in to address excess capacity in sectors like and , alongside incentives for high-tech industries and services, which helped stabilize growth without reverting to stimulus-fueled bubbles. Domestic consumption's GDP share, though still low at under 40% in the mid-2010s, saw gradual uplift through measures like poverty alleviation and rural revitalization, averting a sharper contraction. Debt management played a pivotal role in sustaining momentum, as borrowing—peaking after the 2008-2009 stimulus at around 11.4 trillion RMB by end-2009—was curbed via campaigns and fiscal recentralization from 2014 onward, preventing a Japan-like debt-deflation trap. Concurrent , with urban population rising from 49.95% in 2010 to 60.6% by 2019, fueled and service sector demand, providing a absent in stagnating economies like Japan's. These endogenous policy adjustments, rather than exogenous shocks dictating irreversible decline, underscored the "new normal" as a phase of adaptive , enabling to maintain positive growth trajectories into the late without entrenched stagnation.

COVID-19 Pandemic (2020 Onward)

The phrase "new normal" experienced a marked surge in usage during the initial phases of the , particularly from March 2020 onward, as governments and media invoked it to describe anticipated long-term adaptations to mitigation measures such as , mandatory masking, and . interest for the term peaked globally in 2020-2021, correlating with widespread implementations and campaigns framing these behaviors as enduring necessities rather than temporary responses. In the United States, stay-at-home orders issued by states like on March 19, 2020, and subsequent national emergency declarations were often accompanied by rhetoric positioning and remote operations as elements of a "new normal" to manage ongoing transmission risks. Policymakers and outlets such as highlighted the potential permanence of office closures and hybrid work models, with projections suggesting millions of white-collar jobs would not return to pre-pandemic formats. Similarly, masking was promoted by health authorities and media as a staple of daily life, with some reports in 2020 labeling it the "new normal" amid rising case counts. Economically, the induced sharp contractions, with global GDP falling by approximately 3.1% in , while individual countries recorded annual declines ranging from 3% in to over 10% in nations like and the . These downturns, driven by lockdowns and supply disruptions, fueled narratives of structural shifts, yet early data indicated reversions; for instance, high-wage sectors exhibited V-shaped recoveries by mid-2021, rebounding swiftly due to pent-up demand and fiscal stimuli. The rollout of beginning in December 2020, with widespread availability by early 2021, prompted empirical shifts away from stringent measures, as evidenced by increased social contacts among the vaccinated and updated U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance on May 13, 2021, permitting fully vaccinated individuals to forgo and distancing indoors in low-risk settings. This transition, coinciding with declining hospitalization rates in vaccinated populations, underscored early evidence against the permanence of pandemic-era protocols, with mobility data showing rebounds toward pre-2020 baselines in many regions by late 2021.

Post-2020 Developments and Adaptations

Economic Recovery Trajectories (2021-2025)

Global real GDP growth rebounded to 5.9% in 2021 following the sharp contraction of 2020, then stabilized at 3.5% in 2022 and 3.0% in 2023, surpassing pre-pandemic levels by mid-2023 as economies adapted through and adjustments. , real GDP exceeded its 2019 peak by 2021 and stood 8.1% higher by 2023, with annual growth averaging over 2.5% from 2022 onward, driven by robust and investment rather than sustained fiscal interventions. This trajectory outperformed most peers, where recoveries lagged due to prolonged restrictions, underscoring the resilience of market mechanisms in reallocating resources post-disruption. Inflation pressures peaked globally in 2022 amid supply bottlenecks but cooled without embedding permanent scarring, returning to near-target levels by 2025 as monetary tightening and gains took hold. U.S. fell from 6.6% in 2022 to 2.4% by early 2025, supported by declining energy prices (down 17% from 2022 peaks) and normalized wage dynamics, avoiding effects like entrenched expectations or spikes. Sectoral shifts showed partial persistence of adaptations, such as hybrid work models adopted by 52% of U.S. remote-capable workers in 2025, yet countered by rising office occupancy to 55% nationally by early 2025, indicating rejection of full remote permanence in favor of balanced arrangements. Travel and leisure sectors exemplified surge recoveries, with international tourist arrivals reaching 98% of 2019 levels by late 2024 and volumes exceeding pre-pandemic benchmarks in 2025, fueled by pent-up demand and eased mobility constraints. U.S. labor force participation stabilized at 62.3% in 2025, approaching the 63.3% pre-2020 norm as demographic retirements offset initial exits, reflecting adaptive re-entry rather than enduring detachment from work. These indicators collectively challenge notions of irreversible "new normal" transformations, evidencing instead elastic economic structures capable of reverting toward baseline efficiencies.

Technological and Geopolitical Shifts

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated digital technology adoption across sectors, advancing timelines by several years in areas like e-commerce, remote work tools, and cloud computing, yet these shifts largely extended pre-existing trends rather than inaugurating entirely novel paradigms. For instance, firms that had already invested in digital infrastructure prior to 2020 were better positioned to scale operations rapidly, with global digital spending rising 10.4% to $1.3 trillion in 2020 as a direct response to disruptions. This evolution reflects incremental enhancements in productivity and connectivity, building on foundational advancements from the 2010s such as widespread broadband and mobile internet penetration. In , integration into business processes has progressed incrementally post-2020, with adoption rates emphasizing evolutionary refinement over disruptive overhaul. AI experts anticipate positive societal impacts over the next two decades, with 56% forecasting net benefits for the , though public concerns about daily life integration remain high at 50% as of 2025. Despite rapid user growth—such as reaching 800 million users—many implementations falter, with studies indicating 95% of AI projects fail due to overambitious scopes, underscoring the value of gradual, targeted improvements aligned with prior applications. Analysts characterize AI's trajectory as more evolutionary, leveraging established and techniques rather than constituting a singular technological rupture. Geopolitically, the on February 24, 2022, and escalating U.S.- tensions have prompted discussions of a "new normal" in global supply chains, manifesting in increased reshoring efforts amid energy and vulnerabilities. U.S. CEOs reporting plans to reshore operations rose by 15% year-over-year as of 2025, driven by policies and disruption risks, while 59% of manufacturers had reshored or were quoting projects for clients. These adjustments, including a focus on nearshoring to and domestic production, represent adaptive responses to conflict-induced scarcities, such as Europe's energy dependencies exposed by sanctions on Russian gas. However, empirical data reveal no wholesale economic decoupling, with global merchandise trade volumes demonstrating resilience through projected 2.4% growth in 2025 following a 4.9% year-on-year rise in the first half. U.S.-China bilateral goods trade exceeded $650 billion annually in 2025, sustaining high volumes despite tariffs and export controls, as Chinese firms redirected surpluses—reaching 30% of exports—via third-country routes rather than severing ties entirely. World Trade Organization assessments confirm trade's underlying durability, with merchandise flows rebounding from 2020 lows without evidence of structural fragmentation, indicating evolutionary recalibrations in over revolutionary isolation.

Criticisms, Controversies, and Empirical Scrutiny

Challenges to Permanence Claims

Predictions of a "new normal" entailing permanent or behavioral shifts following major crises have repeatedly been contradicted by subsequent recoveries. After , amid a sharp 1920-1921 with and exceeding 11%, the U.S. swiftly rebounded into , characterized by annual GDP growth averaging over 4% from 1921 to 1929, driven by productivity gains and consumer spending rather than entrenched decline. Similarly, post-2008 financial crisis forecasts of "" with enduring low growth—such as projections of sub-2% U.S. GDP expansion persisting indefinitely—proved overstated, as real GDP growth accelerated to 2.5% by 2018 and fell to 3.5% pre-COVID, reflecting adaptive market adjustments rather than irreversible scarring. In the COVID-19 context, claims of irreversible remote work dominance or persistent social distancing have similarly faltered. By mid-2023, U.S. mask mandates had largely ended nationwide, with voluntary usage dropping to under 10% in public settings by , except in high-risk environments where efficacy justified it, indicating reversion to pre-pandemic norms absent . rates, peaking at 60% during lockdowns, declined to hybrid models for 20-30% of workdays by , with major firms like Amazon and enforcing return-to-office policies, falsifying predictions of wholesale office obsolescence. Longitudinal urban data underscores this: New York City's economy grew 2.8% in real GDP terms in , surpassing pre-pandemic trajectories in sectors like and , with office vacancy stabilizing and foot traffic rebounding 80% of 2019 levels. Causally, crises induce temporary disequilibria—such as supply disruptions or labor reallocations—that markets resolve through and resource reallocation, not entrenchment. Historical evidence shows shocks accelerating technological adoption, as in post-1921 boosting or post-2008 expansions enhancing efficiency, countering narratives of permanent output gaps. Deregulatory responses, like the 1920s wage flexibility without stimulus, facilitated rapid equilibration, whereas prolonged interventions risk prolonging distortions; empirical patterns indicate recoveries accelerate once policies pivot to normalization, as observed in 2023-2025 global growth exceeding 3% amid easing restrictions. This underscores overestimation in permanence claims stems from underappreciating adaptive capacities, with data revealing crises as inflection points for reversion or enhancement, not stasis.

Political and Ideological Instrumentalization

During the , proponents of expanded government authority frequently employed the "new normal" rhetoric to legitimize persistent mechanisms, such as mandatory applications, which facilitated real-time tracking of individuals' movements and associations under the guise of imperatives. Critics from liberty-oriented perspectives argued that this framing downplayed long-term erosions of , as apps like those trialed in multiple countries in enabled centralized with limited oversight, potentially entrenching state monitoring beyond acute crises. Similarly, fiscal expansions—totaling trillions in stimulus across Western nations from March onward—were portrayed by officials as adaptations to an enduring era of economic volatility, often sidelining analyses of inflationary risks or debt sustainability that could have quantified trade-offs against individual economic . Advocates aligned with progressive ideologies leveraged "new normal" discourse to advocate for structural permanency in redistributive policies, exemplified by pushes for (UBI) pilots as equity safeguards against recurrent disruptions, with trials in places like (expanded post-2020), cited as models for buffering income shocks in a post- world. In contrast, conservative analyses highlighted how such interventions risked cultivating dependency, evidenced by welfare cliffs where incremental earnings triggered abrupt benefit losses; U.S. data post-2021 stimulus expiration revealed surging 42% from lows to 12.4% in 2022, underscoring disincentives that prolonged labor market withdrawal for millions. Beyond and welfare, the phrase instrumentalized geopolitical shifts, as seen in Europe's post-February response to Russia's invasion, where leaders like those in the framed LNG imports and renewable accelerations as an irreversible "new normal" for , yet resulted in industrial energy costs doubling relative to global competitors by 2024 without stabilizing supply chains against volatility. This approach, critiqued for prioritizing ideological decarbonization over pragmatic resilience, amplified household bills—reaching €2,500 annually on average in by mid-2024—while failing to mitigate vulnerabilities, as diversified sources remained susceptible to market disruptions. Such cases illustrate a where "new normal" advanced state-centric paradigms, often at the expense of empirical validation and individual agency, with right-leaning observers emphasizing resultant threats to personal freedoms and market efficiencies over unsubstantiated permanence claims.

Data-Driven Reassessments of Impacts

Longitudinal analyses of following major disruptions, including the , reveal modest rebounds rather than sustained transformative gains. U.S. labor grew at an average annual rate of 2.0% from 2000 to 2024, with a post-pandemic uptick accelerating slightly since mid-2023, though remaining below the 1995-2005 boom period's pace. assessments from 2023-2024 highlight potential surges from technological adoption, such as tools averaging 29% of full workdays by 2023, but note offsets from regulatory and structural frictions that tempered net output per hour. These findings challenge narratives of a permanent "new normal" productivity slump, indicating adaptation through business dynamism recovery rather than irreversible decline. Social impact metrics, particularly , demonstrate transient elevations tied to acute phases rather than enduring societal fractures. Surveys tracking anxiety and depression from 2020 onward show symptoms peaking during strict lockdowns and preventive measures, with subsequent declines as restrictions lifted by 2023-2024. For instance, generalized anxiety and depression affected 25-30% of respondents during heighted periods, but longitudinal data from 2024-2025 indicate adaptation in broader populations, with no evidence of permanent demographic divides in recovery trajectories. Among vulnerable subgroups like young adults, some persistence exists into 2025, yet overall patterns refute claims of irreversible "new normal" psychological burdens, attributing variances to socioeconomic factors over inherent permanence. Empirical scrutiny of inflationary pressures labeled as a "new normal" during 2021-2023 underscores the efficacy of in restoring pre-crisis norms. tightening, raising rates above 5.25% by late 2022, reduced from peaks exceeding 9% to near 2% targets by 2024, debunking prognostications of entrenched high-price regimes. Analyses confirm the episode as transitory, driven by supply disruptions and fiscal stimuli rather than structural wage-price spirals, with quarterly run-rates approaching deflationary levels (0.5%) by Q4 2023. This outcome highlights causal mechanisms—demand restraint via higher rates—over narrative-driven permanence, countering early dismissals of as benign or inevitable.

Cultural and Discursive Role

Representations in Media and Literature

The phrase "new normal" originated in science fiction literature with Robert A. Heinlein's 1966 novel The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, where a character describes the post-revolutionary lunar —free from Earth-imposed authority, guards, and troops—as settling into this adapted state, framing the shift as an opportunity for and expanded freedoms rather than mere survival. Heinlein's usage portrayed adaptation not as resignation but as a constructive realignment of social structures, aligning with libertarian themes of agency prevailing over centralized control.32470-3/pdf) Post-2020 literature has extended these roots, employing "new normal" in narratives that both amplify resilience and issue dystopian cautions. Optimistic works, such as thematic analyses of novels, depict characters rebuilding communities through adaptive behaviors, emphasizing via social cohesion and personal fortitude amid quarantines and disruptions, without assuming irreversible decline. In contrast, cautionary dystopian subverts the to warn of entrenched controls, portraying hybrid isolation and as eroding , as in explorations of post-crisis societies where initial precautions evolve into normalized restrictions on movement and association. These depictions often draw from pre-COVID speculative works but gained renewed relevance, highlighting causal risks of policy inertia over empirical reversion to pre-crisis baselines. In film and television, post-COVID productions have visualized hybrid lifestyles, with series like Industry (season 2, ) showing financial traders reacclimating to office environments after , underscoring tensions between voluntary adaptation and mandated changes without resolving them as permanent. Documentaries on pandemic-era shifts, such as those examining distributed workforces, present blended models as transitional experiments, though viewer interpretations frequently overlook data indicating hybrid arrangements as fluid responses rather than fixed endpoints, with surveys showing variability in sustained adoption rates by 2023. Overall, media engagements maintain a balanced lens, contrasting tales of opportunistic reinvention—echoing Heinlein's —with narratives of potential overreach, avoiding unsubstantiated permanence.

Influence on Public and Policy Rhetoric

In policy discourse from 2020 to 2022, U.S. officials including President Biden and CDC Director frequently invoked the "new normal" to frame ongoing adaptations as necessary for public compliance with measures like and strategies. For instance, Walensky described a future where behaves seasonally akin to , emphasizing layered protections as part of this adjusted baseline to sustain health security amid fluctuating cases. Biden similarly referenced the term in early 2022, expressing hope that higher rates would define the "new normal" while rejecting complacency toward persistent infections. This aimed to coordinate societal responses by normalizing vigilance, yet critics argued it veered into fear-mongering by amplifying worst-case projections without commensurate acknowledgment of evolving epidemiological data, potentially eroding trust in messaging. Public reception contrasted sharply with elite framing, as surveys revealed widespread fatigue and preference for pre-pandemic norms by 2023. A YouGov poll indicated that while many Americans sought , residual caution persisted in select activities, underscoring a disconnect between policy-driven permanence and desires for reversion. This sentiment aligned with declining interest in "new normal" terminology, evidenced by data showing search volumes peaking during 2020-2021 surges before tapering post-2022, reflecting empirical adaptation rather than endorsement of indefinite change. initially amplified official narratives for rapid dissemination, aiding early coordination on behaviors like masking, but subsequent backlash highlighted overreach, with users decrying the as a tool for control that fostered toward institutional motives. The rhetorical strategy yielded mixed outcomes: proponents credited it with facilitating compliance during acute phases, enabling and behavioral shifts that mitigated initial overload, yet empirical scrutiny revealed downsides, including heightened public distrust when promises of transience gave way to prolonged restrictions. Polling on susceptibility and institutional post-2022 documented this , particularly where media and elites diverged from ground-level realities, such as overemphasizing hybrid work or as enduring fixtures despite favoring traditional patterns. This elite-public rift, amplified by biased coverage in mainstream outlets favoring alarmist tones, contributed to a causal feedback loop where fear-based initially unified action but ultimately bred resistance, as evidenced by rising alternative discourse questioning the permanence of pandemic-era norms.

References

  1. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/new-normal
  2. https://www.researchaffiliates.com/content/dam/ra/publications/pdf/961-whats-new-about-the-new-normal.pdf
  3. https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-end-of-the-new-normal-by-mohamed-a--el-erian-2016-02
  4. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9253824/
  5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11610867/
  6. https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/new-normal-never-was
  7. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/21582440251357373
  8. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-025-04773-4
  9. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472811724001381
  10. https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3701&context=lawreview
  11. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-30/el-erian-says-the-u-s-alone-has-exited-the-new-normal
  12. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388618958_New_Normal_-_Not_What_We_Expected
  13. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/215012/origin-of-the-new-normal-as-a-freestanding-phrase
  14. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/feds/2016/files/2016080pap.pdf
  15. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2014/sdn1403.pdf
  16. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/19467567211025755
  17. https://ziauddinsardar.com/articles/afterthoughts-transnormal-new-normal-and-other-varieties-normal-postnormal-times
  18. https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=47179
  19. https://www.biblio.com/book/new-normal-first-reader-raub-albert/d/1396849661
  20. https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-u-s-economy-in-the-1920s/
  21. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2022049pap.pdf
  22. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/wb/about/history
  23. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/08/past-recessions.asp
  24. https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/world-war-ii-america-spending-deficits-multipliers-and-sacrifice
  25. https://education.cfr.org/learn/reading/how-did-mass-production-and-mass-consumption-take-after-world-war-ii
  26. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/08/22/national/media-national/office-worker-new-normal/
  27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7455105/
  28. https://dokumen.pub/zucked-waking-up-to-the-facebook-catastrophe.html
  29. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dotcom-bubble.asp
  30. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/apr/23/nasdaq-new-record-high-dotcom-bubble
  31. https://www.atlantafed.org/-/media/Documents/news/conferences/2002/02-financial-markets/papers/venturecapitalandinternetbubblehellmannthomaspurimanju2002mar.pdf
  32. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-32429413
  33. https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2005_05_19-en
  34. https://www.psandman.com/col/panflu3.htm
  35. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7096927/
  36. https://www.cdc.gov/bird-flu/php/surveillance/chart-epi-curve-ah5n1.html
  37. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7256893_Panic_over_bird_flu_pandemic_premature_experts_say
  38. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/430001468110044040/pdf/772080Communic0Box0377295B00PUBLIC0.pdf
  39. https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2015/09/28/04/53/sp101010
  40. https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/great-recession-and-its-aftermath
  41. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2010/06/erian.htm
  42. https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-financial-crisis
  43. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-dodd-frank-act
  44. https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2018/article/great-recession-great-recovery.htm
  45. https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/04/art1full.pdf
  46. https://www.bea.gov/help/faq/1004
  47. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=US
  48. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=CN
  49. https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/19thcpcnationalcongress/2017-10/05/content_32869258.htm
  50. https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2014-10/10/content_18716671.htm
  51. https://www.rieti.go.jp/en/china/14100301.html
  52. https://www.nber.org/reporter/2024number2/challenging-transition-investment-consumption-led-growth-china
  53. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1043951X18300993
  54. https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/economic-bulletin/articles/2024/html/ecb.ebart202405_01~a6318ef569.en.html
  55. https://china.ucsd.edu/_files/2023-report_shih_local-government-debt-dynamics-in-china.pdf
  56. https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2014/09/chinas-debt-dilemma-deleveraging-while-generating-growth?lang=en
  57. https://www.lincolninst.edu/app/uploads/legacy-files/pubfiles/2315_1658_FMG_Ch11_Paying_for_Urbanization_in_China_0.pdf
  58. https://www.bruegel.org/policy-brief/will-chinas-economy-follow-same-path-japans
  59. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2015/03/is-credit-to-blame-for-chinas-slowing-growth/
  60. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2020/06/theres-nothing-new-about-this-new-normal-heres-why/
  61. https://www.npr.org/2020/04/24/840397136/the-office-as-we-knew-it-isnt-coming-back-anytime-soon-maybe-it-s-changed-foreve
  62. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7906737/
  63. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6935a2.htm
  64. https://abcnews.go.com/US/life-changed-year-covid-19-pandemic-masks-restrictions/story?id=76212516
  65. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/download/19447/4028
  66. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/rebuilding-economies-after-covid-19-will-countries-recover
  67. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1102991/covid-19-percent-change-gdp-country/
  68. https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/139/2/829/7289247
  69. https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2021/06/a-v-shaped-recovery/
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8443976/
  71. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755436525000155
  72. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8843325/
  73. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO
  74. https://www.bea.gov/news/glance
  75. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/why-is-the-u-s-gdp-recovering-faster-than-other-advanced-economies-20240517.html
  76. https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/the-us-economic-recovery-in-international-context-2023
  77. https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/rise-and-retreat-us-inflation-update
  78. https://thesundaydiplomat.com/inflation-cooling-down-in-the-u-s-the-calm-after-the-storm/
  79. https://www.gallup.com/401384/indicator-hybrid-work.aspx
  80. https://www.yarooms.com/reports/return-to-office-2025
  81. https://www.untourism.int/news/global-tourism-set-for-full-recovery-by-end-of-the-year-with-spending-growing-faster-than-arrivals
  82. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
  83. https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm
  84. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/how-covid-19-has-pushed-companies-over-the-technology-tipping-point-and-transformed-business-forever
  85. https://mpiresolutions.com/blog/the-era-of-digital-acceleration/
  86. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2025/04/03/public-and-expert-predictions-for-ais-next-20-years/
  87. https://www.technology.org/2025/06/02/ai-revolution-breaks-every-speed-record-in-tech-history/
  88. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ai-transformation-imperative-why-incremental-adoption-chakib-pje0e
  89. https://itif.org/publications/2025/09/22/ai-is-much-more-evolutionary-than-revolutionary/
  90. https://www.kearney.com/service/operations-performance/us-reshoring-index
  91. https://www.amtonline.org/article/2025-reshoring-survey-59-of-shops-reshored-or-are-quoting
  92. https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news25_e/stat_07oct25_e.htm
  93. https://www.woodburnglobal.com/post/us-china-trade-relations-in-2025-decoupling-tariffs-and-strategic-competition
  94. https://www.cathaybank.com/about-us/insights-by-cathay/us-china-2025-fall-report-update
  95. https://www.reuters.com/business/wto-downgrades-global-trade-growth-forecast-05-next-year-2025-10-07/
  96. https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/trade_outlook24_e.pdf
  97. https://www.history.com/articles/pandemic-world-war-i-roaring-twenties
  98. https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-permanent-crisis-economy
  99. https://ced.sog.unc.edu/2024/04/four-years-after-the-pandemic-work-from-home-trends-reshape-residential-choices-and-real-estate/
  100. https://founderreports.com/return-to-office-statistics/
  101. https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-13/remote-work-productivity.htm
  102. https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/nycs-post-pandemic-rebound-resilience-meets-headwinds/
  103. https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/annual-state-of-the-citys-economy-and-finances-2024/
  104. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/innovation-in-a-crisis-why-it-is-more-critical-than-ever
  105. https://www.nber.org/reporter/2022number3/crisis-innovation-historical-evidence-insights-and-open-questions
  106. https://covid19research.ssrc.org/public-health-surveillance-and-human-rights-network/report/
  107. https://www.wired.com/story/contact-tracing-apps-coronavirus/
  108. https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article/7/1/lsaa023/5834621
  109. https://www.independent.org/article/2025/06/03/fed-fiscal-folly/
  110. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2020/658193/IPOL_IDA%282020%29658193_EN.pdf
  111. https://academic.oup.com/book/61513/chapter/536392109
  112. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1478210320987411
  113. https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/expiration-of-pandemic-relief-led-to-record-increases-in-poverty
  114. https://www.rpc.senate.gov/policy-papers/growing-the-welfare-state-in-the-name-of-covid-relief
  115. https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-energy-bills-germany-brussels-pipeline-prices/
  116. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373588753_Quantifying_the_value_of_energy_security_How_Russia%27s_invasion_of_Ukraine_exploded_Europe%27s_fossil_fuel_costs
  117. https://www.icis.com/chemicals-and-the-economy/2025/09/survival-is-the-first-priority-for-european-chemicals/
  118. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48695
  119. https://www.frbsf.org/research-and-insights/publications/economic-letter/2024/11/productivity-during-and-since-pandemic/
  120. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/major-economic-developments-of-2023-and-how-theyll-evolve-in-2024/
  121. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Session-4_Trends-in-remote-work.pdf
  122. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/20008066.2025.2488700
  123. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12531953/
  124. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12398219/
  125. https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgecalhoun/2024/02/05/the-verdict-on-the-2021-2023-inflation--transitory-on-all-counts/
  126. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/24/business/economy/economy-interest-rates-inflation.html
  127. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/monetary-policy-and-exchange-rates-during-the-global-tightening-20240510.html
  128. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378281067_Resilience_in_the_Face_of_Crisis_A_Literary_Exploration_of_Pandemic_Novels_Remnants_of_Resiliency_and_Survival_A_Thematic_Analysis_on_Pandemic_Novels
  129. https://www.tahlianewland.com/apocalyptic-post-apocalyptic-dystopian-fiction/
  130. https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/culture/article/industry-season-two-hbo-pandemic-explained
  131. https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20201023-coronavirus-how-will-the-pandemic-change-the-way-we-work
  132. https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2022/07/22/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-covid-19-response-coordinator-dr-ashish-jha-3/
  133. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cdc-pandemic-next-phase-60-minutes-2022-03-06/
  134. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/walensky-covid-will-probably-seasonal-virus-flu-rcna19023
  135. https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1074038896
  136. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ecaf.12522
  137. https://business.yougov.com/content/41752-americans-want-return-normal-poll
  138. https://www.qeios.com/read/WCDDW0
  139. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8443327/
  140. https://read.dukeupress.edu/jhppl/article/50/6/1081/401248/The-Public-and-Health-Mis-information-What-Polling
  141. https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/12/31/how-normal-really-was-the-old-normal/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.