If there’s a single lesson from the early months of the COVID-19 crisis, it’s that global trade can shudder to a halt almost overnight. The disruptions were felt everywhere, but the specifics—who was most exposed, which sectors rebounded fastest, and where the scars remain—are less obvious. This is where the disciplined use of ISIC codes turns a chaotic period into something that can be studied, debated, and acted upon.
For trade analysts, the approach begins with customs data. Most countries track exports and imports in painstaking detail, but during a crisis, the challenge is to cut through the noise. By focusing on ISIC codes—say, ISIC 2610 for manufacture of electronic components, or any of dozens of other subsectors—it becomes possible to see which parts of the economy experienced the sharpest trade shocks. Instead of getting lost in country-wide totals, you’re looking sector by sector, getting a high-resolution map of who was hit, when, and how hard.
The method is straightforward. Take quarterly export data tagged by ISIC code and compare Q1 2020 to Q2 2020. The changes are often dramatic. Some sectors, like ISIC 2610, might see exports plunge as factories shut and supply chains unravel. Others, like certain pharmaceuticals or essential food products, hold steady or even grow as global demand shifts. The key is granularity: not all manufacturing is the same, not all disruption is equal, and ISIC codes let you track that nuance.
But just as important as what the numbers show is what they make possible. When policymakers can identify which subsectors are most vulnerable—because the data shows a sudden, sharp drop in exports—they can design targeted interventions. Relief measures, trade facilitation, even diplomatic outreach can be focused where they matter most, rather than spread thinly across an entire economy.
It’s worth noting that this kind of analysis isn’t just about managing crisis fallout. It’s a lesson in preparedness. The sectors that suffered the most in Q2 2020 are likely the ones with the least supply chain resilience, the greatest exposure to single markets, or the least flexibility in pivoting to new opportunities. By mapping short-term trade disruptions through ISIC codes, countries can build a blueprint—not just for recovery, but for future-proofing their export strategies.
Of course, there are limitations. Customs data can be slow to update or inconsistent across borders. Some products and firms straddle multiple ISIC codes, blurring the picture. And, as always, not all shocks are immediately visible; some take months to work their way into the numbers. But the rigor of using ISIC-coded customs data gives analysts and policymakers a foundation for understanding shocks not as abstract crises, but as concrete, actionable events.
Quantifying short-term trade disruptions with ISIC is less about producing the perfect model and more about arming decision-makers with the clarity they need, right when it matters most. As the dust settles on 2020 and lessons are drawn for the next crisis—whatever form it takes—the quiet power of this kind of disciplined, sector-level analysis will only grow in value.