No abstract

Abstract:Using Norwegian register data we estimate how children's school performance is affected by their parents' exposure to plant closure. Fathers' exposure leads to a substantial decline in children's graduation-year grade point average, but only in municipalities with mediocre-performing job markets. The negative effect does not appear to be driven by a reduction in father's income and employment, an increase in parental divorce, or the trauma of relocating. In contrast, mothers' exposure leads to improved school performance. Our findings appear to be consistent with sociological "role theories," with parents unable to fully shield their children from the stress caused by threats to the father's traditional role as breadwinner, and mothers responding to job loss by allocating greater attention towards child rearing.

Abstract:We investigate the impact of plant downsizing on disability pension utilization in Norway. Plant downsizing substantially increases the disability entry rate of workers in affected plants. Workers originally employed in plants that closed between 1993 and 1998 were 27.9 percent more likely to utilize disability pensions in 1999 than comparable workers in non-downsizing plants. The effect of downsizing is non-linear, with workers originally employed in plants downsizing 65-95 percent of their workforce more likely to enter disability than workers in fully closing plants. This is consistent with the signaling story of Gibbons and Katz (1991). We also estimate significant effects of downsizing on future earnings and mortality, suggesting the increase in disability participation could be driven by an adverse effect of downsizing on the economic opportunities or health of affected workers.

Abstract:It has been claimed that good environmental performance can improve firms' economic performance. However, because of e.g. data limitations, the methods applied in most previous quantitative empirical studies of the relationship between environmental and economic performance of firms suffer from several shortcomings. We discuss these shortcomings and conclude that previously applied methods are unsatisfactory as support for a conclusion that it pays for firms to be green. Then we illustrate the effects of these shortcomings by performing several regression analyses of the relationship between environmental and economic performance using a panel data set of Norwegian plants. A simple correlation analysis confirms the positive association between our measures of environmental and economic performance. The result prevails when we control for firm characteristics like e.g. size or sub-industry in a pooled regression. However, the result could still be biased by omitted unobserved variables like management or technology. When we control for unobserved plant specific characteristics in a panel regression, the effect is no longer statistically significant. Hence, greener plants perform economically better, but the analysis provides no support for the claim that it is because they are greener. These empirical findings further indicate that a conclusion that it pays to be green is premature.Keywords: Economic performance; environmental performance; environmental regulations, pays to be green JEL classification: Q25, Q28, K23 Acknowledgement: We are indebted to Bente Halvorsen for valuable discussions and suggestions in the initial part of the project and grateful to Knut Einar Rosendahl and Terje Skjerpen for helpful comments. Financial support from the Norwegian Ministry of the Environment is gratefully acknowledged.

Aim: Research concerning COVID-19 among immigrants is limited. We present epidemiological data for all notified cases of COVID-19 among the 17 largest immigrant groups in Norway, and related hospitalizations and mortality. Methods: We used data on all notified COVID-19 cases in Norway up to 18 October 2020, and associated hospitalizations and mortality, from the emergency preparedness register (including Norwegian Surveillance System for Communicable Diseases) set up by The Norwegian Institute of Public Health to handle the pandemic. We report numbers and rates per 100,000 people for notified COVID-19 cases, and related hospitalizations and mortality in the 17 largest immigrant groups in Norway, crude and with age adjustment. Results: The notification, hospitalization and mortality rates per 100,000 were 251, 21 and five, respectively, for non-immigrants; 567, 62 and four among immigrants; 408, 27 and two, respectively, for immigrants from Europe, North-America and Oceania; and 773, 106 and six, respectively for immigrants from Africa, Asia and South America. The notification rate was highest among immigrants from Somalia (2057), Pakistan (1868) and Iraq (1616). Differences between immigrants and non-immigrants increased when adjusting for age, especially for mortality. Immigrants had a high number of hospitalizations relative to notified cases compared to non-immigrants. Although the overall COVID-19 notification rate was higher in Oslo than outside of Oslo, the notification rate among immigrants compared to non-immigrants was not higher in Oslo than outside. Conclusions: We observed a higher COVID-19 notification rate in immigrants compared to non-immigrants and much higher hospitalization rate, with major differences between different immigrant groups. Somali-, Pakistani- and Iraqi-born immigrants had especially high rates.

Background The occupational risk of COVID-19 may be different in the first versus second epidemic wave. Aim To study whether employees in occupations that typically entail close contact with others were at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation during the first and second epidemic wave before and after 18 July 2020, in Norway. Methods We included individuals in occupations working with patients, children, students, or customers using Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO-08) codes. We compared residents (3,559,694 on 1 January 2020) in such occupations aged 20–70 years (mean: 44.1; standard deviation: 14.3 years; 51% men) to age-matched individuals in other professions using logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, birth country and marital status. Results Nurses, physicians, dentists and physiotherapists had 2–3.5 times the odds of COVID-19 during the first wave when compared with others of working age. In the second wave, bartenders, waiters, food counter attendants, transport conductors, travel stewards, childcare workers, preschool and primary school teachers had ca 1.25–2 times the odds of infection. Bus, tram and taxi drivers had an increased odds of infection in both waves (odds ratio: 1.2–2.1). Occupation was of limited relevance for the odds of severe infection, here studied as hospitalisation with the disease. Conclusion Our findings from the entire Norwegian population may be of relevance to national and regional authorities in handling the epidemic. Also, we provide a knowledge foundation for more targeted future studies of lockdowns and disease control measures.

Aim: To study whether employees in occupations that typically imply close contact with other people are at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) and related hospitalization, for the 1st and 2nd wave of infection in Norway. Methods: In 3 553 407 residents of Norway on January 1st 2020 aged 20-70 (with mean [SD] age 44.1 [14.3] years and 51% men), we studied whether persons in occupations in touch with pupils/students/patients/customers (using Standard Classification of Occupations [ISCO-08 codes]) had a higher risk of 1) COVID-19 and 2) hospitalization with COVID-19, compared to everyone aged 20-70 years using logistic regression adjusted for age, sex and birth country. Results: Nurses, physicians, dentists, physiotherapists, bus/tram and taxi drivers had 1.5-3.5 times the odds of COVID-19 during the 1st wave of infection when compared to everyone in their working age. In the 2nd wave of the epidemic, bartenders, waiters, food service counter attendants, taxi drivers and travel stewards had 1.5-4 times the odds of COVID-19 when compared to everyone in their working age. Teachers had no or only a moderately increased odds of COVID-19. Occupation may be of limited relevance for the odds of severe COVID-19, here studied as hospitalization with the disease. Conclusion: Studying the entire Norwegian population using international standardized codes of occupations, our findings may be of relevance to national and regional authorities in handling the epidemic. Also, our findings provide a knowledge foundation for the more targeted future studies of lockdown and disease control measures.

Objectives To explore whether and for how long use of healthcare services is increased among children and adolescents after covid-19. Design Before and after register based study. Setting General population of Norway. Participants Norwegians aged 1-19 years (n=706 885) who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 from 1 August 2020 to 1 February 2021 (n=10 279 positive, n=275 859 negative) or not tested (n=420 747) and were not admitted to hospital, by age groups 1-5, 6-15, and 16-19 years. Main outcome measures Monthly percentages of all cause and cause specific healthcare use in primary care (general practitioner, emergency ward) and specialist care (outpatient, inpatient) from six months before to about six months after the week of being tested for SARS-CoV-2, using a difference-in-differences approach. Results A substantial short term relative increase in primary care use was observed for participants during the first month after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result compared with those who tested negative (age 1-5 years: 339%, 95% confidence interval 308% to 369%; 6-15 years: 471%, 450% to 491%; 16-19 years: 401%, 380% to 422%). Use of primary care for the younger age groups was still increased at two months (1-5 years: 22%, 4% to 40%; 6-15 years: 14%, 2% to 26%) and three months (1-5 years: 26%, 7% to 46%, 6-15 years: 15%, 3% to 28%), but not for the oldest group (16-19 years: 11%, −2% to 24% and 6%, −7% to 19%, respectively). Children aged 1-5 years who tested positive also showed a minor long term (≤6 months) relative increase in primary care use (13%, −0% to 26%) that was not observed for the older age groups, compared with same aged children who tested negative. Results were similar yet the age differences less pronounced compared with untested controls. For all age groups, the increase in primary care visits was due to respiratory and general or unspecified conditions. No increased use of specialist care was observed. Conclusion Covid-19 among children and adolescents was found to have limited impact on healthcare services in Norway. Preschool aged children might take longer to recover (3-6 months) than primary or secondary school students (1-3 months), usually because of respiratory conditions.