The Immediate Effect of COVID-19 Policies on Social Distancing Behavior in the United States

Abouk, Rahi; Heydari, Babak

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3571421

Cited by 71 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…modest short-run effects from statewide orders (Friedson et al 2020;Gupta et al 2020: Abouk andHeydari 2020), with larger effects for county policies (Gupta et al 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

When Do Shelter-in-Place Orders Fight COVID-19 Best? Policy Heterogeneity Across States and Adoption Time

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes the disease COVID-19, has spread rapidly within the United States. The total number of confirmed cases in the United States on March 12, 2020 was 1,629 which grew to 18,747 confirmed cases within seven days (Center for Disease Control and Prevention 2020a). The primary strategy suggested by governments worldwide to reduce the spread of COVID-19 is social distancing (Australian Government Department of Health. 2020;

show abstract

“…modest short-run effects from statewide orders (Friedson et al 2020;Gupta et al 2020: Abouk andHeydari 2020), with larger effects for county policies (Gupta et al 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

When Do Shelter-in-Place Orders Fight COVID-19 Best? Policy Heterogeneity Across States and Adoption Time

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A U.S. study uses aggregate human mobility and location trends published by Google for the month of March 2020 to explore the effect of six different types of orders: statewide stay-athome order, other stay home orders, non-essential business closure, large gatherings ban, school closure, and restaurant/bar limits (Abouk and Heydari 2020). State-wide stay-at-home orders appear to have the largest effect on reducing mobility.…”

Section: Analyses Of Covid-19 and Associated Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paid sick-leave and physical mobility: Evidence from the United States during a pandemic

Andersen¹,

Maclean²,

Simon³

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Authors listed in alphabetical order. All authors contributed equally to the manuscript. Special thanks to SafeGraph, a data company that aggregates anonymized location data from numerous applications in order to provide insights about physical places, for provide the data for this study. We thank Douglas Webber for helpful comments. All errors are our own. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

show abstract

“…Unlike school closure, workplace closure and canceling public events appear to reduce the effectiveness of contact tracing. One reason may be2 that limiting predictable gatherings may push people to take unpredictable gathering and movement behaviors rather than having them stay at home 3 .…”

Section: Effect Of Npis To Contain Covid-19mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The burgeoning literature examines the effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) [3][4][5][6][7] , the stringency of NPIs 8 , or factors affecting compliance with NPIs 9 . Some mainly support the effect of lockdown by arguing that stringent government responses are effective in containing COVID-19, but only in a single country 3,6 , or even without giving what it means by lockdown in different countries 5,10,11 . Given the variety of scope and measures included in a lockdown of different countries, however, it is crucial to investigate the effect of NPIs in a more detailed way.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of COVID-19 Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions and Threats to Human Rights

Hwang

Hong

Park

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments have implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to curb rapid virus transmission. A growing concern is that such interventions, aimed at ensuring public safety, may severely restrain fundamental human rights. This paper examines which NPIs are more effective than others in containing COVID-19 with the consideration of their threat to human rights. After classifying NPIs into three categories according to their threat to human rights: the right to freedom of movement, the right to freedom of assembly, and the right to privacy, this paper conducts linear regression analyses on the effectiveness of NPIs in containing COVID-19 over 108 countries. This paper finds that school closure is effective in containing COVID-19 only when it is implemented along with complete contact tracing. We confirm the results of the regression analysis by examining the changes in the cumulated number of confirmed cases and the changes of NPIs in ten selected countries. Our findings imply that to contain COVID-19 effectively and minimize the risk of human rights abuse, governments should consider implementing prudently designed full contact tracing and school closure policies, among others. Other interventions limiting freedom of movement and assembly should be carefully adopted with minimal infringement of human rights.

show abstract

The Immediate Effect of COVID-19 Policies on Social Distancing Behavior in the United States

Cited by 71 publications

References 10 publications

When Do Shelter-in-Place Orders Fight COVID-19 Best? Policy Heterogeneity Across States and Adoption Time

When Do Shelter-in-Place Orders Fight COVID-19 Best? Policy Heterogeneity Across States and Adoption Time

Paid sick-leave and physical mobility: Evidence from the United States during a pandemic

Effect of COVID-19 Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions and Threats to Human Rights

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About