Understanding the Economic Impact of COVID-19 Stay-at-Home Orders: A Synthetic Control Analysis

Gibson, John; Sun, Xiaojin

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3601108

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Instead, it appears that households changed their behavior in advance of the Stay-at-Home order. These results are qualitatively similar to the findings of Goolsbee and Syverson (2021) and Gibson and Sun (2020), who conclude that factors other than the Stay-at-Home order-"such as the spread of the virus and a general waning of consumer confidence"-may have contributed to the economic impacts of COVID-19. Although our findings for Maine are consistent with the impacts of Stay-at-Home orders issued in other states, the analysis does not explicitly account for local (e.g., county-or city-level) restrictions or the actions of businesses (e.g., national hotel chains) themselves to limit their capacity prior to the state-level Stay-at-Home order.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Effects of the COVID-related stay-at-home order on hospitality sales and automobile traffic counts: evidence from the State of Maine, USA

Gabe

Crawley

2021

Econ Bus Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the effects of the COVID-related Stay-at-Home order on hospitality sales and automobile traffic counts in the State of Maine, USA. Empirical results show that the Stay-at-Home order did not have a statistically significant impact on either measure of state economic activity. Instead, households adjusted their behavior as a result of COVID-19 in advance of the Stay-at-Home order. This is an important public policy issue given the large health and economic impacts of the pandemic, and widespread use of Stay-at-Home orders. Even beyond the COVID pandemic, however, the extent to which people respond to government restrictions is important for policy development and implementation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Effects of the COVID-related stay-at-home order on hospitality sales and automobile traffic counts: evidence from the State of Maine, USA

Gabe

Crawley

2021

Econ Bus Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, at least in the short run, policy interventions aimed at saving lives tend to produce negative consequences on the economic activity. Quasi-complete lockdown policies implemented by many governments worldwide have mitigated the extent of the spread of the contagion but have also given rise to very considerable short-term economic costs [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]. As regards Italy, the estimated cost for each week of closure of all non-essential activities is a reduction in GDP of 0.5-0.75% [14,15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The health-economy trade-off during the Covid-19 pandemic: Communication matters

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do people balance concerns for general health and economic outcomes during a pandemic? And, how does the communication of this trade-off affect individual preferences? We address these questions using a field experiment involving around 2000 students enrolled in a large university in Italy. We design four treatments where the trade-off is communicated using different combinations of a positive framing that focuses on protective strategies and a negative framing which refers to potential costs. We find that positive framing on the health side induces students to give greater relevance to the health dimension. The effect is sizeable and highly effective among many different audiences, especially females. Importantly, this triggers a higher level of intention to adhere to social distancing and precautionary behaviors. Moreover, irrespective of the framing, we find a large heterogeneity in students’ preferences over the trade-off. Economics students and students who have directly experienced the economic impact of the pandemic are found to give greater value to economic outcomes.

show abstract

“…Average 45 days). However, it is possible that the economic and non-economic consequences of the long-term SAH orders outweigh the need to protect public health (27,(54)(55)(56)(57). When US states began phased reopening of their economies, and communities started gathering, the daily new cases observed an upward surge.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Mandating Face Masks (Mfms) and Stay-at-h...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stay-at-home and face mask policy intentions inconsistent with incidence and fatality during the US COVID-19 pandemic

2022

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many states imposed stay-at-home (SAH) and mandatory face mask (MFM) orders to supplement the United States CDC recommendations. The purpose of this study was to characterize the relationship between SAH and MFM approaches with the incidence and fatality of COVID-19 during the pandemic period until 23 August 2020 (about 171 days), the period with no vaccines or specific drugs that had passed the phase III clinical trials yet. States with SAH orders showed a potential 50–60% decrease in infection and fatality during the SAH period (about 45 days). After normalization to population density, there was a 44% significant increase in the fatality rate in no-SAH + no-MFM states when compared to SAH + MFM. However, many results in this study were inconsistent with the intent of public health strategies of SAH and MFM. There were similar incidence rates (1.41, 1.81, and 1.36%) and significant differences in fatality rates (3.40, 2.12, and 1.25%; p < 0.05) and mortality rates (51.43, 34.50, and 17.42 per 100,000 residents; p < 0.05) among SAH + MFM, SAH + no-MFM, and no-SAH + no-MFM states, respectively. There were no significant differences in total positive cases, average daily new cases, and average daily fatality when normalized with population density among the three groups. This study suggested potential decreases in infection and fatality with short-term SAH order. However, SAH and MFM orders from some states' policies probably had limited effects in lowering transmission and fatality among the general population. At the policy-making level, if contagious patients would not likely be placed in strict isolation and massive contact tracing would not be effective to implement, we presume that following the CDC's recommendations with close monitoring of healthcare capacity could be appropriate in helping mitigate the COVID-19 disaster while limiting collateral socioeconomic damages.

show abstract

Understanding the Economic Impact of COVID-19 Stay-at-Home Orders: A Synthetic Control Analysis

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Effects of the COVID-related stay-at-home order on hospitality sales and automobile traffic counts: evidence from the State of Maine, USA

Effects of the COVID-related stay-at-home order on hospitality sales and automobile traffic counts: evidence from the State of Maine, USA

The health-economy trade-off during the Covid-19 pandemic: Communication matters

Stay-at-home and face mask policy intentions inconsistent with incidence and fatality during the US COVID-19 pandemic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About