Early adoption of non-pharmaceutical interventions and COVID-19 mortality

被引:15
作者
Amuedo-Dorantes, Catalina [1 ]
Borra, Cristina [2 ]
Rivera-Garrido, Noelia [3 ]
Sevilla, Almudena [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Merced, Econ, 5200 North Lake Rd, Merced, CA 95343 USA
[2] Univ Seville, Econ & Econ Hist, Ramon y Cajal 1, Seville 41018, Spain
[3] Univ Loyola Andalucia, Econ, Avda Univ S-N, Seville 41704, Spain
[4] UCL, Social Sci, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT, England
关键词
COVID-19; Coronavirus; Lockdown; Mortality; Pandemic; Spain;
D O I
10.1016/j.ehb.2021.101003
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
To contain the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries around the globe have adopted social distancing measures. Yet, establishing the causal effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is difficult because they do not occur arbitrarily. We exploit a quasi-random source of variation for identification purposes -namely, regional differences in the placement on the pandemic curve following an unexpected and nationwide lockdown. Our results reveal that regions where the outbreak had just started when the lockdown was implemented had 1.62 fewer daily deaths per 100,000 inhabitants when compared to regions for which the lockdown arrived 10+ days after the pandemic's outbreak. As a result, a total of 4,642 total deaths (232 deaths/daily) could have been avoided by the end of our period of study -a figure representing 23% of registered deaths in Spain at the time. We rule out differential pre-COVID mortality trends and self-distancing behaviors across the compared regions prior to the swift lockdown, which was also uniformly observed nationwide. In addition, we provide supporting evidence for contagion deceleration as the main mechanism behind the effectiveness of the early adoption of NPIs in lowering the death rate, rather than an increased healthcare capacity. (C) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 35 条
  • [1] ECONOMIC ACTIVITY AND THE SPREAD OF VIRAL DISEASES: EVIDENCE FROM HIGH FREQUENCY DATA
    Adda, Jerome
    [J]. QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 2016, 131 (02) : 891 - 941
  • [2] Atkeson A., 2020, WHAT WILL BE EC IMPA
  • [3] Bertoli S., 2020, TURNOUT MUNICIPAL EL
  • [4] BRAINERD E, 2003, CEPR DISCUSSION PAPE, V3791
  • [5] What explains cross-city variation in mortality during the 1918 influenza pandemic? Evidence from 438 US cities
    Clay, Karen
    Lewis, Joshua
    Severnini, Edson
    [J]. ECONOMICS & HUMAN BIOLOGY, 2019, 35 : 42 - 50
  • [6] Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: Evidence from the 1918 Flu
    Correia, Sergio
    Luck, Stephan
    Verner, Emil
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC HISTORY, 2022, 82 (04) : 917 - 957
  • [7] JUE Insight: Were urban cowboys enough to control COVID-19? Local shelter-in-place orders and coronavirus case growth
    Dave, Dhaval
    Friedson, Andrew
    Matsuzawa, Kyutaro
    Sabia, Joseph J.
    Safford, Samuel
    [J]. JOURNAL OF URBAN ECONOMICS, 2022, 127
  • [8] WHEN DO SHELTER-IN-PLACE ORDERS FIGHT COVID-19 BEST? POLICY HETEROGENEITY ACROSS STATES AND ADOPTION TIME
    Dave, Dhaval
    Friedson, Andrew I.
    Matsuzawa, Kyutaro
    Sabia, Joseph J.
    [J]. ECONOMIC INQUIRY, 2021, 59 (01) : 29 - 52
  • [9] De la Fuente A., 2020, EC ESPANOLA TIEMPOS
  • [10] Di Porto E., 2020, PARTIAL LOCKDOWN SPR