Do more stringent policies reduce daily COVID-19 case counts? Evidence from Canadian provinces

The enactment of COVID-19 policies in Canada falls under provincial jurisdiction. This study exploits time-series variation across four Canadian provinces to evaluate the effects of stricter COVID-19 policies on daily case counts. Employing data from this time-period allows an evaluation of the efficacy of policies independent of vaccine impacts. While both OLS and IV results offer evidence that more stringent Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) can reduce daily case counts within a short time-period, IV estimates are larger in magnitude. Hence, studies that fail to control for simultaneity bias might produce confounded estimates of the efficacy of NPIs. However, IV estimates should be treated as correlations given the possibility of other unobserved determinants of COVID-19 spread and mismeasurement of daily cases. With respect to specific policies, mandatory mask usage in indoor spaces and restrictions on business operations are significantly associated with lower daily cases. We also test the efficacy of different forecasting models. Our results suggest that Gradient Boosted Regression Trees (GBRT) and Seasonal Autoregressive-Integrated Moving Average (SARIMA) models produce more accurate short-run forecasts relative to Vector Auto Regressive (VAR), and Susceptible-Infected-Removed (SIR) epidemiology models. Forecasts from SIR models are also inferior to results from basic OLS regressions. However, predictions from models that are unable to correct for endogeneity bias should be treated with caution.

Do more stringent policies reduce daily COVID-19 case counts? Evidence from Canadian provinces.

The enactment of COVID-19 policies in Canada falls under provincial jurisdiction. This study exploits time-series variation across four Canadian provinces to evaluate the effects of stricter COVID-19 policies on daily case counts. Employing data from this time-period allows an evaluation of the efficacy of policies independent of vaccine impacts. While both OLS and IV results offer evidence that more stringent Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) can reduce daily case counts within a short time-period, IV estimates are larger in magnitude. Hence, studies that fail to control for simultaneity bias might produce confounded estimates of the efficacy of NPIs. However, IV estimates should be treated as correlations given the possibility of other unobserved determinants of COVID-19 spread and mismeasurement of daily cases. With respect to specific policies, mandatory mask usage in indoor spaces and restrictions on business operations are significantly associated with lower daily cases. We also test the efficacy of different forecasting models. Our results suggest that Gradient Boosted Regression Trees (GBRT) and Seasonal Autoregressive-Integrated Moving Average (SARIMA) models produce more accurate short-run forecasts relative to Vector Auto Regressive (VAR), and Susceptible-Infected-Removed (SIR) epidemiology models. Forecasts from SIR models are also inferior to results from basic OLS regressions. However, predictions from models that are unable to correct for endogeneity bias should be treated with caution.