Fear itself. Is fear a determinant of the efficacy oflockdowns?

Among non-pharmaceutical measures for fighting the COVID-19 pandemic, one of the most important is the implementation of lockdowns. The cost and effectiveness of this policy remains a much-debated topic in economics. In this study we investigate whether a 'fear effect' is at work in influencing the effectiveness of lockdowns. According to previous contributions on the topic, fear can increase protective habits, and for this reason we may imagine that a high number of COVID-19-caused deaths creates fear among the population, which may make people more likely to follow government prescriptions and observe lockdowns strictly. By means of a qualitative-quantitative analysis, we find that among the 46 countries that reported coronavirus-caused deaths before the implementation of a lockdown, the top quartile for per capita deaths has better results in terms of reducing new COVID-19 cases after a lockdown, compared to the worst quartile. This suggests that the number of reported deaths, as well as its communication to the population, are important determinants of the effectiveness of a lockdown.

Assessing the effectiveness of mandatory outdoor mask policy: The natural experiment of Campania.

Face masks are possibly the main symbol of the COVID-19 pandemic. Once rarely used in Western countries, in the last two years they have become an object it is impossible to leave one's home without. Italy made their use a legal requirement, even outdoors, from late 2020 to early 2022. The effectiveness of this policy in reducing COVID-19 cases has been widely debated. The recent cancellation of their mandatory use in Italy offers an interesting setting in which to test its impact, since one Italian region (Campania) extended the restriction for a further three weeks. We aim to shed some light on the real-world impact of mandatory use of face masks outdoors, identifying the effect of this policy on the spread of COVID-19. By means of a quantitative analysis, employing a synthetic control method approach, we find that Campania had statistically the same number of cases as its synthetic counterfactual, built from a donor pool formed from the other Italian provinces. Hence, results suggest that while it imposes a burden on the public, the use of face masks outdoors is not correlated with a decrease in the number of COVID-19 cases.

The effect of self-esteem on the spread of a pandemic. A cross-country analysis of the role played by self-esteem in the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic

Extant research on COVID-19 suggests that many socio-economic determinants, by affecting personal behavior, have influenced the evolution of the pandemic. In this paper we study the role played in this regard by average levels of self-esteem in the public. There are reasons to believe that both low and very levels of self-esteem may have an effect on the spread of COVID-19, for opposite reasons. On the one hand, people with low self-esteem may not worry enough to behave in the way recommended (and prescribed, through non-pharmaceutical interventions) by the authorities;people with very high self-esteem, on the other hand, may be over-confident and fail to follow the prescriptions, believing that they do not need them. In this study we test this hypothesis by means of a quantitative cross-country analysis, using a hybrid model and the Rosenberg self-esteem scale. Our results suggest the existence of a U-shaped relationship between the trend of COVID-19 and average levels of self-esteem in a country.

The effect of self-esteem on the spread of a pandemic. A cross-country analysis of the role played by self-esteem in the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Extant research on COVID-19 suggests that many socio-economic determinants, by affecting personal behavior, have influenced the evolution of the pandemic. In this paper we study the role played in this regard by average levels of self-esteem in the public. There are reasons to believe that both low and very levels of self-esteem may have an effect on the spread of COVID-19, for opposite reasons. On the one hand, people with low self-esteem may not worry enough to behave in the way recommended (and prescribed, through non-pharmaceutical interventions) by the authorities; people with very high self-esteem, on the other hand, may be over-confident and fail to follow the prescriptions, believing that they do not need them. In this study we test this hypothesis by means of a quantitative cross-country analysis, using a hybrid model and the Rosenberg self-esteem scale. Our results suggest the existence of a U-shaped relationship between the trend of COVID-19 and average levels of self-esteem in a country.

In COVID We Trust: The Impact of The Pandemic on Religiousness-Evidence from Italian Regions.

By changing many aspects of everyday life, the COVID-19 pandemic and the social distance policies implemented to face it have affected the behaviour of people all over the world. Has the pandemic also affected people's approach towards the divine? Previous evidence suggests that prayer searches on the Internet rose during the pandemic and that people tend to rely mainly on intrinsic rather than extrinsic religiousness to cope with adversity. In the present contribution, using a set of panel random effect estimators, we compare the change in religious attendance in Italian regions before and during the pandemic. Our results suggest that there has been an increase in religiousness during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings are robust to several specifications of the model and to different estimators. This suggests that people derive more comfort from religious activities during hard times that are characterized by uncertainty.

Work ethics, stay-at-home measures and COVID-19 diffusion : How is the pandemic affected by the way people perceive work?

Non-pharmaceutical interventions aimed at reducing the spread of COVID-19 rely largely on voluntary compliance among the target population to be effective, since such measures, which are aimed at the entire population, are very hard to enforce. In this paper, we focus on the impact of different work ethics on the spread of COVID-19. There are indeed reasons to believe that populations with different attitudes toward work will react differently to stay-at-home orders and other policies that forbid people from working. By means of a quantitative analysis, using hybrid model estimators, we test the impact of different work ethics on COVID-19 diffusion in a sample of 30 European countries. Results show that the more a population holds certain beliefs about work-namely, that it is humiliating to receive money without working, that people who do not work become lazy, and that work always comes first-the higher contagion rates of COVID-19 are, ceteris paribus. On the other hand, the more a population perceives work as a social duty, the lower contagion rates are. All this suggests that different work ethics matter in the containment of COVID-19.

Your vaccine attitude determines your altitude. What are the determinants of attitudes toward vaccination?

Attitudes toward vaccination are doubtless an important determinant of public health, and this became evident after the first year of the last COVID-19 pandemic. The issue, long-debated within European societies, especially with respect to occasional surges of diseases in given years, has become a crucial determinant of the wellbeing of a country since 2021. In this study, using microdata from a 2019 Eurobarometer survey, we frame and deepen our knowledge about the main determinants of vaccination attitudes as observed by the related literature. We argue that a positive attitude toward vaccination may be due to individualistic or altruistic reasons, or various incentives; our analysis aims to improve our knowledge about the determinants of such a complex decision. Our findings, obtained by means of a quantitative analysis that employs Ordered Probit, Ordered Logit and Generalized Ordered Logit estimations, provide complete support for some of the theories that have been debated in the literature, limited support for others because of mixed evidence, and no support for some.

Carrot and stick: Economic support and stringency policies in response to COVID-19.

To address the economic losses caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, countries have implemented, together with policies aimed at stopping the spread of the virus, a mixture of fiscal and monetary measures. This work investigates the effect of containment policies and economic support measures on economic growth in the short run, investigating a time window of six quarters in a cross country perspective. Our results confirm the existence of a negative effect of stringency measures on GDP; we also detect a positive effect from economic support measures. Moreover, looking at the interaction between these two kinds of interventions, our findings suggest that up to a relatively low level of stringency policies, economic support measures are able to positively counterbalance the negative impact of containment and closure policies. When the level of closures became more severe, however, the economic support measures that countries adopt are not able to completely recoup, in the short run, the economic losses due to stringency policies. Results suggest that in order to have a positive net effect, policymakers should take into account the level of stringency measures implemented before investing in economic support.

COVID-19 in Central Asia: exploring the relationship between governance and non-pharmaceutical intervention.

To fight coronavirus disease 2019, non-pharmaceutical interventions were adopted all over the world. Non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI) effectiveness also depends on governments' capacity to implement sound policies. Stay-at-home orders are binding measures that can raise serious concerns among the population. The perceived quality and effective need for these measures are therefore crucial for the willingness of the citizens to accept NPIs. This study investigates the relationship between the efficacy of NPIs and governance quality in Central Asia. Results suggest that overall governance quality matters and that in this relationship regulatory quality is more important than rule of law, which matters more than government effectiveness.

Does social capital enforce social distancing? The role of bridging and bonding social capital in the evolution of the pandemic.

By shaping the way people look at members of their networks as well as strangers, social capital affects the behavior of a population during a pandemic. Over the course of 2020, various countries implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI), imposing restrictions that were difficult to enforce (due to the scale of the policies) in order to protect the public from the threat of COVID-19. This is an interesting quasi-experimental setting in which to test the compliance of populations with different levels of social capital with government suggestions and prescriptions. With the help of European Social Survey data, and the John Hopkins University dataset on the spread of COVID-19 around the world, the present work aims to test the impact within a sample of European countries with different social capital stocks on the spread of coronavirus. The results show that countries with higher social capital have fewer COVID-19 cases, ceteris paribus for NPI. This is especially true if this capital is of the bonding kind.

Death takes no bribes: Impact of perceived corruption on the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions at combating COVID-19.

Corruption is considered in the literature as an activity with several externalities and spillover effects. Adding to the recent research on the corruption-COVID-19 nexus, we study the impact of corruption on coronavirus cases. High perceived levels of corruption have been proven to lead to lower institutional trust, and hence possibly to lower levels of citizen compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), such as lockdowns, imposed by the authorities during the first wave of the pandemic to reduce the spread of coronavirus. Applying quantitative analysis with the use of hybrid models, we find that in countries with higher levels of perceived corruption, across alternative corruption measures, more COVID-19 cases are observed, ceteris paribus. This suggests that corruption has a detrimental effect on the spread of COVID-19, and that countries experiencing higher levels of corruption should pay extra attention when implementing NPIs.

Back to school or back to lockdown? The effects of opening schools on the diffusion of COVID-19 in Italian regions.

The opening of schools that coincided with the beginning of fall 2020 and the arrival of the second wave of COVID-19 in continental Europe has fostered significant debate in several countries. Some contributions have suggested that youngsters play a minor role in the spread of the virus, given the specific characteristics of this infection; other scholars have raised concerns about the necessary movement that involves keeping schools open, and the consequent potential spread of the virus. In this study, we focus on the Italian case, an interesting setting in which to test the impact of opening schools on the spread of COVID-19, because of the different dates at which schools have opened in the various Italian provinces, and because of the different rates at which the virus has spread across Italy. Our results suggest that open schools have a positive impact on COVID-19 cases, whose spread occurs between 10 and 14 days after opening. While closing schools or using distance learning have other social and economic consequences, making it necessary for policymakers to adopt a holistic evaluation, it should be taken into account that open schools have an impact on the spread of the pandemic.

Fighting the COVID pandemic: National policy choices in non-pharmaceutical interventions.

The COVID-19 pandemic pushed countries to adopt various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). Due to the features of the pandemic, which spread over time and space, governments could decide whether or not to follow policy choices made by leaders of countries affected by the virus before them. In this study, we aim to empirically model the adoption of NPIs during the first wave of COVID-19 in the 14 European countries with more than 10 million inhabitants, in order to detect whether a policy diffusion mechanism occurred. By means of a multivariate approach based on Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis, we manage to derive three clusters representing different behaviour models to which the different European countries belong in the different periods of the first wave: pre-pandemic, summer relaxation and deep-lockdown scenarios. These results bring a two-fold contribution: on the one hand, they may help us to understand differences and similarities among European countries during the first wave of the COVID-19 outbreak and guide future quantitative or qualitative studies; on the other, our findings suggest that with minor exceptions (such as Sweden and Poland), different countries adopted very similar policy strategies, which are likely to be due more to the unfolding of the pandemic than to specific governmental strategies.

COVID-19 Diffusion Before Awareness: The Role of Football Match Attendance in Italy.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that football matches may have played a role in the spread of COVID-19 all over Europe. Nevertheless, from a scientific point of view, the impact of football matches on the spread of COVID-19 remains unclear. In this paper we study, via a quantitative analysis, the case of Italy, a country badly affected by COVID, and one where attending football matches is very popular. We consider the impact of matches played in January and February 2020 on the dynamic of the pandemic in March and April the same year. Our results, which consider all levels of Italian professional football, and the highest level of amateur football, show that matches played in January and February had an impact on the evolution of the pandemic in March and April. These results suggest that great care must be taken before considering re-opening stadia.

The Effects of School Closures on COVID-19: A Cross-Country Panel Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There has been much debate about the effects and importance of closing, keeping closed, or not opening schools in order to prevent COVID-19 contagion. This policy has been questioned regarding both its efficacy and the social cost it entails, including the possible asymmetric impact it has on genders in many societies due to traditional childcare roles. To the best of our knowledge no existing contribution has attempted to gauge the effectiveness of such a policy over time, in a longitudinal cross-country perspective. OBJECTIVES: This paper aimed to fill the gap in the literature by assessing, at a European level, the effect of school closures (or the lack of such measures) on the numbers of new COVID-19 infections, in the absence of vaccines. Given this policy's expected change in effectiveness over time, we also measured the effectiveness of having schools closed after a given number of days (from 7 to 100). METHODS: We pursued our objectives by means of a quantitative panel analysis, building a longitudinal dataset with observations from countries in Europe, from 1 January to 30 September, and estimating the impact of school closure via feasible-generalised least-squares fixed effect and random effect estimators, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) mixed models. RESULTS: Our results show that having schools closed is effective in reducing the number of new cases. Countries that implement closure have fewer new COVID-19 cases than those that do not. This becomes a reality around 20 days after the implementation of the policy. Its efficacy continues to be detectable up to 100 days after implementation. The result is robust to controls for other forms of social distancing. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that school closure is effective in reducing the number of people who are infected with COVID-19. Unlike what has been suggested in previous analyses or with regard to other diseases, its efficacy continues to be detectable up to 100 days after the introduction of the policy.

Social capital, quality of institutions and lockdown. Evidence from Italian provinces.

This paper uses the exogenous shock generated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the relative government response as an informative case in investigating the factors able to affect policy efficacy. Lockdown measures have been widely adopted to limit the diffusion of COVID-19, indirectly supporting the capacity of the hospital system to face the pandemic. Lockdown obliges people to change their social behaviour significantly, and consequently is a matter of serious concern amongst the population. For this reason, how people react to lockdown is of the utmost importance, since failure to observe it properly will be of little benefit in reducing contagion. In this rationale, factors correlated with individuals' behaviour could affect the efficacy of such measures. The aim of this paper is to investigate whether differences in institutional quality and social capital are correlated with the efficacy of lockdown measures, taking the Italian provinces as a case study. Using a quantitative analysis employing F-GLS estimators, our results suggest that both local social capital and institutional quality have affected the efficiency of lockdown measures in Italian provinces. In general terms these factors contribute to forming the set of incentives able to promote individual behaviour that is in closer compliance with government choices. In this perspective, institutional quality and social capital can be considered factors able to influence the efficacy of policies.

School openings and the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy. A provincial-level analysis using the synthetic control method.

Schools have been central in the debate about COVID-19. On the one hand, many have argued that they should be kept open, given their importance to youngsters and the future of the country, and the effort many countries have made in establishing protocols to keep them safe. On the other hand, it has been argued that open schools further the spread of the virus, given that these are places with large-scale interaction between teenagers and adults accompanying their children, as well as a major source of congestion on public transportation. We aim to identify the effect of school openings on the spread of COVID-19 contagion. Italy offers an interesting quasi-experimental setting in this regard due to the scattered openings that schools have experienced. By means of a quantitative analysis, employing a synthetic control method approach, we find that Bolzano, the first province in Italy to open schools after the summer break, had far more cases than its synthetic counterfactual, built from a donor pool formed from the other Italian provinces. Results confirm the hypothesis that despite the precautions, opening schools causes an increase in the infection rate, and this must be taken into account by policymakers.

Stay at Home! Governance Quality and Effectiveness of Lockdown.

In order to control the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, during the first wave of the pandemic numerous countries decided to adopt lockdown policies. It had been a considerable time since such measures were last introduced, and the first time that they were implemented on such a global scale in a contemporary, information intensive society. The effectiveness of such measures may depend on how citizens perceive the capacity of government to set up and implement sound policies. Indeed, lockdown and confinement policies in general are binding measures that people are not used to, and which raise serious concerns among the population. For this reason governance quality could affect the perception of the benefits related to the government's choice to impose lockdown, making citizens more inclined to accept it and restrict their movements. In the present paper we empirically investigate the relation between the efficacy of lockdown and governance quality (measured through World Governance Indicators). Our results suggest that countries with higher levels of government effectiveness, rule of law and regulatory quality reach better results in adopting lockdown measures. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11205-021-02742-3.

The Efficacy of Lockdown Against COVID-19: A Cross-Country Panel Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There has been much debate about the effectiveness of lockdown measures in containing COVID-19, and their appropriateness given the economic and social cost they entail. To the best of our knowledge, no existing contribution to the literature has attempted to gauge the effectiveness of lockdown measures over time in a longitudinal cross-country perspective. OBJECTIVES: This paper aims to fill the gap in the literature by assessing, at an international level, the effect of lockdown measures (or the lack of such measures) on the numbers of new infections. Given this policy's expected change in effectiveness over time, we also measure the effect of having a lockdown implemented over a given number of days (from 7 to 20 days). METHODS: We pursue our objectives by means of a quantitative panel analysis, building a longitudinal dataset with observations from countries all over the world, and estimating the impact of lockdown via feasible generalized least squares fixed effect, random effects, generalized estimating equation, and hierarchical linear models. RESULTS: Our results show that lockdown is effective in reducing the number of new cases in the countries that implement it, compared with those countries that do not. This is especially true around 10 days after the implementation of the policy. Its efficacy continues to grow up to 20 days after implementation. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that lockdown is effective in reducing the R0, i.e. the number of people infected by each infected person, and that, unlike what has been suggested in previous analyses, its efficacy continues to hold 20 days after the introduction of the policy.