The Benefits and Costs of Using Social Distancing to Flatten the Curve for COVID-19

We examine the net benefits of social distancing to slow the spread of COVID-19 in USA. Social distancing saves lives but imposes large costs on society due to reduced economic activity. We use epidemiological and economic forecasting to perform a rapid benefit–cost analysis of controlling the COVID-19 outbreak. Assuming that social distancing measures can substantially reduce contacts among individuals, we find net benefits of about $5.2 trillion in our benchmark case. We examine the magnitude of the critical parameters that might imply negative net benefits, including the value of statistical life and the discount rate. A key unknown factor is the speed of economic recovery with and without social distancing measures in place. A series of robustness checks also highlight the key role of the value of mortality risk reductions and discounting in the analysis and point to a need for effective economic stimulus when the outbreak has passed.

Can gold or silver be used as a hedge against policy uncertainty and COVID-19 in the Chinese market?

Purpose The purpose of this study is to present evidence as to whether the use of gold or silver can be justified as an asset to hedge against policy uncertainty and COVID-19 in the Chinese market. Design/methodology/approach By using a GARCH model with a generalized error distribution (GED), this study specifies that the gold (or silver) return is a function of a set of economic and uncertainty variables, which include volatility from interest rate innovation, a change in economic policy uncertainty (EPU), a change in geopolitical risk (GPR) and volatility due to pandemic diseases, while controlling for stock market returns, inflation rates, economic growth and the Chinese currency value. Findings This study employs monthly data of gold and silver prices over the period from January 2002 to August 2021 to examine hedging behavior. Estimated results show that the gold return is positively correlated to the stock return and a rise in uncertainty from economic policy innovation, geopolitical risk, volatility due to US interest rate innovation as well as COVID-19 infection. This result suggests that gold cannot be used to hedge against a stock market decline, but can be used to hedge against uncertainty in general. However, the silver return only responds positively to a rise in uncertainty from the inflation rate and geopolitical risk. Evidence shows that silver returns are negatively correlated with stock returns, and display hedging characteristics. However, the evidence lacks statistically significance during the COVID-19 period, suggesting that the role of silver as a safe-haven asset against stock market turmoil is weak for this time period. Research limitations/implications More general nonlinear specifications can be developed. The tests may include different measures of uncertainty that interact with each other or with the lagged error terms. An implication of the model is that gold can be used to hedge against a broad range of uncertainties for economic policy change, political risk and/or a pandemic. However, the use of gold as an asset to hedge against a stock downturn in Chinese market should be done with caution. Practical implications This study has important policy implications as regards a choice in assets in formatting a portfolio to hedge against uncertainty. Specifically, this study presents empirical evidence on gold and silver return behavior and finds that gold returns respond positively to heightened uncertainty. Thus, gold is a good asset to hedge against uncertainty arising from policy innovations and infectious disease uncertainty. Social implications This paper provides insightful information on the choice of assets toward hedging against risk in the uncertainty market conditions. It provides information to investors and policy makers to use gold price movements as a signal for detecting the arrival of uncertainty. This study also provides information for demanding a risk premium for infectious disease. Originality/value This study empirically analyzes and verifies the role that gold serves as a safe haven asset to hedge against uncertainty in the Chinese market. This paper contributes to the literature by presenting evidence of risk/uncertainty premiums for holding gold against various sources of uncertainty such as economic policy uncertainty, geopolitical risk and equity market volatility due to US interest rate innovation and/or COVID-19. This study finds evidence that supports the use of a nonlinear specification, which demonstrates the interaction of uncertainty with the lagged change of infectious disease and helps to explain the gold/silver return behavior. Further, evidence shows that the gold return is positively correlated to the stock return. This finding contrasts with evidence in the US market. However, silver returns are negatively correlated with stock returns, but this correlation becomes insignificant during the period of COVID-19.

Higher order risk attitudes in the time of COVID-19: an experimental study

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) represents a large increase in background risk for individuals. Like the COVID-19 pandemic, extreme events (e.g. financial downturns, natural disasters, and war) have been shown to change attitudes towards risk. Using a risk apportionment approach, we examine whether risk aversion as well as higher order risk attitudes (HORAs) (prudence and temperance) have changed during COVID-19. This methodology allows us to measure model-free HORAs. We include prudence and temperance as higher order measures, as these two have been largely understudied under extreme events but are determinants of decisions related to the health and financial domains. Once we account for socio-demographic characteristics, we find an overall increase in risk aversion during COVID-19. We also find similar results using a hypothetical survey question which measures willingness to take risks. We do not find changes in prudence and temperance using the risk apportionment methodology.

Stability of Risk Preferences During COVID-19: Evidence From Four Measurements.

This article studies the stability of risk-preference during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results differ between risk-preference measurements and also men and women. We use March 13, 2020, when President Trump declared a national state of emergency as a time anchor to define the pre-pandemic and on-pandemic periods. The pre-pandemic experiment was conducted on February 21, 2020. There are three on-pandemic rounds conducted 10 days, 15 days, and 20 days after the COVID-19 emergency declaration. We include four different risk-preference measures. Men are more sensitive to the pandemic and become more risk-averse based on the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). Women become more risk-averse in the Social and Experience Seeking domains based on the results from the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) and Sensation Seeking Scales (SSS). Both men's and women's risk-preference are stable during COVID-19 based on a Gamble Choice (GC) task. The results match our hypotheses which are based on the discussion about whether the psychological construct of risk-preference is general or domain-specific. The differential outcomes between incentivized behavioral and self-reported propensity measures of risk-preference in our experiment show the caveats for studies using a single measure to test risk-preference changes during COVID-19.