Lockdown stringency and employment formality: evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa.

In response to COVID-19 most governments used some form of lockdown policy to manage the pandemic. This required making iterative policy decisions in a rapidly changing epidemiological environment resulting in varying levels of lockdown stringency over time. While studies estimating the labour market effects of lockdown policies exist in both developed and developing countries, there is limited evidence on the impact of variation in lockdown stringency, particularly in developing countries. Such variation may have large heterogenous effects both on aggregate and between worker groups. In this paper, we estimate the causal effect of lockdown stringency on employment probabilities, adopting a quasi-experimental design on unique labour force panel data from South Africa. South Africa is a useful case study given its upper-middle-income status and relatively small informal sector, thus serving as an example to a variety of developing and developed country economies. We find that the negative employment effects of the country's lockdown policy were driven by effects on the informal sector. Furthermore, we observe important effect heterogeneity by employment formality as the stringency of the country's lockdown regulations changed over time. We find that more stringent lockdown levels negatively affected informal, but not formal sector employment, while less stringent levels negatively affected formal, but not informal sector employment. From a policy perspective, evidence of such heterogeneity can inform decisions around the optimal targeting of support as the pandemic progresses and lockdown policies are reconsidered.

Increased Risk Perception, Distress Intolerance and Health Anxiety in Stricter Lockdowns: Self-Control as a Key Protective Factor in Early Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Studies provide evidence that distress, (health) anxiety, and depressive symptoms were high during the first weeks of COVID-19 lockdown restrictions, decreasing over time (possibly due to individuals' protective psychological factors). Relations between different lockdown restrictions, mental health issues, and protective factors need to be explored, since even small lockdown effects might increase the risk of future mental health issues. We merged objective lockdown stringency data with individual data (N = 1001) to examine differences in lockdown effects in strict lockdown (Romania) and mild lockdown (Hungary) conditions between March and May 2020 on stressors and mental health symptoms, taking protective factors into account. The stricter lockdown in Romania revealed higher levels of perceived risk of infection, distress intolerance, and COVID-19 health anxiety. Protective psychological factors were not affected by the lockdown measures. Surpassing psychological flexibility and resilient coping, self-control proved to be the most promising protective factor. It is recommended that future research merge objective data with study data to investigate the effects of different COVID-19 lockdown measures on mental health and protective factors. Policy decisions should consider lockdown-dependent consequences of mental health issues. Intervention programs are suggested to mitigate mental health issues and to strengthen peoples' protective psychological factors.

Lockdown stringency and paediatric self-harm presentations during COVID-19 pandemic: retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lockdown during the pandemic has had significant impacts on public mental health. Previous studies suggest an increase in self-harm and suicide in children and adolescents. There has been little research on the roles of stringent lockdown. AIMS: To investigate the mediating and predictive roles of lockdown policy stringency measures in self-harm and emergency psychiatric presentations. METHOD: This was a retrospective cohort study. We analysed data of 2073 psychiatric emergency presentations of children and adolescents from 23 hospital catchment areas in ten countries, in March to April 2019 and 2020. RESULTS: Lockdown measure stringency mediated the reduction in psychiatric emergency presentations (incidence rate ratio of the natural indirect effect [IRRNIE] = 0.41, 95% CI [0.35, 0.48]) and self-harm presentations (IRRNIE = 0.49, 95% CI [0.39, 0.60]) in 2020 compared with 2019. Self-harm presentations among male and looked after children were likely to increase in parallel with lockdown stringency. Self-harm presentations precipitated by social isolation increased with stringency, whereas school pressure and rows with a friend became less likely precipitants. Children from more deprived neighbourhoods were less likely to present to emergency departments when lockdown became more stringent. CONCLUSIONS: Lockdown may produce differential effects among children and adolescents who self-harm. Development in community or remote mental health services is crucial to offset potential barriers to access to emergency psychiatric care, especially for the most deprived youths. Governments should aim to reduce unnecessary fear of help-seeking and keep lockdown as short as possible. Underlying mediation mechanisms of stringent measures and potential psychosocial inequalities warrant further research.

Examining the association between the COVID-19 pandemic and self-harm death counts in four Canadian provinces.

Governments implemented lockdowns and other physical distancing measures to stop the spread of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). Resulting unemployment, income loss, poverty, and social isolation, coupled with daily reports of dire news about the COVID-19 pandemic, could serve as catalysts for increased self-harm deaths (SHD). This ecological study examined whether observed SHD counts were higher than predicted SHD counts during the pandemic period in the Canadian provinces of Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, and Québec. The study also explored whether SHD counts during the pandemic were affected by lockdown severity (measured using the lockdown stringency index [LSI]) and COVID-19 case numbers. We utilized publicly available SHD data from January 2018 through November 2020, and employed AutoRegressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) modelling, to predict SHD during the COVID-19 period (March 21 to November 28, 2020). We used Poisson and negative binomial regression to assess ecological associations between the LSI and COVID-19 case numbers, controlling for seasonality, and SHD counts during the COVID-19 period. On average, observed SHD counts were lower than predicted counts during this period (p < 0.05 [except Alberta]). Additionally, LSI and COVID-19 case numbers were not statistically significantly associated with SHD counts.

Critical country-level determinants of death rate during Covid-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has already led to over 94 million confirmed cases and over 2 million deaths globally (John Hopkins CSSE, 2021). Due to the magnitude of the socio-economic damage of COVID-19 all over the world, we analyzed the critical country-level determinants of the death rate during the COVID-19 pandemic. We have examined the effects of GDP (allocated to pandemics and health), education, gender, cultural factors, number of physicians (per 1000 of the population) on the death rate. A correlation between the death rate and socio-economic conditions has been observed. The finding shows that power distance, individualism, gender, and age affect the death rate more than other socio-economic factors we use. We have also performed the same analysis by using Lockdown levels as a moderator. Lockdown levels have a more significant moderating effect on cultural factors rather than the other socio-economic factors. However, due to the topic's sensitivity, we still need to pay attention to the socio-economic factors that may have lower levels of significant relationship with the death rate, since even 0.1 % of changes in coefficients of our other socio-economic variables could mean thousands of lives. The study results will help health organizations, administration, and policymakers take the necessary steps to combat and manage the pandemic.

One year of COVID-19 in Italy: are containment policies enough to shape the pandemic pattern?

A successful fight against COVID-19 greatly depends on citizens' adherence to the restrictive measures, which may not suffice alone. Making use of a containment index, data on sanctions, and Google's movement trends across Italian provinces, complemented by other sources, we investigate the extent to which compliance with the mobility limitations has affected the number of infections and deaths over time, for the period running from February 24, 2020 to February 23, 2021. We find proof of a deterrent effect on mobility given by the increase in sanction rate and positivity rate among the population. We also show how the pandemic dynamics have changed between the first and the second wave of the emergency. Lots of people could be spared by incorporating greater interventions and many more are at stake, despite the recent boost in vaccinations. Informing citizens about the effects and purposes of the restrictive measures has become increasingly important throughout the various phases of the pandemic.

What caused global stock market meltdown during the COVID pandemic-Lockdown stringency or investor panic?

This paper isolates the different effects of COVID-19 on the stock market returns and identifies the channels through which each of the effects influences the returns. Using a sample of twelve countries with most liquid stock markets, we find that the panic caused by the pandemic affects the stock return negatively through the updation of market risk premium channel. The stringency of the lockdown has a two-way effect on the stock market returns, whereas it affects the return negatively through the updation of growth forecasts, it also affects the return positively through the updation of market risk premium.