How Effective are Policy Interventions Against the COVID-19 Infection Rates?

IF 1 Q3 ECONOMICS
Etikonomi Pub Date : 2023-03-04 DOI:10.15408/etk.v22i1.28486
C. Tang, Bee Wah Tan
{"title":"How Effective are Policy Interventions Against the COVID-19 Infection Rates?","authors":"C. Tang, Bee Wah Tan","doi":"10.15408/etk.v22i1.28486","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Studies on the COVID-19 pandemic are more likely to concentrate on the effects of the virus while ignoring its time-series characteristics, particularly its stationarity characteristics. Thus, this study attempts to investigate the effectiveness of policy interventions against COVID-19 by determining the permanent or transitory effects in 5 major regions and the ten most infected countries. Using the endogenous multiple breaks unit root tests introduced by Kapetanios (2005), the findings indicate that only the impacts of shocks to COVID-19 infection rates in France are likely to be permanent. However, the transitory effect is found in Brazil, Germany, Iran, Italy, Russia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The country where the shock has a permanent impact is suitable for policy interventions, including lockdowns, social isolation, and local isolation. While herd immunity, which protects the entire population against COVID-19, is better ideal for application in countries that experience shocks with a transitory effect.JEL Classification: C1, I15, I18How to Cite:Tang, C.F., & Tan, B.W. (2023). How Effective are Policy Interventions Against the COVID-19 Infection Rates? Etikonomi, 22(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.15408/etk.v22i1.28486.","PeriodicalId":41552,"journal":{"name":"Etikonomi","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Etikonomi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15408/etk.v22i1.28486","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Studies on the COVID-19 pandemic are more likely to concentrate on the effects of the virus while ignoring its time-series characteristics, particularly its stationarity characteristics. Thus, this study attempts to investigate the effectiveness of policy interventions against COVID-19 by determining the permanent or transitory effects in 5 major regions and the ten most infected countries. Using the endogenous multiple breaks unit root tests introduced by Kapetanios (2005), the findings indicate that only the impacts of shocks to COVID-19 infection rates in France are likely to be permanent. However, the transitory effect is found in Brazil, Germany, Iran, Italy, Russia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The country where the shock has a permanent impact is suitable for policy interventions, including lockdowns, social isolation, and local isolation. While herd immunity, which protects the entire population against COVID-19, is better ideal for application in countries that experience shocks with a transitory effect.JEL Classification: C1, I15, I18How to Cite:Tang, C.F., & Tan, B.W. (2023). How Effective are Policy Interventions Against the COVID-19 Infection Rates? Etikonomi, 22(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.15408/etk.v22i1.28486.
政策干预对COVID-19感染率的影响如何?
对新冠肺炎大流行的研究更有可能集中于病毒的影响,而忽略其时间序列特征,特别是其平稳性特征。因此,本研究试图通过确定5个主要地区和10个感染率最高的国家的永久性或暂时性影响,来调查针对新冠肺炎的政策干预的有效性。使用Kapetanios(2005)引入的内源性多重断裂单位根测试,研究结果表明,只有冲击对法国新冠肺炎感染率的影响可能是永久性的。然而,在巴西、德国、伊朗、意大利、俄罗斯、西班牙、土耳其、英国和美国都发现了这种暂时性影响。冲击具有永久影响的国家适合采取政策干预措施,包括封锁、社会隔离和地方隔离。而群体免疫保护整个人口免受新冠肺炎的感染,更适合应用于经历短暂影响的冲击的国家。JEL分类:C1,I15,I18如何引用:唐,C.F.,&谭,B.W.(2023)。针对新冠肺炎感染率的政策干预效果如何?Etikonomi,22(1),1-14。https://doi.org/10.15408/etk.v22i1.28486.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Etikonomi
Etikonomi ECONOMICS-
自引率
12.50%
发文量
29
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信