风险规避、社区效应抵消和COVID-19:来自室内政治集会的证据。

IF 1.3 2区 经济学 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-22 DOI:10.1007/s11166-021-09359-4
Dhaval Dave, Andrew Friedson, Kyutaro Matsuzawa, Drew McNichols, Connor Redpath, Joseph J Sabia
{"title":"风险规避、社区效应抵消和COVID-19:来自室内政治集会的证据。","authors":"Dhaval Dave,&nbsp;Andrew Friedson,&nbsp;Kyutaro Matsuzawa,&nbsp;Drew McNichols,&nbsp;Connor Redpath,&nbsp;Joseph J Sabia","doi":"10.1007/s11166-021-09359-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) deem large indoor gatherings without social distancing the \"highest risk\" activity for COVID-19 contagion. On June 20, 2020, President Donald J. Trump held his first mass campaign rally following the US coronavirus outbreak at the indoor Bank of Oklahoma arena. In the weeks following the event, numerous high-profile national news outlets reported that the Trump rally was \"more than likely\" the cause of a coronavirus surge in Tulsa County based on time series data. This study is the first to rigorously explore the impacts of this event on social distancing and COVID-19 spread. First, using data from SafeGraph Inc, we show that while non-resident visits to census block groups hosting the Trump event grew by approximately 25 percent, there was no decline in net stay-at-home behavior in Tulsa County, reflecting important offsetting behavioral effects. Then, using data on COVID-19 cases from the CDC and a synthetic control design, we find little evidence that COVID-19 grew more rapidly in Tulsa County, its border counties, or in the state of Oklahoma than each's estimated counterfactual during the five-week post-treatment period we observe. Difference-in-differences estimates further provide no evidence that COVID-19 rates grew faster in counties that drew relatively larger shares of residents to the event. We conclude that offsetting risk-related behavioral responses to the rally-including voluntary closures of restaurants and bars in downtown Tulsa, increases in stay-at-home behavior, displacement of usual activities of weekend inflows, and smaller-than-expected crowd attendance-may be important mechanisms.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11166-021-09359-4.</p>","PeriodicalId":48066,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty","volume":"63 2","pages":"133-167"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8535106/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk avoidance, offsetting community effects, and COVID-19: Evidence from an indoor political rally.\",\"authors\":\"Dhaval Dave,&nbsp;Andrew Friedson,&nbsp;Kyutaro Matsuzawa,&nbsp;Drew McNichols,&nbsp;Connor Redpath,&nbsp;Joseph J Sabia\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11166-021-09359-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) deem large indoor gatherings without social distancing the \\\"highest risk\\\" activity for COVID-19 contagion. On June 20, 2020, President Donald J. Trump held his first mass campaign rally following the US coronavirus outbreak at the indoor Bank of Oklahoma arena. In the weeks following the event, numerous high-profile national news outlets reported that the Trump rally was \\\"more than likely\\\" the cause of a coronavirus surge in Tulsa County based on time series data. This study is the first to rigorously explore the impacts of this event on social distancing and COVID-19 spread. First, using data from SafeGraph Inc, we show that while non-resident visits to census block groups hosting the Trump event grew by approximately 25 percent, there was no decline in net stay-at-home behavior in Tulsa County, reflecting important offsetting behavioral effects. Then, using data on COVID-19 cases from the CDC and a synthetic control design, we find little evidence that COVID-19 grew more rapidly in Tulsa County, its border counties, or in the state of Oklahoma than each's estimated counterfactual during the five-week post-treatment period we observe. Difference-in-differences estimates further provide no evidence that COVID-19 rates grew faster in counties that drew relatively larger shares of residents to the event. We conclude that offsetting risk-related behavioral responses to the rally-including voluntary closures of restaurants and bars in downtown Tulsa, increases in stay-at-home behavior, displacement of usual activities of weekend inflows, and smaller-than-expected crowd attendance-may be important mechanisms.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11166-021-09359-4.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty\",\"volume\":\"63 2\",\"pages\":\"133-167\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8535106/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-021-09359-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/10/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-021-09359-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

美国疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)认为,没有保持社交距离的大型室内聚会是新冠病毒感染的“最高风险”活动。2020年6月20日,美国总统唐纳德·j·特朗普在俄克拉荷马银行室内体育馆举行了冠状病毒爆发后的首次大规模竞选集会。在活动结束后的几周内,许多备受瞩目的全国性新闻媒体报道称,根据时间序列数据,特朗普的集会“很可能”是塔尔萨县冠状病毒激增的原因。该研究首次严格探讨了这一事件对社交距离和COVID-19传播的影响。首先,我们使用SafeGraph Inc .的数据表明,虽然非居民访问主办特朗普活动的人口普查小组的人数增加了约25%,但塔尔萨县的净呆在家里的行为并没有下降,这反映了重要的抵消行为效应。然后,使用疾病预防控制中心的COVID-19病例数据和综合对照设计,我们发现在我们观察到的治疗后五周期间,几乎没有证据表明COVID-19在塔尔萨县、其边境县或俄克拉荷马州的增长速度比每个估计的反事实更快。差异中的差异估计进一步没有证据表明,在吸引相对较多居民参加活动的县,COVID-19发病率增长得更快。我们得出的结论是,抵消风险相关的行为反应可能是重要的机制,包括塔尔萨市中心的餐馆和酒吧自愿关闭,呆在家里的行为增加,周末流入的日常活动被取代,以及低于预期的人群出席率。补充信息:在线版本包含补充资料,可在10.1007/s11166-021-09359-4获得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Risk avoidance, offsetting community effects, and COVID-19: Evidence from an indoor political rally.

Risk avoidance, offsetting community effects, and COVID-19: Evidence from an indoor political rally.

Risk avoidance, offsetting community effects, and COVID-19: Evidence from an indoor political rally.

Risk avoidance, offsetting community effects, and COVID-19: Evidence from an indoor political rally.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) deem large indoor gatherings without social distancing the "highest risk" activity for COVID-19 contagion. On June 20, 2020, President Donald J. Trump held his first mass campaign rally following the US coronavirus outbreak at the indoor Bank of Oklahoma arena. In the weeks following the event, numerous high-profile national news outlets reported that the Trump rally was "more than likely" the cause of a coronavirus surge in Tulsa County based on time series data. This study is the first to rigorously explore the impacts of this event on social distancing and COVID-19 spread. First, using data from SafeGraph Inc, we show that while non-resident visits to census block groups hosting the Trump event grew by approximately 25 percent, there was no decline in net stay-at-home behavior in Tulsa County, reflecting important offsetting behavioral effects. Then, using data on COVID-19 cases from the CDC and a synthetic control design, we find little evidence that COVID-19 grew more rapidly in Tulsa County, its border counties, or in the state of Oklahoma than each's estimated counterfactual during the five-week post-treatment period we observe. Difference-in-differences estimates further provide no evidence that COVID-19 rates grew faster in counties that drew relatively larger shares of residents to the event. We conclude that offsetting risk-related behavioral responses to the rally-including voluntary closures of restaurants and bars in downtown Tulsa, increases in stay-at-home behavior, displacement of usual activities of weekend inflows, and smaller-than-expected crowd attendance-may be important mechanisms.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11166-021-09359-4.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
10.60%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (JRU) welcomes original empirical, experimental, and theoretical manuscripts dealing with the analysis of risk-bearing behavior and decision making under uncertainty. The topics covered in the journal include, but are not limited to, decision theory and the economics of uncertainty, experimental investigations of behavior under uncertainty, empirical studies of real world risk-taking behavior, behavioral models of choice under uncertainty, and risk and public policy. Review papers are welcome. The JRU does not publish finance or behavioral finance research, game theory, note length work, or papers that treat Likert-type scales as having cardinal significance. An important aim of the JRU is to encourage interdisciplinary communication and interaction between researchers in the area of risk and uncertainty. Authors are expected to provide introductory discussions which set forth the nature of their research and the interpretation and implications of their findings in a manner accessible to knowledgeable researchers in other disciplines. Officially cited as: J Risk Uncertain
×
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