Learning from Deregulation: The Asymmetric Impact of Lockdown and Reopening on Risky Behavior During COVID-19

Abstract

We thank Safegraph and Yelp for providing data. We thank Scott Kominers for helpful comments. Luca has done consulting for tech companies, including Yelp. Leyden was previously employed as an Economics Research Intern at Yelp, but did not receive compensation directly connected to this paper. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. At least one co-author has disclosed a financial relationship of potential relevance for this research. Further information is available online at http://www.nber.org/papers/w27650.ack NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

School Reopenings, Mobility, and COVID-19 Spread: Evidence from Texas

“…This could include either greater physical presence in workplaces or increased outside-the-home leisure activities, both of which could lead to greater transmission and community spread. Finally, reopening schools could send an incorrect signal to the larger community that normal activities are safe again, similar to the "learning by deregulation" concept described in Glaeser et al (2020). Such a signaling effect could even extend to those -such as seniors -with no direct ties to students or school employees.…”

“…Kids returning to in-person school may allow parents or other caregivers to return to in-person work or outside-the-home activities, leading to COVID-19 spread in the community even if there is minimal spread in the schools. Spillovers could even extend beyond families directly affected by the return to school, as school openings could signal to the community that it is safe to return to normal activities, again fueling spread (Glaeser et al, 2020). Alternatively, spillovers could reduce spread if people foresee danger from school reopenings and cut back on other activities.…”

Early pandemic COVID-19 case growth rates increase with city size

“…Second, measures taken to contain outbreaks 9,10 will impact cities differently based on city size. From the perspective of containing the outbreak, larger cities require faster responses, which could consist of a number of proven policies 9,10 , that can quickly reduce R below the epidemic threshold. These distinctions may help to bring more nuance to ongoing strategies for suppression and control of COVID-19, including gradually restoring socioeconomic activity in context appropriate and safe ways.…”

“…Governments around the world have enacted aggressive policies, including "shelter in place" and emergency closures of all non-essential services, which carry severe economic and social consequences. However, there is still a great deal of uncertainty as to how strong social distancing recommendations must be or how long they must last 9,10 . In addition, regional and local variation in the severity of and compliance with restrictions are likely to impact individual cities differently.…”

Interdependent program evaluation: Geographic and social spillovers in COVID-19 closures and reopenings in the United States

“…As different regions of the world continue to relax and tighten mobility restrictions, it is critical that we understand how different mobility policy regimes contribute to increases and decreases in COVID-19 case counts. While there is abundant research on the efficacy of shutting down, the body of quantitative research examining the impact of reopening and/or the factors that make reopening safe and effective is still nascent (11)(12)(13)(14)(15). Although most of the research is not causal (13,15), the more causally rigorous studies (14) neglect the magnitude of a policy's spillover effects relative to its direct effects and do not account for non-travel-related social spillovers.…”