艰难而不早:将新西兰Covid-19应对措施置于背景中

IF 0.8 Q3 ECONOMICS New Zealand Economic Papers Pub Date : 2020-11-25 DOI:10.1080/00779954.2020.1842796
J. Gibson
{"title":"艰难而不早:将新西兰Covid-19应对措施置于背景中","authors":"J. Gibson","doi":"10.1080/00779954.2020.1842796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A popular narrative that New Zealand’s policy response to Coronavirus was ‘go hard, go early’ is misleading. While restrictions were the most stringent in the world during the Level 4 lockdown in March and April, these were imposed after the likely peak in new infections. I use the time path of Covid-19 deaths for each OECD country to estimate inflection points. Allowing for the typical lag from infection to death, new infections peaked before the most stringent policy responses were applied in many countries, including New Zealand. The cross-country evidence shows that restrictions imposed after the inflection point in infections is reached are ineffective in reducing total deaths. Even restrictions imposed earlier have just a modest effect; if Sweden’s more relaxed restrictions had been used, an extra 310 Covid-19 deaths are predicted for New Zealand – far fewer than the thousands of deaths in some widely reported mathematical simulations.","PeriodicalId":38921,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand Economic Papers","volume":"56 1","pages":"1 - 8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00779954.2020.1842796","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hard, not early: putting the New Zealand Covid-19 response in context\",\"authors\":\"J. Gibson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00779954.2020.1842796\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A popular narrative that New Zealand’s policy response to Coronavirus was ‘go hard, go early’ is misleading. While restrictions were the most stringent in the world during the Level 4 lockdown in March and April, these were imposed after the likely peak in new infections. I use the time path of Covid-19 deaths for each OECD country to estimate inflection points. Allowing for the typical lag from infection to death, new infections peaked before the most stringent policy responses were applied in many countries, including New Zealand. The cross-country evidence shows that restrictions imposed after the inflection point in infections is reached are ineffective in reducing total deaths. Even restrictions imposed earlier have just a modest effect; if Sweden’s more relaxed restrictions had been used, an extra 310 Covid-19 deaths are predicted for New Zealand – far fewer than the thousands of deaths in some widely reported mathematical simulations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Zealand Economic Papers\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00779954.2020.1842796\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Zealand Economic Papers\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00779954.2020.1842796\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand Economic Papers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00779954.2020.1842796","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: 9

摘要

一种流行的说法是,新西兰对冠状病毒的政策反应是“努力,尽早”,这是一种误导。虽然在3月和4月的4级封锁期间,限制措施是世界上最严格的,但这些措施是在新感染病例可能达到峰值后实施的。我使用每个经合组织国家新冠肺炎死亡人数的时间路径来估计拐点。考虑到从感染到死亡的典型滞后,在包括新西兰在内的许多国家采取最严格的政策应对措施之前,新感染病例就达到了峰值。跨国证据表明,在感染达到拐点后实施的限制措施对减少总死亡人数无效。即使是早些时候实施的限制也只是适度的效果;如果采用瑞典更宽松的限制措施,预计新西兰将新增310例新冠肺炎死亡病例,远低于一些广泛报道的数学模拟中的数千例死亡病例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hard, not early: putting the New Zealand Covid-19 response in context
A popular narrative that New Zealand’s policy response to Coronavirus was ‘go hard, go early’ is misleading. While restrictions were the most stringent in the world during the Level 4 lockdown in March and April, these were imposed after the likely peak in new infections. I use the time path of Covid-19 deaths for each OECD country to estimate inflection points. Allowing for the typical lag from infection to death, new infections peaked before the most stringent policy responses were applied in many countries, including New Zealand. The cross-country evidence shows that restrictions imposed after the inflection point in infections is reached are ineffective in reducing total deaths. Even restrictions imposed earlier have just a modest effect; if Sweden’s more relaxed restrictions had been used, an extra 310 Covid-19 deaths are predicted for New Zealand – far fewer than the thousands of deaths in some widely reported mathematical simulations.
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
New Zealand Economic Papers
New Zealand Economic Papers Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (all)
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Community-level ethnic diversity and community-level socio-economic development: evidence from 20 African countries The wage cost of a lack of access to affordable childcare in Aotearoa New Zealand Distinguished fellow lecture: monetary policy and the benefits and limits of central bank independence Differences between NZ and U.S. individual investor sentiment: more noise or more information? Citation for Bob Buckle to mark his Distinguished Fellow Award
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1