IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v102y2021i5p2088-2105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effectiveness of government measures during the first wave of the outbreak

Author

Listed:
  • María Celeste Ratto
  • Juan Manuel Cabrera
  • Daniela Zacharías
  • Juan Martín Azerrat

Abstract

Objectives The Covid‐19 pandemic changed the humanity life. Millions of deaths and infections that spread rapidly around the world made all countries take measures to stop the outbreaks and assume the enormous consequences that the Coronavirus is leaving behind. The challenge has been enormous; governments across the world have implemented a wide span of nonpharmaceutical interventions to mitigate the Coronavirus pandemic (SARS‐CoV‐2) and its consequences in economic terms. The aim of this article is to analyze the effects that different kinds of measures taken by Latin American governments had on the daily new infections. The countries analyzed were Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, México, Panamá, Peru, Paraguay, Dominican Republic, Uruguay and Venezuela. Methods A time series cross‐section analysis was performed, which allows studying the evolution of the number of daily cases over time and by country. The timeframe of this study was from the day the first case of coronavirus was registered in a country, until September 14, 2020. We used data from Covid‐19 Dashboard database of Johns Hopkins University and the Oxford Covid‐19 Government Response Tracker data set. Results The Stringency Index did not have a significant influence at the beginning of the pandemic but turned out to be significant and inversely related to DNI during Phases 2 and 3. On the contrary, the Economic and the Sanitary Containment Index was not statistically significant for any of the phases. Furthermore, the level of wealthfare of a country, measured from its GDP per capita, exerts a substantive conditional influence on the management of the Covid‐19 crisis. Conclusions The scenarios have been changing and strategies had to change as well in order to be successful because they lose effectiveness and have increased social costs with time. Therefore, understanding the relative effectiveness of such measures had on the disease spreading during the first wave of the outbreak, could help governments to make more informed decisions about how to control future outbreaks of the Covid‐19 pandemic.

Suggested Citation

  • María Celeste Ratto & Juan Manuel Cabrera & Daniela Zacharías & Juan Martín Azerrat, 2021. "The effectiveness of government measures during the first wave of the outbreak," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2088-2105, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:5:p:2088-2105
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13043
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13043?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cindy Cheng & Joan Barceló & Allison Spencer Hartnett & Robert Kubinec & Luca Messerschmidt, 2020. "COVID-19 Government Response Event Dataset (CoronaNet v.1.0)," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(7), pages 756-768, July.
    2. Sumedha Gupta & Thuy D. Nguyen & Felipe Lozano Rojas & Shyam Raman & Byungkyu Lee & Ana Bento & Kosali I. Simon & Coady Wing, 2020. "Tracking Public and Private Responses to the COVID-19 Epidemic: Evidence from State and Local Government Actions," NBER Working Papers 27027, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Poe, Steven C. & Tate, C. Neal, 1994. "Repression of Human Rights to Personal Integrity in the 1980s: A Global Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(4), pages 853-872, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rajeev K. Goel & Michael A. Nelson, 2023. "Aggressive COVID‐19 lockdown policies: What factors significantly drove them across nations?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(4), pages 2211-2222, June.
    2. Lorena Barberia & Thomas Plümper & Guy D. Whitten, 2021. "The political science of Covid‐19: An introduction," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2045-2054, September.
    3. Gowokani Chijere Chirwa & Joe Maganga Zonda & Samantha Soyiyo Mosiwa & Jacob Mazalale, 2023. "Effect of government intervention in relation to COVID-19 cases and deaths in Malawi," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-7, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ruggeri Andrea & Burgoon Brian, 2012. "Human Rights “Naming & Shaming” and Civil War Violence," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(3), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Lalinsky, Tibor & Pál, Rozália, 2022. "Distribution of COVID-19 government support and its consequences for firm liquidity and solvency," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 305-335.
    3. Germà Bel & Óscar Gasulla & Ferran A. Mazaira-Font, 2020. "The effect of health and economic costs on governments' policy responses to COVID-19 crisis, under incomplete information," IREA Working Papers 202008, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Jun 2020.
    4. Pagano, Michael S. & Sedunov, John & Velthuis, Raisa, 2021. "How did retail investors respond to the COVID-19 pandemic? The effect of Robinhood brokerage customers on market quality," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    5. Alexander B. Downes, 2007. "Restraint or Propellant? Democracy and Civilian Fatalities in Interstate Wars," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(6), pages 872-904, December.
    6. Mossberger, Karen & LaCombe, Scott & Tolbert, Caroline J., 2022. "A new measure of digital economic activity and its impact on local opportunity," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1).
    7. Gabriele Spilker & Tobias Böhmelt, 2013. "The impact of preferential trade agreements on governmental repression revisited," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 343-361, September.
    8. Dave, Dhaval M. & Friedson, Andrew I. & Matsuzawa, Kyutaro & Sabia, Joseph J. & Safford, Samuel, 2020. "Black Lives Matter Protests, Social Distancing, and COVID-19," IZA Discussion Papers 13388, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Abel Brodeur & David Gray & Anik Islam & Suraiya Bhuiyan, 2021. "A literature review of the economics of COVID‐19," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 1007-1044, September.
    10. Austin L. Wright & Geet Chawla & Luke Chen & Anthony Farmer, 2020. "Tracking Mask Mandates during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Working Papers 2020-104, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    11. Andrew G. Atkeson & Karen A. Kopecky & Tao Zha, 2024. "Four Stylized Facts About Covid‐19," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 65(1), pages 3-42, February.
    12. Shadmehr, Mehdi & Bernhardt, Dan, 2011. "Collective Action with Uncertain Payoffs: Coordination, Public Signals, and Punishment Dilemmas," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(4), pages 829-851, November.
    13. Christian Davenport, 2012. "When democracies kill: Reflections from the US, India, and Northern Ireland," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 15(1), pages 3-20, March.
    14. Kimberly R Frugé, 2019. "Repressive agent defections: How power, costs, and uncertainty influence military behavior and state repression," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(6), pages 591-607, November.
    15. Sabine C. Carey, 2010. "The Use of Repression as a Response to Domestic Dissent," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(1), pages 167-186, February.
    16. Jacqueline H.R. DeMeritt & Joseph K Young, 2013. "A political economy of human rights: Oil, natural gas, and state incentives to repress1," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(2), pages 99-120, April.
    17. Todd Landman & T. Huw Edwards & Tulio Antonio-Cravo & David Kernohan, 2011. "Human Rights: The Effect of Neighbouring Countries," Discussion Paper Series 2011_01, Department of Economics, Loughborough University, revised Sep 2011.
    18. Kong, Edward & Prinz, Daniel, 2020. "Disentangling policy effects using proxy data: Which shutdown policies affected unemployment during the COVID-19 pandemic?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    19. Axel Dreher & Martin Gassebner & Lars-H. R. Siemers, 2012. "Globalization, Economic Freedom, and Human Rights," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 56(3), pages 516-546, June.
    20. Felipe Lozano Rojas & Xuan Jiang & Laura Montenovo & Kosali I. Simon & Bruce A. Weinberg & Coady Wing, 2020. "Is the Cure Worse than the Problem Itself? Immediate Labor Market Effects of COVID-19 Case Rates and School Closures in the U.S," NBER Working Papers 27127, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:5:p:2088-2105. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.