ArticleJournal of regional science2021
The intensity of COVID-19 nonpharmaceutical interventions and labor market outcomes in the public sector.
Article in Journal of regional science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-communicable diseases, COVID-19 and labour market outcomes.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- The Omicron Lineages BA.1 and BA.2 (Viruses · 2023Article
- Schooling and Parental Labor Supply: Evidence from COVID-19 School Closures in the United States.Industrial & labor relations review · 2023Article
- Mass gathering events and the spread of infectious diseases: Evidence from the early growth phase of COVID-19.Economics and human biology · 2022Article
- Public responses to COVID-19 case disclosure and their spatial implications.Journal of regional science · 2022Article
- The intensity of COVID-19 nonpharmaceutical interventions and labor market outcomes in the public sector.Journal of regional science · 2021Article
- Early adoption of non-pharmaceutical interventions and COVID-19 mortality.Economics and human biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper examines whether the intensity of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has differentially impacted the public sector labor market outcomes. This extends the analysis of the already documented negative economic consequences of COVID-19 and their dissimilarities with a typical economic crisis. To capture the intensity of the NPIs, we build a novel index (COVINDEX) using daily information on NPIs merged with state-level data on out-of-home mobility (Google data). We show that among individuals living in a typical state, NPI enforcement during COVID-19 reduces the likelihood of being employed (at work) by 5% with respect to the pre-COVID period and the hours worked by 1.3% using data on labor market outcomes from the monthly Current Population Survey and difference-in-difference models. This is a sizable amount representing the sector with the higher job security during the pandemic. Public sector workers in a typical state are 4 percentage points more likely to be at work than salaried workers in the private sector and 7 percentage points more likely to be at work than self-employed workers (the worst so far). Our results are robust to the endogeneity of the NPI measures and present empirical evidence of heterogeneity in response to the NPIs, with those in local employment being the hardest hit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.