IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_10875.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Restrictions to Civil Liberties in a Pandemic and Satisfaction with Democracy

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Graeber
  • Lorenz Meister
  • Panu Poutvaara

Abstract

In times of crises, democracies face the challenge of balancing effective interventions with civil liberties. This study examines German states’ response during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the interplay between civil liberties and public health goals. Using state-level variation in mobility restrictions, we employ a difference-in-differences design to show that stay-at-home orders notably increased satisfaction with democracy and shifted political support towards centrist parties. Stay-at-home orders increased satisfaction with democracy most among individuals who had been exposed to the authoritarian regime of the German Democratic Republic. A potential explanation is that these individuals had got used to more restrictive state interventions. Moreover, we find suggestive evidence that satisfaction with democracy increases more among individuals who are obese or have low vitality, possibly because their benefit from the mobility restrictions is higher. However, these differences are not statistically significant.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Graeber & Lorenz Meister & Panu Poutvaara, 2023. "Restrictions to Civil Liberties in a Pandemic and Satisfaction with Democracy," CESifo Working Paper Series 10875, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_10875
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp10875.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Graeber & Alexander S. Kritikos & Johannes Seebauer, 2021. "COVID-19: a crisis of the female self-employed," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(4), pages 1141-1187, October.
    2. Pamela Jakiela & Owen Ozier, 2019. "The Impact of Violence on Individual Risk Preferences: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(3), pages 547-559, July.
    3. Allcott, Hunt & Boxell, Levi & Conway, Jacob & Gentzkow, Matthew & Thaler, Michael & Yang, David, 2020. "Polarization and public health: Partisan differences in social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    4. A. Colin Cameron & Jonah B. Gelbach & Douglas L. Miller, 2008. "Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(3), pages 414-427, August.
    5. Alberto Alesina & Nichola Fuchs Schuendeln, 2005. "Good bye Lenin (or not?): The Effect of Communism on People's Preferences," NBER Working Papers 11700, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Nicola Fuchs-Schünde & Dirk Krueger & Alexander Ludwig & Irina Popova, 2022. "The Long-Term Distributional and Welfare Effects of Covid-19 School Closures," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(645), pages 1647-1683.
    7. Goebel Jan & Grabka Markus M. & Liebig Stefan & Kroh Martin & Richter David & Schröder Carsten & Schupp Jürgen, 2019. "The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP)," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 239(2), pages 345-360, April.
    8. Martin Baekgaard & Julian Christensen & Jonas Krogh Madsen & Kim Sass Mikkelsen, 2020. "Rallying around the flag in times of COVID-19: Societal lockdown and trust in democratic institutions," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(2).
    9. Roth, Christopher & Wohlfart, Johannes, 2018. "Experienced inequality and preferences for redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 251-262.
    10. Shana Kushner Gadarian & Sara Wallace Goodman & Thomas B Pepinsky, 2021. "Partisanship, health behavior, and policy attitudes in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-13, April.
    11. Pamela Jakiela & Owen Ozier, 2019. "The Impact of Violence on Individual Risk Preferences: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(3), pages 547-559, July.
    12. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    13. Michael Callen & Mohammad Isaqzadeh & James D. Long & Charles Sprenger, 2014. "Violence and Risk Preference: Experimental Evidence from Afghanistan," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(1), pages 123-148, January.
    14. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    15. A. Colin Cameron & Douglas L. Miller, 2015. "A Practitioner’s Guide to Cluster-Robust Inference," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(2), pages 317-372.
    16. Ulrike Malmendier & Stefan Nagel, 2011. "Depression Babies: Do Macroeconomic Experiences Affect Risk Taking?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(1), pages 373-416.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dietmar Fehr & Yannick Reichlin, 2021. "Status, Control Beliefs, and Risk-Taking," CESifo Working Paper Series 9253, CESifo.
    2. Fang, Guanfu & Li, Wei & Zhu, Ying, 2022. "The shadow of the epidemic: Long-term impacts of meningitis exposure on risk preference and behaviors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    3. Remy Levin & Daniela Vidart, 2021. "Risk-Taking Adaptation to Macroeconomic Experiences," Working papers 2021-09, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Nov 2023.
    4. Muhammad Nasir & Marc Rockmore & Chih Ming Tan, 2015. "It's No Spring Break in Cancun: The Effects of Exposure to Violence on Risk Preferences, Pro-Social Behavior, and Mental Health," Working Paper series 15-40, Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis.
    5. Haile, Kaleab K. & Nillesen, Eleonora & Tirivayi, Nyasha, 2020. "Impact of formal climate risk transfer mechanisms on risk-aversion: Empirical evidence from rural Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    6. Ryan Brown & Verónica Montalva & Duncan Thomas & Andrea Velásquez, 2019. "Impact of Violent Crime on Risk Aversion: Evidence from the Mexican Drug War," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(5), pages 892-904, December.
    7. Magontier, Pierre, 2020. "Does media coverage affect governments' preparation for natural disasters?," MPRA Paper 101291, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Shouyu Yao & Zhuoqun Wang & Mengyue Sun & Jing Liao & Feiyang Cheng, 2020. "Top executives’ early‐life experience and financial disclosure quality: impact from the Great Chinese Famine," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(5), pages 4757-4793, December.
    9. Klaus Gründler & Armin Hackenberger & Anina Harter & Niklas Potrafke, 2021. "Covid-19 Vaccination: The Role of Crisis Experience," CESifo Working Paper Series 9096, CESifo.
    10. Abdelaziz Alsharawy & Sheryl Ball & Alec Smith & Ross Spoon, 2021. "Fear of COVID-19 changes economic preferences: evidence from a repeated cross-sectional MTurk survey," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(2), pages 103-119, December.
    11. Freitas-Monteiro, Teresa & Ludolph, Lars, 2021. "Barriers to humanitarian migration, victimisation and integration outcomes: evidence from Germany," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110500, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Guo, Shiqi & An, Jiafu, 2022. "Does terrorism make people pessimistic? Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    13. Roxanne Kovacs & Maurice Dunaiski & Janne Tukiainen, 2023. "The effect of compulsory face mask policies on community mobility in Germany," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 125(4), pages 1027-1055, October.
    14. Guo, Julie & Tymula, Agnieszka, 2021. "Waterfall illusion in risky choice – exposure to outcome-irrelevant gambles affects subsequent valuation of risky gambles," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    15. Li, Haoyang & Zhang, Xiaomeng, 2023. "Deciphering the influence of the macroeconomic environment on economic preferences: A comprehensive analysis of the Global Preferences Survey," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    16. Ongena, Steven & Mishra, Mrinal, 2020. "The Effect of Conflict on Lending: Evidence from Indian Border Areas," CEPR Discussion Papers 14925, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Borisova, Ekaterina & Gründler, Klaus & Hackenberger, Armin & Harter, Anina & Potrafke, Niklas & Schoors, Koen, 2023. "Crisis experience and the deep roots of COVID-19 vaccination preferences," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    18. Silva,Joana C. G. & Morgandi,Matteo & Levin,Victoria, 2016. "Trust in government and support for redistribution," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7675, The World Bank.
    19. Andrés Elberg & Pedro M. Gardete & Rosario Macera & Carlos Noton, 2019. "Dynamic effects of price promotions: field evidence, consumer search, and supply-side implications," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-58, March.
    20. Hagemann, Andreas, 2019. "Placebo inference on treatment effects when the number of clusters is small," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 190-209.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    perceptions of public policies; satisfaction with democracy; Covid-19;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • H12 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Crisis Management
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • P26 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist and Transition Economies - - - Property Rights

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ces:ceswps:_10875. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.