IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/nhhfms/2020_002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Effect of Social Distancing Measures on Intensive Care Occupancy: Evidence on COVID-19 in Scandinavia

Author

Listed:
  • Juranek, Steffen

    (Dept. of Business and Management Science, Norwegian School of Economics)

  • Zoutman, Floris T.

    (Dept. of Business and Management Science, Norwegian School of Economics)

Abstract

Understanding the effectiveness of social distancing on the spread of COVID-19 is crucial to justify economically costly social distancing measures. We present a case study focusing on the three Scandinavian countries. Whereas Denmark and Norway imposed relatively strict measures, Sweden follows an extraordinarily lenient approach. We use an event-study approach in which Sweden serves as a counterfactual to Denmark/Norway to estimate the measures’ effectiveness. We estimate that in the counterfactual in which Denmark/Norway implemented Sweden’s more lenient measures the number of hospitalizations would have peaked between around 15-20 days later. The peak number of hospitalizations in Denmark (Norway) would have been 133 (231) percent higher, and the peak number of ICU patients would have increased by 107 (140) percent.

Suggested Citation

  • Juranek, Steffen & Zoutman, Floris T., 2020. "The Effect of Social Distancing Measures on Intensive Care Occupancy: Evidence on COVID-19 in Scandinavia," Discussion Papers 2020/2, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:nhhfms:2020_002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2652920
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Steffen Juranek & Jörg Paetzold & Hannes Winner & Floris Zoutman, 2020. "Labor Market Effects of Covid-19 in Sweden and Its Neighbors: Evidence from Novel Administrative Data," CESifo Working Paper Series 8473, CESifo.
    2. Germain Gauthier, 2021. "On the Use of Two-Way Fixed Effects Models for Policy Evaluation During Pandemics," Papers 2106.10949, arXiv.org.
    3. Mr. Francesco Grigoli & José M. Mota, 2020. "Assessing Targeted Containment Policies to Fight COVID-19," IMF Working Papers 2020/277, International Monetary Fund.
    4. Karolina Drela & Agnieszka Malkowska & Anna Bera & Anna Tokarz-Kocik, 2021. "Instruments for Managing the EU Labour Market in the Face of the COVID-19 Crisis," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 984-998.
    5. Carlos B. Carneiro & I'uri H. Ferreira & Marcelo C. Medeiros & Henrique F. Pires & Eduardo Zilberman, 2020. "Lockdown effects in US states: an artificial counterfactual approach," Papers 2009.13484, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    6. Ulrich Glogowsky & Emanuel Hansen & Simeon Schächtele, 2020. "How Effective Are Social Distancing Policies? Evidence on the Fight against Covid-19 from Germany," CESifo Working Paper Series 8361, CESifo.
    7. Brantly Callaway & Tong Li, 2021. "Policy Evaluation during a Pandemic," Papers 2105.06927, arXiv.org.
    8. Asger Lau Andersen & Emil Toft Hansen & Niels Johannesen & Adam Sheridan, 2020. "Pandemic, Shutdown and Consumer Spending: Lessons from Scandinavian Policy Responses to COVID-19," Papers 2005.04630, arXiv.org.
    9. Martin Huber & Henrika Langen, 2020. "Timing matters: the impact of response measures on COVID-19-related hospitalization and death rates in Germany and Switzerland," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 156(1), pages 1-19, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    COVID-19; Social Distancing; Intensive Care; Case Study;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • 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

    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:hhs:nhhfms:2020_002. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dfnhhno.html .

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Stein Fossen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dfnhhno.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.