This website uses cookies.

By clicking the "Accept" button or continuing to browse our site, you agree to first-party and session-only cookies being stored on your device to enhance site navigation and analyze site performance and traffic. For more information on our use of cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.

  1. Home
  2. ASSA Annual Meeting
  3. 2022
  4. Preliminary Program
  5. Behaviour versus Policy through Pandemics and Crises: Behavioral Economic Insights from the COVID-19 Pandemic
« Back to Results

Behaviour versus Policy through Pandemics and Crises: Behavioral Economic Insights from the COVID-19 Pandemic

Paper Session

Friday, Jan. 7, 2022 3:45 PM - 5:45 PM (EST)

Hosted By: Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics
  • Chair: Michelle Baddeley, University of Technology Sydney and University College London

Hoarding in the Age of COVID-19

Michelle Baddeley
,
University of Technology Sydney and University College London

Abstract

Hoarding is a well-established phenomenon in economics, often explored in the context of savings, financial speculation and employment. Conventional economic models of hoarding cannot, however, easily explain some of the unusual hoarding behaviours observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper extends the economic analysis of hoarding by incorporating multidisciplinary explanations for some of the anomalies in hoarding observed during the COVID-19 crisis. This multidisciplinary approach suggests that behavioural economics and behavioural science can provide rich insights for policy-makers to use in adapting their policies to limit the negative economic, social and psychological impacts from anomalous hoarding behaviours during pandemics.

The Effect of Messaging and Gender on Intentions to Wear a Face Covering to Slow Down COVID-19 Transmission

Valerio Capraro
,
Middlesex University
Hélène Barcelo
,
Mathematical Sciences Research Institute

Abstract

This paper explores results from a pre-registered experiment (N=2,459) testing the effect of messages highlighting that the coronavirus is a threat to “you” vs “your family” vs “your community” vs “your country” on self-reported intentions to wear a face covering. We find that focusing on “your community” promotes intentions to wear a face covering relative to the baseline. We also find that men less than women intend to wear a face covering, but this difference almost disappears in counties where wearing a face covering is mandatory. Finally, we find that men less than women believe they will be seriously affected by the coronavirus, and more than women agree that wearing a face covering is shameful, not cool, a sign of weakness, and a stigma; and these gender differences partly mediate gender differences in intentions to wear a face covering.

Which Vaccine and Who Should Get It First? Public Preferences for the COVID-19 Vaccination Program in Australia

Stephen Goodall
,
University of Technology Sydney
Kathleen Manipis
,
University of Technology Sydney
Deborah Street
,
University of Technology Sydney
Richard De Abreu Lourenco
,
University of Technology Sydney
Rosalie Viney
,
University of Technology Sydney

Abstract

Using a discrete choice experiment, this study aimed to explore public preferences for different COVID-19 vaccination programs. Attributes focussed on the vaccine and roll-out program. A representative sample of Australians (N=1,079) completed the survey. Data were analysed using mixed logit regression. Respondents had strong preferences for a safe and effective vaccine. Vaccine cost and local manufacturing were also important. There was agreement with the Government proposed roll-out, that people at increased risk of dying (older people) and increased risk of infection (health workers) should have priority. The majority (74%) indicated they would vaccinate. Australia’s response to COVID-19 has been among the most successful in the world and these results are consistent of a population with a low perceived risk of acquiring COVID-19.

The Ethics of Social Choices and the Role of Economists in a Pandemic

Lionel Page
,
University of Technology Sydney

Abstract

Insights from economics can help policy makers to make hard decisions about saving lives in a pandemic but two views may seem deceptively appealing in the public debate: First, the idea that decisions are not hard because there is no trade-off to make when considering lives saved; Second, the idea that economics provides a simple and correct way to make decisions using standard evaluations of the cost of lives saved. I argue that, in a democracy, hard decisions, involving trade-offs of lives saved versus other economic and social considerations, have to reflect the preferences of the citizens. The role of economists is to facilitate policy decision making by clarifying the moral principles people would be willing to follow when hard decisions have to be made, and to inform politicians about the specific trade-offs which would reflect these preferences.

Discussant(s)
Lionel Page
,
University of Technology Sydney
Stephen Goodall
,
University of Technology Sydney
Valerio Capraro
,
Middlesex University
Michelle Baddeley
,
University of Technology Sydney and University College London
JEL Classifications
  • D9 - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics