scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Felipe Lozano Rojas

Other affiliations: Indiana University
Bio: Felipe Lozano Rojas is an academic researcher from University of Georgia. The author has contributed to research in topics: Unemployment & Medicine. The author has an hindex of 6, co-authored 9 publications receiving 546 citations. Previous affiliations of Felipe Lozano Rojas include Indiana University.

Papers
More filters
ReportDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors make several contributions to understand the socio-demographic divide in early labor market responses to the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic and its policies, benchmarked against two previous recessions.
Abstract: We make several contributions to understanding the socio-demographic divide in early labor market responses to the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic and its policies, benchmarked against two previous recessions. First, monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) data show greater declines in employment in April and May 2020 (relative to February) for Hispanics, younger workers, and those with high school degrees and some college. Between April and May, all the demographic subgroups considered regained some employment. Re-employment in May was broadly proportional to the employment drop that occurred through April, except for Blacks who experienced a smaller rebound. Further, we show that compared to the 2001 recession and the Great Recession, employment losses in the early COVID-19 recession were smaller for groups with very low or very high (vs. medium) education. Second, we show that job loss was larger in occupations that require more interpersonal contact and that cannot be performed remotely. Third, we find pre-COVID-19 sorting of workers into occupations and industries along demographic lines can explain a sizeable portion of the gender, race, and ethnic gaps in new unemployment. For example, while women did suffer more job losses than men, their disproportionate pre-epidemic sorting into remote work compatible occupations shielded women from what would have been even larger employment losses during the epidemic. However, there remain substantial gaps in employment losses across groups that cannot be explained by socio-economic differences. We find some larger gaps in labor market impacts when we consider the “employed but absent from work” measure present in the CPS, in addition to the more traditional employment and unemployment measures. We conclude with a discussion of policy lessons and future research needs implied by the disparities in early labor market losses from the COVID-19 crisis.

313 citations

ReportDOI
TL;DR: This article examined the determinants of social distancing during the COVID-19 epidemic and found that early and information-focused actions have had bigger effects, such as first case announcements, emergency declarations, and school closures, which reduced mobility by 1-5% after 5 days and 7-45% after 20 days.
Abstract: This paper examines the determinants of social distancing during the COVID-19 epidemic. We classify state and local government actions, and we study multiple proxies for social distancing based on data from smart devices. Mobility fell substantially in all states, even ones that have not adopted major distancing mandates. There is little evidence, for example, that stay-at-home mandates induced distancing. In contrast, early and information-focused actions have had bigger effects. Event studies show that first case announcements, emergency declarations, and school closures reduced mobility by 1-5% after 5 days and 7-45% after 20 days. Between March 1 and April 11, average time spent at home grew from 9.1 hours to 13.9 hours. We find, for example, that without state emergency declarations, event study estimates imply that hours at home would have been 11.3 hours in April, suggesting that 55% of the growth comes from emergency declarations and 45% comes from secular (non-policy) trends. State and local government actions induced changes in mobility on top of a large response across all states to the prevailing knowledge of public health risks. Early state policies conveyed information about the epidemic, suggesting that even the policy response mainly operates through a voluntary channel.

223 citations

ReportDOI
TL;DR: This article examined the impact of the social distancing policies states adopted between March and April of 2020 in response to the COVID-19 epidemic and found that the employment rate fell by about 1.7 percentage points for every extra 10 days that a state experienced a stay-at-home mandate during the period March 12-April 12, 2020; select business closure laws were associated with similar employment effects.
Abstract: This paper examines the impact of the social distancing policies states adopted between March and April of 2020 in response to the COVID-19 epidemic. These actions, together with voluntary social distancing, appear to have reduced the rate of new COVID-19 cases and deaths, but raised concerns about the costs experienced by workers and businesses. Estimates from difference-in-difference models that leverage cross-state variation in the timing of business closures and stay-at-home mandates suggest that the employment rate fell by about 1.7 percentage points for every extra 10 days that a state experienced a stay-at-home mandate during the period March 12-April 12, 2020; select business closure laws were associated with similar employment effects. Our estimates imply that about 40% of the 12 percentage point decline in employment rates between January and April 2020 was due to a nationwide shock while about 60% was driven by state social distancing policies. The negative employment effects of state policies were larger for workers in "non-essential" industries, workers without a college degree, and early-career workers. Policy caused relatively modest changes in hours worked and earnings among those who remain employed. We find no concerning evidence of pre-trends in the monthly (low-frequency) CPS data, but use high-frequency data on work-related mobility measured from cellphones, job-loss-related internet searches, and initial unemployment claims to investigate the possibility that the large employment effects experienced in April could have occurred after the March CPS but but before policy adoption. In those analyses, we find pre-trends for some outcomes but not others. Thus we cannot fully rule out that some employment effects shortly predated the policies. As states relax business closures, ensuring gains in labor market activities in ways that continue to mitigate COVID-19 "surges" and public health risks will be key considerations to monitor.

146 citations

ReportDOI
TL;DR: The relationship between population health and measures of economic well-being and economic activity is a long standing topic in health economics (Preston, 1975; Cutler, Deaton, and Lleras-Muney, 2006; Ruhm, 2000).
Abstract: The relationship between population health and measures of economic well-being and economic activity is a long standing topic in health economics (Preston, 1975; Cutler, Deaton, and Lleras-Muney, 2006; Ruhm, 2000). The conceptual issues in analyzing the complicated link between health and economic well-being are central to understanding the implications of the COVID-19 epidemic in the United States The public health shock of the epidemic has direct economic impacts, but the mitigation policies governments are using to control the spread of the virus may also damage economic activity. We estimate how state job market conditions respond to state COVID-19 infections and school closures, which are the earliest of the major mitigation policies. Mitigation policies and local epidemiological conditions explain some of the variation in unemployment patterns. However, the historically unprecedented increase in new UI claims during the weeks of March 15-21 and March 22-28 was largely across-the-board and occurred in all states. This suggests most of the economic disruption was driven by the health shock itself. Put differently, it appears that the labor market slowdown was due primarily to a nationwide response to evolving epidemiological conditions and that individual state policies and own epidemiologic situations have had a comparatively modest effect.

96 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper examined the sociodemographic divide in early labor market responses to the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic and associated policies, benchmarked against two previous recessions.
Abstract: This study examines the sociodemographic divide in early labor market responses to the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic and associated policies, benchmarked against two previous recessions. Monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) data show greater declines in employment in April and May 2020 (relative to February) for Hispanic individuals, younger workers, and those with a high school diploma or some college. Between April and May, the demographic subgroups considered regained some employment. Reemployment in May was broadly proportional to the employment drop that occurred through April, except for Black individuals, who experienced a smaller rebound. Compared to the 2001 recession and the Great Recession, employment losses in the early COVID-19 recession were smaller for groups with low or high (vs. medium) education. We show that job loss was greater in occupations that require more interpersonal contact and that cannot be performed remotely, and that pre-COVID-19 sorting of workers into occupations and industries along demographic lines can explain a sizable portion of the demographic gaps in new unemployment. For example, while women suffered more job losses than men, their disproportionate pre-epidemic sorting into occupations compatible with remote work shielded them from even larger employment losses. However, substantial gaps in employment losses across groups cannot be explained by socioeconomic differences. We consider policy lessons and future research needs regarding the early labor market implications of the COVID-19 crisis.

44 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: For example, the authors found that government restrictions on commercial activity and voluntary social distancing, operating with powerful effects in a service-oriented economy, are the main reasons the U S stock market reacted so much more forcefully to COVID-19 than to previous pandemics in 1918, 1957, and 1968.
Abstract: No previous infectious disease outbreak, including the Spanish Flu, has affected the stock market as forcefully as the COVID-19 pandemic In fact, previous pandemics left only mild traces on the U S stock market We use text-based methods to develop these points with respect to large daily stock market moves back to 1900 and with respect to overall stock market volatility back to 1985 We also evaluate potential explanations for the unprecedented stock market reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic The evidence we amass suggests that government restrictions on commercial activity and voluntary social distancing, operating with powerful effects in a service-oriented economy, are the main reasons the U S stock market reacted so much more forcefully to COVID-19 than to previous pandemics in 1918–1919, 1957–1958, and 1968

927 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors survey the developing and rapidly growing literature on the economic consequences of COVID-19 and the governmental responses, and synthetize the insights emerging from a very large number of studies.
Abstract: The goal of this piece is to survey the developing and rapidly growing literature on the economic consequences of COVID-19 and the governmental responses, and to synthetize the insights emerging from a very large number of studies. This survey: (i) provides an overview of the data sets and the techniques employed to measure social distancing and COVID-19 cases and deaths; (ii) reviews the literature on the determinants of compliance with and the effectiveness of social distancing; (iii) mentions the macroeconomic and financial impacts including the modelling of plausible mechanisms; (iv) summarizes the literature on the socioeconomic consequences of COVID-19, focusing on those aspects related to labor, health, gender, discrimination, and the environment; and (v) summarizes the literature on public policy responses.

400 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Examining the drivers of the economic slowdown using cellular phone records data on customer visits to more than 2.25 million individual businesses across 110 different industries suggests that legal shutdown orders account for only a modest share of the massive changes to consumer behavior.

387 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that disruption to physical activity is a leading risk factor for depression during the pandemic and restoration of those habits-either naturally or through policy intervention-has limited impact on restoring mental well-being.
Abstract: Using a longitudinal dataset linking biometric and survey data from several cohorts of young adults before and during the COVID-19 pandemic ([Formula: see text]), we document large disruptions to physical activity, sleep, time use, and mental health. At the onset of the pandemic, average steps decline from 10,000 to 4,600 steps per day, sleep increases by 25 to 30 min per night, time spent socializing declines by over half to less than 30 min, and screen time more than doubles to over 5 h per day. Over the course of the pandemic from March to July 2020 the proportion of participants at risk for clinical depression ranges from 46% to 61%, up to a 90% increase in depression rates compared to the same population just prior to the pandemic. Our analyses suggest that disruption to physical activity is a leading risk factor for depression during the pandemic. However, restoration of those habits through a short-term intervention does not meaningfully improve mental well-being.

324 citations

ReportDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors make several contributions to understand the socio-demographic divide in early labor market responses to the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic and its policies, benchmarked against two previous recessions.
Abstract: We make several contributions to understanding the socio-demographic divide in early labor market responses to the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic and its policies, benchmarked against two previous recessions. First, monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) data show greater declines in employment in April and May 2020 (relative to February) for Hispanics, younger workers, and those with high school degrees and some college. Between April and May, all the demographic subgroups considered regained some employment. Re-employment in May was broadly proportional to the employment drop that occurred through April, except for Blacks who experienced a smaller rebound. Further, we show that compared to the 2001 recession and the Great Recession, employment losses in the early COVID-19 recession were smaller for groups with very low or very high (vs. medium) education. Second, we show that job loss was larger in occupations that require more interpersonal contact and that cannot be performed remotely. Third, we find pre-COVID-19 sorting of workers into occupations and industries along demographic lines can explain a sizeable portion of the gender, race, and ethnic gaps in new unemployment. For example, while women did suffer more job losses than men, their disproportionate pre-epidemic sorting into remote work compatible occupations shielded women from what would have been even larger employment losses during the epidemic. However, there remain substantial gaps in employment losses across groups that cannot be explained by socio-economic differences. We find some larger gaps in labor market impacts when we consider the “employed but absent from work” measure present in the CPS, in addition to the more traditional employment and unemployment measures. We conclude with a discussion of policy lessons and future research needs implied by the disparities in early labor market losses from the COVID-19 crisis.

313 citations