Working Paper: CEPR ID: DP17480
Authors: Darren Hoover; Flavio Toxvaerd
Abstract: We analyse optimal disease mitigation in a spatial model where disease spreads within and between interconnected regions. We characterise optimal strategies and emphasise the role of inter-regional coordination and policy targeting. Delegation of policy to regional planners achieves targeting without coordination, while a centrally determined uniform policy achieves coordination without targeting; both induce inefficiencies. For strongly connected regions, policy coordination is paramount, while for weakly connected regions, targeting becomes more important. Last, we analyse the value of reductions in integration, such as travel restrictions. We show that these may be non-monotone and sensitive to the underlying mitigation policy in place.
Keywords: Economic Epidemiology; Mitigation; Spatial Epidemiology; Regional Social Planners; Travel Restrictions
JEL Codes: C73; E61; I18; H75; R13
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| interregional coordination (F42) | disease dynamics (C69) |
| interregional coordination (F42) | welfare (I38) |
| targeted policies (J18) | mitigation efficiency (D61) |
| uniform policies (J78) | coordination (P11) |
| lack of coordination (P11) | inefficiencies (D61) |
| targeting (L21) | effectiveness in weakly connected regions (D85) |
| travel restrictions (Z38) | mitigation strategy effectiveness (H84) |