The challenge of estimating the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19 interventions - Toward an integrated economic and epidemiological approach.

Decisions on public health measures to contain a pandemic are often based on parameters such as expected disease burden and additional mortality due to the pandemic. Both pandemics and non-pharmaceutical interventions to fight pandemics, however, produce economic, social, and medical costs. The costs are, for example, caused by changes in access to healthcare, social distancing, and restrictions on economic activity. These factors indirectly influence health outcomes in the short- and long-term perspective. In a narrative review based on targeted literature searches, we develop a comprehensive perspective on the concepts available as well as the challenges of estimating the overall disease burden and the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19 interventions from both epidemiological and economic perspectives, particularly during the early part of a pandemic. We review the literature and discuss relevant components that need to be included when estimating the direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. The review presents data sources and different forms of death counts, and discusses empirical findings on direct and indirect effects of the pandemic and interventions on disease burden as well as the distribution of health risks.

The common interests of health protection and the economy: evidence from scenario calculations of COVID-19 containment policies.

We develop a novel approach integrating epidemiological and economic models that allows data-based simulations during a pandemic. We examine the economically optimal opening strategy that can be reconciled with the containment of a pandemic. The empirical evidence is based on data from Germany during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Our empirical findings reject the view that there is necessarily a conflict between health protection and economic interests and suggest a non-linear U-shape relationship: it is in the interest of public health and the economy to balance non-pharmaceutical interventions in a manner that further reduces the incidence of infections. Our simulations suggest that a prudent strategy that leads to a reproduction number of around 0.75 is economically optimal. Too restrictive policies cause massive economic costs. Conversely, policies that are too loose lead to higher death tolls and higher economic costs in the long run. We suggest this finding as a guide for policy-makers in balancing interests of public health and the economy during a pandemic.

[Debate about Accural Accounting - Reply and Response]. / Debatte über die Doppik: Replik und Erwiderung.

In its September 2020 issue, Wirtschaftsdienst published an article entitled "Bremst die Doppik öffentliche Investitionen? Ergebnisse aus drei aktuellen Evaluationsstudien" by Désirée Christofzik, Florian Dorn, Stefanie Gäbler, Christian Raffer and Felix Rösel. Stephan Stüber takes a different view in a reply, and Christofzik et al. explain their point of view in a response.