Understanding the nature of a negative economic shock is key to getting the policy prescription right. After ensuring that households have enough short-term resources, policymakers are confronted with the following conundrum: Should the aim of policy be to encourage people to spend more, that is to provide stimulus, or should policy focus purely on providing forms of social insurance?

The authors’ key insight is that the coronavirus shock is a supply shock of a special nature, as it affects different sectors unevenly. The central argument of their work is that the coronavirus shock will likely cause a reduction in aggregate demand larger than the original reduction in labor supply, something that the authors coin a “Keynesian supply shock.” Their work describes two forces that propagate the shock from those it directly affects, or those in affected (or contact-intensive) sectors, to those in less affected sectors: complementarities across sectors and incomplete markets. In the first case, when people are restricted from spending on certain goods, like restaurants and events, they do not spend the same amount on other complementary goods and services, and there is less overall spending

In the second case, the overall reduction in spending spreads to unaffected sectors because those who retain their jobs do not spend enough to prevent this occurrence (in economists’ parlance, the marginal propensity to consume of those in the unaffected sectors is less than those in affected sectors). Together, these two forces transform the original supply shock into a demand shock.

The authors’ findings pose challenges for policymakers, as a “typical” increase in government consumption may be less powerful in a pandemic shock. The reason is that government spending can only lift incomes in the unaffected sectors, not in the affected sectors, but it’s the workers in the affected sectors who have the highest propensity to consume, and they are exactly those who cannot benefit from an aggregate spending increase. On the other hand, fiscal stimulus can be desirable when combined with polices more targeted towards the workers in the affected sectors.

More on this topic

BFI Data Studio·May 14, 2024

Return to Office and the Tenure Distribution

Austin Wright, David Van Dijcke, and Florian Gunsilius
Return-to-office (RTO) mandates drive employees away from firms, with senior employees leaving at the highest rates, likely leading to significant human capital costs in terms of output, productivity, innovation, and competitiveness for the companies implementing strict RTO policies.
Topics: COVID-19, Employment & Wages
Research Briefs·Mar 7, 2024

What Drives Inflation? Lessons from Disaggregated Price Data

Elisa Rubbo
US inflation in the early phases of the COVID pandemic was entirely driven by disruptions in supply and demand across industries, whereas most of the subsequent increase in consumer prices is driven by aggregate demand.
Topics: COVID-19, Monetary Policy
Research Briefs·Feb 1, 2024

Quantifying the Social Value of a Universal COVID-19 Vaccine and Incentivizing Its Development

Rachel Glennerster, Thomas Kelly, Claire T. McMahon, and Christopher M. Snyder
A universal COVID-19 vaccine that is effective against existing and future variants could provide the United States population with $1.5–$2.6 trillion more in social value than variant-specific boosters. The social value of a universal vaccine eclipses the cost of incentivizing...
Topics: COVID-19