We introduce two types of agent heterogeneity in a calibrated epidemiological search model. First, some agents cannot afford staying home to minimize their virus exposure, while others can. Our results show that these poor agents bear most of the epidemic’s health costs. Moreover, we show that having more agents who do not change their behavior during the pandemic could lead to a deeper recession. Second, agents are heterogeneous in developing symptoms. We show that diseases with higher share of asymptomatic cases, even if less lethal, lead to worse health and economic outcomes. Public policies such as testing, quarantining, and lockdowns are particularly beneficial in economies with a larger share of poor agents. However, lockdowns lose effectiveness when part of the agents take precautions to minimize virus exposure independent of government actions.
Studies of the impact of trade openness on growth are based either on cross-country analysis-which lacks transparency-or case studies-which lack statistical rigor. We apply transparent econometric methods drawn from the treatment evaluation literature to make the comparison between treated (i.e., open) and control (i.e., closed) countries explicit while remaining within a unified statistical framework. First, matching estimators highlight the rather far-fetched country comparisons underlying common cross-country results. When appropriately restricting the sample, we confirm a positive and significant effect of openness on growth. Second, we apply synthetic control methods-which account for endogeneity due to unobservable heterogeneity-to countries that liberalized their trade regime and we show that trade liberalization has often had a positive effect on growth.