Estimation of Lockdowns’ Impact on Well-Being in Selected Countries: An Application of Novel Bayesian Methods and Google Search Queries Data

Lockdowns introduced in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic have had a significant impact on societies from an economic, psychological, and health perspective. This paper presents estimations of their impact on well-being, understood both from the perspective of mental health and considering economic security and similar factors. This is not an easy task because well-being is influenced by numerous factors and the changes happen dynamically. Moreover, there are some obstacles when using the control group. However, other studies show that in certain cases it is possible to approximate selected phenomena with Google search queries data. Secondly, the econometric issues related to the suitable modeling of such a problem can be solved, for example, by using Bayesian methods. In particular, herein the recently gaining in popularity Bayesian structural time series and Bayesian dynamic mixture models are used. Indeed, these methods have not been used in social sciences extensively. However, in the fields where they have been used, they have been very efficient. Especially, they are useful when short time series are analyzed and when there are many variables that potentially have a significant explanatory impact on the response variable. Finally, 15 culturally different and geographically widely scattered countries are analyzed (i.e., Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom). Little evidence of any substantial changes in the Internet search intensity on terms connected with negative aspects of well-being and mental health issues is found. For example, in Mexico, some evidence of a decrease in well-being after lockdown was found. However, in Italy, there was weak evidence of an increase in well-being. Nevertheless, the Bayesian structural time series method has been found to fit the data most accurately. Indeed, it was found to be a superior method for causal analysis over the commonly used difference-in-differences method or Bayesian dynamic mixture models.