AEAのコロナ対策は過剰か? 補足

前回エントリで取り上げたタイラー・コーエンとJoshua Gansの論争について、Gansが連ツイで解説していた

Why do @tylercowen ( and I ( disagree on the AEA's policy to require KN-95 masks at the annual meetings in New Orleans this January? A thread. 1/n
The disagreement isn't about masks per se. I happen to personally hate them and I am not sure how Tyler feels about them. This disagreement is about whether the AEA was engaging in a good decision-making process on this. 2/n
Tyler argues that AEA should have (a) defaulted to no mandate; (b) conducted a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate whether to impose one or (c) failing that looked at other practices or held a vote amongst AEA members. 3/n
I argued that it is reasonable that the AEA default to a protective stance (but real not performative) and did not see any reason to presume they didn't consider the costs and benefits, other options and that there was no reason for a vote as the leadership was elected. 4/n
On the cost-benefit analysis, that is obviously a good standard econ approach. But it is not straightforward here because (i) we don't know what the pandemic will be like in January and (ii) there are people at higher risk. 5/n
The higher risk group includes international visitors (a considerable number) who can't get travel insurance that covers Covid-19 and won't have access to anti-virals etc. 6/n
Thus, accusing the AEA of "ignoring the science" doesn't seem warranted. It is true, those really at risk can protect themselves more. But it is a crowded poorly ventilated event. The risks remain. 7/n
The one conference I attended without a mask mandate -- in Belgium, in April -- had a number of people who chose to mask up. I didn't and got Covid. Others did and they got Covid too! I don't think it is obvious people can just protect themselves. 8/n
My guess is what the AEA are going to do is not necessarily throw out people without masks but set the expectation of mask wearing, most people will then wear masks because it is uncomfortable to be in a crowded room and not be wearing one. 9/n
In summary, on masks, I don't think we can presumptively rail on the AEA for not following the science. They actions are consistent with it and depend on weights in the social welfare function. On the vaccine mandate, I'm less sure but even Tyler isn't upset about that. 10/10
ニューオーリンズで1月に開催される年次大会においてKN-95マスク着用を要求するAEAの方針に関し、タイラー・コーエンと私の意見が分かれているのは何故か? 以下スレッド。
タイラーは、AEAが (a) マスク着用義務無しを既定値とし、(b) 着用義務を課すかどうかを評価するために費用便益分析を実施する、もしくは、(c) 費用便益分析が難しければ、余所での実施状況を調べるか、あるいはAEA会員で投票を実施すべきだった、と論じる。
費用便益分析について言えば、標準的な経済学的手法としては明らかに良いものだ。しかしこの場合に素直に適用できるわけではない。というのは (i) 1月時点でコロナ禍がどうなっているか分からないし、(ii) リスクの高い人々もいるからだ。
私が参加したマスクの着用義務がなかったあるコンファレンスでは、4月にベルギーで開催されたものだったが、多くの人がマスクを着用することを選択した。私は着用せず、コロナに感染した。他の人たちは着用したのだが、やはりコロナに感染した! 人々はとにかく自分を守ることができる、というのは明白なことのようには私には思われない。