  During the global spread of COVID-19, Japan has been among the top countries
to maintain a relatively low number of infections, despite implementing limited
institutional interventions. Using a Tokyo Metropolitan dataset, this study
investigated how these limited intervention policies have affected public
health and economic conditions in the COVID-19 context. A causal loop analysis
suggested that there were risks to prematurely terminating such interventions.
On the basis of this result and subsequent quantitative modelling, we found
that the short-term effectiveness of a short-term pre-emptive stay-at-home
request caused a resurgence in the number of positive cases, whereas an
additional request provided a limited negative add-on effect for economic
measures (e.g. the number of electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) communications and
restaurant visits). These findings suggest the superiority of a mild and
continuous intervention as a long-term countermeasure under epidemic pressures
when compared to strong intermittent interventions.
