Superiority of Mild Interventions against COVID-19 on Public Health and Economic Measures

(1) Background: 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 and its high population density. This study investigated how limited intervention policies have affected public health and economic conditions in the COVID-19 context and aimed to gain insight into the effective and sustainable measures against new infectious diseases in densely inhabited areas. (2) Methods: A system dynamics approach was employed. Qualitative causal loop analysis and stock and quantitative flow model analysis were performed, using a Tokyo Metropolitan area dataset. (3) Results: A causal loop analysis suggested that there were risks in prematurely terminating such interventions. Based on this result and the subsequent quantitative modeling, 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., number of electronic word-of-mouth communications and restaurant visits). (4) Conclusions: These findings suggest the superiority of a mild and continuous intervention as a long-term countermeasure under epidemic pressures when compared with strong intermittent interventions.