The COVID-19 pandemic that we are experiencing is both tragic and shocking. There is no question that, except in some Asian countries trained by prior infectious outbreaks, most policy makers around the world have been ill-prepared to respond to the crisis. The effects of the coronavirus on our mental and physical health has been indeed calamitous, and the economic and financial impacts for many have been truly unfortunate. Furthermore, the extreme nature of the event is challenging researchers to compile and interpret new evidence that is arriving at a rapid pace. The editors Hui Chen, Thierry Foucault, Jeffrey Pontiff, and Nikolai Roussanov and contributing authors are to be commended for assembling and collating a thought-provoking collection of papers. More time and study will be needed to fully sift through the evidence and to glean the lessons to be learned from this pandemic for policy makers and investors. But the evidence and insights in this volume are a very good start.

Abstract Geophysicists examine and document the repercussions for the earth’s climate induced by alternative emission scenarios and model specifications. Using simplified approximations, they produce tractable characterizations of the associated uncertainty. Meanwhile, economists write highly stylized damage functions to speculate about how climate change alters macroeconomic and growth opportunities. How can we assess both climate and emissions impacts, as well as uncertainty in the broadest sense, in social decision-making? We provide a framework for answering this question by embracing recent decision theory and tools from asset pricing, and we apply this structure with its interacting components to a revealing quantitative illustration.

We develop a new method to measure CEO behavior in large samples via a survey that collects high-frequency, high-dimensional diary data and a machine learning algorithm that estimates behavioral types. Applying this method to 1,114 CEOs in six countries reveals two types: “leaders,” who do multifunction, high-level meetings, and “managers,” who do individual meetings with core functions. Firms that hire leaders perform better, and it takes three years for a new CEO to make a difference. Structural estimates indicate that productivity differentials are due to mismatches rather than to leaders being better for all firms.