Search

During the pre-vaccine period, the success of containing the spread of COVID-19 depends upon how communities respond to non-pharmaceutical mitigation policies such as social distancing, wearing of masks, retail and dining constraints, crowd limitation, and shelter-in-place orders. Of these policies, shelter-in-place and social distancing are of central importance. By using county-level mobility data as a measure of a community's voluntary compliance with social distancing policies, this study found that counties who received strong state social distancing policy directives and who had a high pro-social character showed lower mobility on retail and recreation mobility and grocery and pharmacy mobility (better social distancing) after states reopened from shelter-in-place orders. Counties that experienced a longer duration of shelter-in-place orders showed higher mobility (less social distancing), implying that the duration of the shelter-in-place order deteriorated social distancing response after reopening. This may be because reopening sent a "safe" signal to these counties or resulted in a response to the pent-up demand inducing higher mobility. The results indicate that implementing shelter-in-place and social distancing policies to slow down the transmission of COVID-19 were not necessarily effective in motivating a county to reduce mobility voluntarily. A county's pro-social character and the duration of shelter-in-place order should be considered when designing COVID-19 mitigation policies. • This study explores factors affecting voluntary compliance behavior after lockdowns. • A community's pro-social intention needs to be separated from community capital. • A longer duration of lockdowns leads to people not adhering to social distancing. • Pro-social intention increases voluntary compliance behavior after lockdowns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, some countries introduced early evening curfews. Several studies try to measure the effectiveness of such measures across different countries, but disentangling competing effects can be elusive. We examined the impact of an early evening curfew on mobility by studying a shift in curfews from 9pm to 6pm in Greece using Google mobility data. We followed a difference-in-differences (DiD) econometric approach, where we compared trends in mobility in residential spaces as well as groceries and pharmacies, before and after the introduction of the 6pm curfew in Attica with trends in three other comparable Regions. We found little or no evidence of an effect of the early curfew on daily mobility relating to groceries and pharmacies, and that an 18.75% reduction in hours where people were allowed to leave home led to a relatively small increase in time spent in residential spaces. This less-than-proportionate reduction in mobility outside the household suggests a possibility that the curfew led to more people coinciding in indoor public spaces, such as grocery shops – which constitutes a contagion risk factor. Results should be treated with caution, especially with regards to the magnitude of any effect, as Google mobility data do not report the time of the day, so the time density of activities cannot be estimated. Lockdowns and other measures are necessary to tackle Covid-19, but it is important to avoid substitution by activities that contribute further to spreading the virus. Interventions should therefore be based on a thorough analysis of human behaviour. • A shift from 9pm to 6pm curfews were introduced in Attica, Greece, to fight COVID-19. • We used a difference-in-differences approach using other regions as control groups. • There was a small relative increase in time spent in residential spaces. • The early curfew had little or no effect on daily grocery and pharmacy mobility. • This might have led to more people coinciding in indoor spaces, such as supermarkets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]