Social inequalities in human mobility during the Spanish lockdown and post-lockdown in the Covid-19 pandemic of 2020

  1. Alberto Hernando
  2. David Mateo
  3. Ignacio barrios
  4. Angelo Plastino

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Many countries established strong population lockdowns as a response to the pandemic of COVID-19 in 2020. While these measures proved efficient in stopping the spreading of the virus, they also introduced collateral effects in the economies of these countries. We report in this work that the imprints in mobility of both the lockdown and post-lockdown on the Spanish population are measurable by means of the daily radius of gyration using mobile phone data. We cross mobility with economic data segmented by average salary per person so as to find large inequalities between low- and high-income populations. Indeed, low-income populations typically show a 17% higher radius of gyration than high-income ones during pre-lockdown (8.1 km vs. 6.9 km). However, this relative difference grows to a maximum during lock-down (3.3 km vs. 900 m) since most of the essential workers (carriers, nurses, supermarket cashiers, farmworkers, etc.) belong to the first segment. Post-lockdown shows reversed inequality in the weeks during summer vacations as high-income populations multiplied their pre-lockdown radius by 70% as a rebound effect driven by leisure, while low-income populations recovered their normal pre-lockdown radius. This period is correlated with an extraordinary increase in the number of new Covid cases, which stabilized after the holyday weeks once at the so-called new normal . We find that this new normal emphasizes the pre-lockdown inequalities in mobility between low- and high-income population, increasing the inequality up to a 47%. These results show the relevance of devising measures that could account for potential collateral inequalities.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.26.20219709: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.10.26.20219709 on medRxiv