Are lockdowns more effective than voluntary measures in checking mobility during a pandemic?

Objectives To evaluate the relative effectiveness of mandated lockdowns and voluntary distancing measures in reducing mobility during the COVID-19 pandemic in developing countries, using India as a case study. Study design: This study analyzes mobility patterns during India’s 14-hour voluntary Janta Curfew (JC) and the subsequent mandatory nationwide lockdown. The focus is on understanding the contributions of voluntary and mandated measures to overall reductions in mobility. Methods Using daily mobility data from Google’s Community Mobility Reports, this study examines changes across six location categories (e.g., retail and recreation, transit stations, residential) during ten sub-periods spanning February 16 to May 31, 2020. A geographic-level regression model controls for pandemic severity, health infrastructure, and socioeconomic factors to isolate voluntary mobility changes prior to the lockdown. Results The analysis reveals that voluntary measures led to significant mobility reductions before the mandated lockdown. During the JC, voluntary changes accounted for 27–89% of the maximum mobility reductions later observed under the lockdown, depending on the location category. The lockdown did not significantly improve mobility reductions beyond what voluntary measures achieved. Over time, the effectiveness of lockdowns in increasing time spent at home diminished, as behavioral adaptations offset initial compliance. Conclusions Voluntary measures, when combined with soft appeals and partial controls, can achieve substantial reductions in mobility, even in developing countries with economic and enforcement constraints. Governments should prioritize voluntary approaches as a first line of defense during pandemics, reserving mandates for situations where voluntary measures prove insufficient or unsustainable.