Abstract
In absence of vaccine or a well-known treatment at onset of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), public health measures such as social distancing, washing hands, and wearing face masks were implemented as the most effective strategies to combat the spread of the virus. This article explores the perceptions and interpretations of COVID-19-related regulations and implications of the disease to human life in different contexts. The article adopted a qualitative research methodology, where twenty participants were selected purposively and interviewed, then data analyzed inductively. The analysis of interviews revealed varied conceptualizations and interpretations about the disease and social distancing. Notably, COVID-19 regulations such social distancing and face masking were perceived as imported policy, a misconception that would be attributed to non-adherence to COVID-19 protocols. Further, the study underscore that the disease and policies related to it disrupted ways of social life; infringed on people’s social-cultural rights; and had adverse health consequences. The study recommends a strategic and deliberate reconstruction of the society to restore its sociological functions post COVID-19 pandemic.
1 Introduction
The havoc-wreaking coronavirus pandemic originated in China, the city of Wuhan in the late 2019. Rapidly, it spread to almost all countries of world in the first quarter of 2020 (AU & Africa CDC 2020a; WHO 2020a). COVID-19 is associated with SARS-CoV-2, a novel strain of coronavirus from the SARS species (CDC 2020). According to the African Union (AU) & Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) (2020a), Johns Hopkins Medicine (2020), and WHO (2020a), COVID-19 transmits through person-to-person contact, especially through respiratory droplets, and causes death from severe respiratory illnesses. With the absence of vaccines or medication to cure the infection at the time of outbreak (WHO 2020a), COVID-19 rapidly spread across the globe causing confusion in various ways, which consequently resulted into severe illness and mortalities (CDC 2020). The elderly and those with underlying comorbidities were reportedly the most vulnerable to the infection and possible death (AU & Africa CDC 2020; Johns Hopkins Medicine 2020). The outbreak of the disease was characterized by fear and misinformation. The spate of heightened fear and confusion was aggravated by fake news from media sources, myths, and unclear epidemiological information from health care systems (Chen et al. 2020; Mohler et al. 2020). For instance, mythical and pseudoscientific theories that the virus would not thrive in hot regions or severely affect black communities (Ebrahim 2020) were topical. Moreover, the uncertainty about the pandemic in the near future led to a scenario of ‘flight to safety’ evidenced by panic buying (consumption) and withholding of investment by investors and traders (Ozili and Arun 2020). This information gap indicates the need for creating authentic forums for dispensing information on the epidemiology and etiology of coronavirus in African communities, which would be critical in demystifying the misconceptions and fear associated with the disease.
In response to the coronavirus pandemic, various polices and regulations were implemented by governments as advised by the World Health Organization (WHO). These policies and regulations included social distancing, isolation, quarantine, restrictions on local and international travelling, regular washing of hands, and face masking (AU & Africa CDC 2020; WHO 2020a). These regulations were received and perceived differently by the affected communities. Therefore, this article explores how people interpreted the disease and the regulations such as social distancing and how it affected their day-to-day lives.
Previous research on pandemics and public health perspectives shows that social distancing is considered a strategic health mechanism to reduce potential or infectious disease from spreading among individuals and communities (Hatchett et al. 2007; Kelso et al. 2009; Reluga 2010; Wilder-Smith and Freedman 2020). Arguably, this is why social distancing became one of the best recommendations to implement in order to avoid exposure to the virus and slow its spread locally, nationally, and internationally (CDC 2020; WHO 2020a). The Centre for Disease Control (CDC) defines social distancing, also known as ‘physical distancing,’ as keeping space between oneself and the other people outside of one’s home. This definition is emphasized by the WHO’s advice that to practice social distancing, one should stay at least two meters from other people, avoid gathering in groups, and stay at home (CDC 2020). This implied, for instance, that people should not hug, kiss, or handshake as it is a traditional in many African communities. The new requirements seemingly necessitated a change of traditions and development of a new way of life.
The United Natation (2020a:5) illustrated the significance of social distancing in mitigating the spread of the coronavirus using the Imperial College Epidemiological Model as of March 25, 2020. The United Nations (UN) projected four case scenarios for Africa, which were (i) unmitigated scenario: with no intervention the virus could result in the death of 3.3 million people in Africa; (ii) mitigation using moderate social distancing: with a 45 percent reduction in contact rate among the general population the virus could result in 2.4 million deaths; (iii) intervention of intense social distancing: social distancing of 1.6 meters among the general population would reduce contact by 75 percent and the virus could result in 1.5 million deaths; and (iv) intense social distancing: with social distancing of at least two meters of the general population the virus could result in about 300 thousand deaths. Therefore, social distancing, just as an example of public health measures, has immense health benefits in arresting the spread of COVID-19. Among other measures, the implementation of lockdowns and curfews were some of the strategies to practice social distancing for countries to achieve what was described as ‘flattening the infection curve’ (Johns Hopkins Medicine 2020). These measures led to a temporary release of prisoners from overcrowded prisons; the shutting-down of air, land, and sea travels; and the shutdown of schools. The governments deployed the military and police machinery to enforce these regulations in African countries (Ozili and Arun 2020). Consequently, a constellation of challenges emerged affecting the social, economic, health, cultural, and political structures of countries and individuals differently.
Extreme social distancing such as isolations and quarantines were also imposed, attributes that literature associate with depression, anxiety, and mental illness (Jeong et al. 2016). The pandemic and its related regulations are perceived as a threat to family relationships, limitations to personal liberties and social-cultural interactions, leading to frustrations, boredom, depression, fear, and despondency (Brooks et al. 2020). Economically, jobs and other sources of income were lost (Gössling et al. 2020; Ozili and Arun 2020). These abrupt changes and challenges demand various psychosocial and economic empowering of citizens to achieve a state of normalcy. Apparently, it is for this reason that monetary policies and measures such as granting regulatory tolerance to banks and principal or interest moratoria to debtors affected by COVID-19; stimulus packages; and social welfare schemes were proposed in various countries (Ozili and Arun 2020). Continued surveillance of the implications of COVID-19 and its related regulations such social distancing is critical in Africa for an effective response to social, health, and economic challenges post COVID-19 pandemic.
As noted earlier, there were some conspiracy theories associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. These theories to some extent undermine the efforts of health practitioners in combating the disease. It is important, therefore, to explore how people in African communities received and interpreted the information about the disease and policies related to social distancing during the pandemic. This is of paramount importance for social and healthcare workers as essential service providers during and post the pandemic. Notably, social workers, as practitioners of helping professions (IASSW, ICSW, & IFSW 2016), play a key role in educative and advocacy initiatives to ensure communities are protected against, and restored from the adverse impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
2 Problem Statement
Like other previous epidemics, such as HIV and AIDS in Africa and Ebola in West and central Africa (Peak et al. 2018; Mo Ibrahim Foundation 2020; WHO 2020b), the outbreak of COVID-19 exposed the incapacity and unpreparedness of many countries to respond to health disasters (Gilbert et al. 2020; Moore and Nyenswah 2020; Nkengasong and Mankoula 2020). Globally, countries have been at a crossroads, that is, the decision to save the economy and save people’s lives (UN 2020a). Since it is extremely difficult to have both ‘saves’ given the time and resources available for countries, especially in Africa, which were already resource-constrained, the saving of lives was prioritized. The move to save lives culminated into imposition of regulations such as lockdowns. The implementation of COVID-19-related regulations resulted into unprecedented consequences on cultural, religious, political, economic, social, and health well-being of the people. The spate of these challenges is associated with domestication of universal policy recommendations without a clear flow of information about the virus to the public. This article, therefore, explores the perceptions, interpretations, and implications of COVID-19 regulations on selected African countries. This is important in enhancing the understanding of the disease and demystifying the misconceptions for improved adherence to the regulations in order to combat the spread of COVID-19 in African communities.
3 Contextualizing COVID-19-Related Regulations and the Disease Impact
3.1 ‘Social Distancing’ and Economic Activities
Normally, economic activities thrive through the interactions of people across the world in the exchange of goods and services. However, with the outbreak of the coronavirus, countries imposed restrictions, such as lockdowns, that hampered economic activities (Ozili and Arun 2020). The restrictions on local and international travel negatively affected economic activities in developing countries (Maliszewska et al. 2020; Ozili and Arun 2020). Further, (Ibid) report that massive wealth in stock markets totaling approximately US$6 trillion was lost within a week (February 24–28, 2020). These losses sparked an economic plight, a ‘run-to-safety’ kind of response by investors. Unarguably, this undertaking resulted in loss of livelihoods through retrenchments, salary cuts, and closure of businesses with little hope of recovery (World Economic Forum 2020). The travel, hospitality, events, and entertainment industries were estimated to accrue losses worth over US$200 billion globally in the early days of the disease outbreak (Ozili and Arun 2020). The supply chain of goods was significantly reduced given that China, the world’s largest manufacturer and exporter, had suspended production in major factories in the country (Ibid). The financial sector, too, suffered from general decline in bank transactions, card payments, and the use of automatic teller machines (ATM s). These losses negatively affected the banks’ profits (Ozili and Arun 2020; World Economic Forum 2020).
Due to the financial constraints on both the private and public sectors, budgets began to be revised to accommodate health and social care needs in various countries. In South Africa, for example, over 18 million South Africans were receiving a temporary COVID-19 grant by June 24, 2020 (National Treasury Department 2020). In the same vein, the South African minister of finance proposed a further R25.5 billion for the Social Development Department to support the vulnerable households with a relief package. Further, by mid‐June 2020, the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) had provided R23 billion in COVID‐19 relief to over 4.7 million workers affected by the pandemic in South Africa. These budgetary diversions have had a knock-down effect on investments and economic activities in Africa (Ibid). To further cushion the impact of COVID-19, the government of South Africa launched a ‘Solidarity Fund’ to support and supplement the government efforts in providing economic and social relief (Ibid). It is clear, therefore, that COVID-19 and the restrictive measures implemented in African countries had serious economic implications for governments, businesses, and households.
3.2 COVID-19 Regulations and Social Lifestyle
Apparently, the pandemic has had a toll on social activities such as travelling opportunities, sporting events, attending rites of passage such weddings and burials, and outdoor entertainment adventures (Elliot 2020; Horowitz 2020). The social consequences of the pandemic elucidate the power of a health crisis in causing significant sociological turbulence (Ozili 2020). The pandemic caused social anxiety and value-conflicts among individuals, families, and communities. Arguably, when families and communities are socially unstable, there is the likelihood of a new culture emerging and, therefore, a shift in the sociological function of a society. Having highlighted that, it is prudent that policymakers engage in developing social policies aimed at the reconstruction of communities’ social functions. Perhaps, this approach would reduce social anxiety and fragmentation of the society post the COVID-19 pandemic (Ibid). This is in agreement with the Mo Ibrahim Foundation (2020) caution that the pandemic might widen and deepen the inequalities within and between countries, communities, and even families. The pandemic presents serious threats to the already existing vulnerabilities and fragilities in African communities, thus weakening the social function and stability. The report by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation (2020) highlights that such conditions are a haven for domestic unrest and community conflicts. Similarly, the UN Secretary-General António Guterres alluded to the sociological turbulence by aptly asserting that:
This is not a financial crisis. This is a human crisis. This is not a question of just bringing liquidity to the financial systems, which, of course, is necessary. We need to support directly those that lose their jobs, those that lose their salaries, the small companies that cannot operate anymore, all those that are the fabrics of our societies, and we need to make sure that we keep thousands afloat, we keep small companies afloat, we keep all societies afloat.
UN 2020b:iv
From the social impact perspective of the pandemic, The UN (2020b) outlined three levels of possible impact, which are first order, second order, and third order. In the first-order category, the social impact includes loss of lives (through deaths), reduced social spending, disproportionate suffering for vulnerable groups (i.e., children, women, and people living with disabilities), and disruption of social service delivery. The second-order effects include widespread deprivation (could be deprivation of rights and freedoms, and basic needs), breakdown of social service supply chains (health care, education, and schooling, entertainment facilities etc.), and social disaffection (breakdown in family relationships, threatened marriages etc.). Finally, the third-order effects include increased inequalities, losses in human development programs, social unrest, victimization of vulnerable groups, and stigmatization of the patients. This break of possible social impact reported by the UN is irrefutably a glaring doom for the society in the near future.
Based on the available literature on the pandemic, it is clear that the coronavirus disease and the implementation of various regulations affected, and shall continue to affect, the African communities, especially those living in poverty, older persons, persons with disabilities, and children, a cluster of the population depending on others for social and economic support. Homeless people, migrants, and refugees who usually depend entirely on the benevolence of donors, well-wishers, and partly the government are likely to be severely affected as well (Ozili 2020; UN 2020a). The implication of this evidence is the need to engage multiple stakeholders to formulate social policies to address the new social realities caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Perhaps, the policy on lessening social and economic inequalities and exclusion can enhance community inclusion and cohesion, and preserve the sociological functions of the society.
3.3 Political Distancing in Response to COVID-19 Pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic presented multiple challenges for governments both at the local and international levels. Observably, the behavior espoused by many governments in response to COVID-19, especially in Africa, portrayed a phenomenon that would be perceived as ‘political social distancing’ in various ways. Perhaps, this is because the timing and conditions on lockdowns seemed to lack political consultations between countries, commissions, unions, and partnerships. This view is supported by the fact that many people were stranded in other countries as a result of the abrupt closure of international borders and airports (Ozili 2020). The phenomenon of people being stranded in foreign countries heralds a situation bereft of communication and consultations with national, regional, and international bodies such as the African Union (AU), South African Development Community (SADC), ECOWAS, COMESA, East Africa Community (EAC), NEPAD, and European Union (EU), among others, to respond to the outbreak of the disease collectively.
Accordingly, governments began suspending visas and other immigration services (Ozili and Arun 2020) further hampering movement of people across countries. Thoughtfully, with many trading blocks and partnerships, one would have expected concerted consultations on how and when to impose border regulations to allow smooth transition into the pandemic demands. Worrying episodes of what seemed to be political social distancing began to emerge. The Ministry of Health in Singapore, for example, advised all doctors in public and private hospitals and private specialist clinics to immediately stop accepting foreign patients who did not live in Singapore (Ibid). On the other hand, politicians aligned to various political ideologies also illustrated a sense of political difference towards the COVID-19 pandemic. In the United States, for example, the democrats were reacting to the pandemic-related regulations differently than the republicans and pro-Trump supporters (Allcott et al. 2020; Greenstone and Nagim 2020). Arguably, these political behaviors exacerbated the misconception about the pandemic, hence undermining the public health efforts in combating the disease.
Notably also, the political behavior portrayed by the governments and other players relates to the AU and Africa CDC (2020) caution on the emergence of resistance to policies that limit work, school, social and cultural events, religious practices, and local, national, and international travelling. The early days of the disease outbreak were characterized by incidences of protests against the lockdowns (Ebrahim 2020), with people getting into conflict with the law and the government machinery (Evans 2020). Consequently, people were arrested across the globe for violating the pandemic-related regulations (Evans 2020; Ozili 2020), a phenomenon that presented a political and public health paradox. This is because as governments were busy releasing thousands of offenders from the prisons to prevent the death of prisoners and staff due to the coronavirus, there were new arrests being made. These scenarios presented questions on leadership and political decisions on combating the pandemic in Africa and the world at large.
4 Methods and Study Settings
The coronavirus pandemic tested, and continues to test, the resilience of health, economic, political, and social systems globally. The regulations implemented by governments to curb the spread of the disease were received with mixed reactions. This study investigated the interpretations around social distancing regulations and its implications in some African countries. Since COVID-19 is a new disease and much is yet to be learnt, an explorative qualitative research methodology was adopted. This was fitting because of the need to explore the views of participants about social distancing and the implication of the disease to the human life. The study utilized a heterogeneous sample of participants from various countries in Africa, but the majority of participants were from Kenya and South Africa. The fact that these two countries were implementing social distancing regulations and lockdowns at the time of developing the manuscript qualified them as relevant samples. The participants’ perceptions, personal experiences, and the realities on the ground provided great insights for discussions in this article.
4.1 Sampling and Sample Size
The data was collected during a national lockdown in South Africa. Therefore, the researchers had to employ mobile-enhanced technology in recruiting participants and collecting data. This imply that only participants with mobile phones and internet connectivity would participate in the study. The participants were recruited purposively based on their accessibility and willingness to participate in the interviews. The researchers had contacts of the selected participates and, therefore, it became easier to send them invitations to participate in the study. This being a qualitative research, the sample did not have to be representative of the entire population. The sample consisted of twenty participants both male and female of thirty years and above from eight African countries. They were all employed, but due to national lockdown they were working from home at the time of interviews. They were considered a suitable sample because they were in countries implementing COVID-19 regulations. Notably, however, none of the participants had been diagnosed with the virus at the time of the interviews. Table 1 shows the distribution of the sample.
Distribution of sample size
Citation: Perspectives on Global Development and Technology 20, 3 (2021) ; 10.1163/15691497-12341596
4.2 Data Collection and Analysis
The interviews were conducted by telephone between the last week of June 2020 and first week of July 2020. The key issues raised in the interviews focused on the knowledge and experiences of participants with regards to social distancing from a personal and community perspective; the effectiveness of social distancing as a strategy of curbing the disease; social, cultural, economic, and psychological implications of the COVID-19 pandemics and its related regulations; public awareness and the role of various government and non-government bodies in dispensing information about the coronavirus; and their views on social, economic, and political life post COVID-19 pandemic. Interviews were conducting in English because all the participants could clearly express themselves and engage constructively in this language.
Data analysis was undertaken hand-in-hand with data collection. This implies that, while the researchers were conducting the interviews, they were taking notes on the key themes as possible pointers to the findings. Through inductive reasoning, the content of the interviews was analyzed and findings presented thematically. All research ethics were considered to ensure that the participants were protected and the findings trustworthy.
4.3 Limitation
The study used a small sample of participants, which limits the generalizability of the findings. Further, the study did not include persons who had been isolated or quarantined for having been diagnosed with the disease. Nonetheless, the study provides vital insights on interpretations of social distancing during the COVID-19 period. This is useful in informing public education machinery, and highlights the need for clear public health message packaging in future.
5 Findings
5.1 Social Distancing as ‘Physical Interaction Holiday’
Generally, the majority of the participants perceived social distancing within the precepts of public health regulations of abstaining from physical interactions between persons, for the purpose of combating the spread of the coronavirus disease. This ‘abstinence,’ to some participants, meant a physical interaction ‘holiday.’ Perhaps, this is because of limited time spent with family members and friends due to lockdown-related regulations such as curfews. The analysis further revealed that the COVID-19-related regulations were perceived as authoritative directives from the governments’ machinery to combat the disease without having made a comprehensive assessment of its impact on the people. To illustrate the authoritative connotation, a participant from South Africa argued that
the majority of the people complied with the social distancing regulations, with the presence of police or other law enforcing authorities in public places and shopping malls. In their absence, people are inclined to doing things as normal.
South Africa participant
Similarly, a participant from Kenya reported that
… people in Nairobi sub-urbans do not observe social distance especially in shopping malls, bus stations and areas where queuing for services was required, without the enforcement of security personnel. I think people are yet to learn and come into terms with this new way of moving around.
These views indicate that in the early days of the COVID-19 outbreak, the majority of people did not receive the regulations in good faith, hence failing to take personal responsibility to support the government’s efforts in the implementation of preventive measures against the disease. These findings reveal the sluggishness in the flow of clear information from the government structures to the community in times of crisis. The reluctance in uptake of government regulation and information as reported during the COVID-19 crisis should be a motivation for the government and non-governmental organizations to continually intensify disaster awareness education at the community and household level. The intensification of health-related information is of paramount importance because research indicates that public health regulations such as social distancing (keeping a physical distance of two meters between persons) can prevent the spread of most respiratory infectious diseases (Greenstone and Nigam 2020; Qian and Jiang 2020). Thus, social distancing and staying away from crowds is one of the most effective measures to reduce the spread of the coronavirus disease. The perception, understanding, practice, and attitude in following the expected regulations to curb the spread of the coronavirus should be promoted and enforced from a bottom-up approach for effective results. Notably, misconceptions about the disease and the government regulations can undermine the intentions and efforts of public and private health care systems in combating the COVID-19 pandemic.
5.2 Social Distancing Deemed as an Imported Policy Regulation
The World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronavirus as a global health emergency in March 2020. Consequently, this declaration was followed by issuance of public health regulations that countries had to implement such as washing hands with water and soap regularly, wearing face masks, and maintaining social distance (WHO 2020a). The participants in this study perceived these regulations as being imported and hurriedly implemented without due consideration to the local circumstances. The participants in this study decried the preparedness and consultation of the public in implementing the regulations, as indicated in the following verbatim.
The manner in which these regulations were introduced to the people sounded very alien and confusing especially to the children and the elderly. Does it mean that there were no other homemade or country-based measures even though the World Health Organization is the global oversight Health body? It was reasonable for the quick adaptation of WHO advice but then also provide alternatives to cater for special cases.
Tanzanian Participant
When one thinks about our government’s response to issues, one wonders whether they have any plans for their own people in moments of crisis. If for example WHO had not given these regulations, what measures would they have taken to curb the disease? The dependence on international machinery to make decisions is what I perceive as importation of policies and ideas and applying to our local communities without extensive and intensive assessment on application.
Kenyan Participant
The above views indicate that the participants did not associate COVID-19 regulations such as social distancing with home-made decisions, that are clear and locally accepted. These perceptions and attitudes could partly explain the non-adherence especially among the communities in the selected countries. This was evidenced by squeezed queues at service outlets. To further illustrate misconception of information relating to social distancing, a participant introduced the use of face masks and keeping physical distance. The participant narrated that
the use of face masks also seemingly was new and hoodwinked the majority that the physical distancing was unnecessary. These misconceptions and possibly information lacuna had in a way compromised the effectiveness of the regulations being implemented to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus.
Kenyan Participant
In essence, the analysis suggests lack of adequate public education in the selected African countries to demystify that the regulations to combat COVID-19 pandemic were not just imported, but global universal public health measures. These findings suggest the need to heighten the scope and coverage of public awareness by social service providers such as social workers, community health workers, and local administration to inform and educate families and communities.
5.3 Interrupted Socio-Cultural Practices in Some African Communities
The analysis established conflicts between adhering to the COVID-19 regulations and practicing or participating in cultural rites, activities, and rituals. The majority of participants lamented that COVID-19-related regulations such as social distancing and travel restrictions had begun to take a toll on the core attribute of ‘social-being’ of people cross the cultural divide. Abruptly, individuals, families, and communities began being subjected to new cultural lifestyles. The cultural disruptions and quagmire associated with COVID-19-related regulations are illustrated in the following participant’s narration.
In African context, socio-cultural events and activities such as funerals and burials, weddings, child naming, initiation process and religious practices are undertaken with a high person-to-person interactions. With the outbreak of COVID-19, these activities abruptly were altered due to limitations in number of people who could attend weddings, burials and even visiting the sick in the hospital. This is really disturbing to us Africans because we are used to unlimited attendance of these events in our communities.
Zimbabwean Participant
Lack, limited and restrictions on hospital visitations denied some patients the love and care received from family members, which plays a vital role in the healing process. So the absence of family care, which is, either giving or receiving has an emotional and psychological discomfort.
Malawian Participant
Further, the study established that due to social distancing requirements in South Africa and Kenya for instance, it was only fifty people and fifteen people who could attend a burial, respectively. With the significance attached to these cultural and religious rites in the African socio-cultural milieu, COVID-19 restrictions interfered and compromised people’s way of normal life. In support of this view, a participant decried that
the regulations being enforced currently have really denied many people the chance to pay their last respect to their loved ones in a culturally and religiously acceptable manner. Imagine how stressful it is and will be for family members and friends failing to celebrate their friends’ marriages, or burials. These changes will automatically cause many people to be on the wrong side of the law.
South African Participant
The analysis indicates that the COVID-19-related regulations negatively impacted the social, cultural, and religious practices of the people in selected African communities as well as other parts of the world. Early studies and technical reports on the impact of COVID-19 on different aspects of human life showed disrupted economic activities, sporting events, religious practices, academic, and education activities (AU & Africa CDC 2020; World Economic Forum 2020). The disruption of people’s routine of life caused dilemma in communities, with those that are culturally-rich and depend on cultural systems, and person-to-person interactions being hard hit. Thus, post COVID-19, there is a need to deliberately and strategically engage in rebuilding socio-cultural systems to expedite the recovery of communities.
5.4 Ambiguity and Misconceptions Associated with Social Distancing
As noted earlier, the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic was received with varying views and conspiracy theories. The speculations about the origin marred the public health communication, hence causing varied interpretations. The analysis in this article revealed that the messaging and presentation of information suffered ambiguity. The ambiguity of information was apparent with regard to treatment, where homemade herbal concoctions seemed to be encouraged. To illustrate this ambiguity, a participant opined that
the government led by the ministry of health advised people to maintain social distance in public places, but it did not mention how to effectuate it at home. This is serious gap in information packaging because the family members who went for work or shopping could possibly be carrying the virus. Actually it is at home where people get closer and intimate with their children and partners, but there is no clear information how to act at home. Imagine for example how a father should not shake hands, hug and kiss his children or spouse and vice versa.
Ghanaian Participant
The social distancing especially while one has tested positive for the virus is really nearly impossible in many of our African communities. The limited and small living rooms in informal and poor rural communities, remains a dream as per as social distancing and isolation is concerned. Even those in middle class like some of us, our homes are not any better as far as isolating and distancing is concerned, and then what about the families in slums or the ghettos.
Nigerian Participant
The issue of spacing at home was reported across the participants, indicating the difficulty of implementing social distancing at home. The analysis also revealed another aspect of social distancing apart from the physical distancing, that is, withdrawing from people and showing care. Perhaps, this is because of varying community understanding of social distancing. In some instances, literal social distancing was observed, with lack or limited visiting of the elderly, the sick, friends, and family members. Arguably, this narrow interpretation and exercising of social distancing might have denied deserving family members of care and love. This was exacerbated perhaps by lack of knowledge and understanding to distinguish the extent of distancing between the infected and non-infected in their daily interactions. This ambiguity is illustrated in the following participant’s narration.
The whole confusion begun from the information about the origin of the disease, where some said its laboratory manufactured, other believed it was from an animal and others as God’s punishment to the world. So people had different views and believes about the disease and this determined how they acted towards the provided regulations. Honestly, even the scientists did not clarify the etiology, epidemiology, and characterization of the disease until later days when they started talking about asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, which further caused misunderstandings about the disease.
Kenyan Participant
From the above participant’s view, no adherence to COVID-19 regulations was bound to happen. Perhaps, this why in the first days of lockdown and curfews the citizens suffered arrests and police brutality in Kenya, Zimbabwe, and South Africa, to mention but a few. These arrests led to what one participant describes as a “state of bad blood” between the government and the citizens.
In South Africa and Zimbabwe for example the governments’ imposition of lockdown was not received well by the citizens and was characterized by diminishing of adherence with time. Unfortunately, this was happening at the time when the virus was gaining momentum in African countries. The citizens were seemingly surrendering to the virus altogether due to socio-economic demands, and lack clear information about the disease.
Zimbabwean Participant
The observations made in this study collaborate with the Marchiori (2020) study on a paradoxical behavior of people’s adherence to social distancing and other COVID-19 regulations. In his study, without masks, people adopted a counter-intuitively dangerous strategy, explaining the relative lack of effectiveness of social distancing; and while using masks, they radically changed, leading to a safe social distance behavior. This behavior would partly explain the actual adherence to social distancing and isolation measures. Further, the ambiguity of the term ‘social distance’ is highlighted by Abel and McQueen (2020) for its failure to convey the right message for both social and biomedical perspectives. Arguably, in societies that are more cultural and communal-based like African ones, the term social distancing may be problematic and disturbing in its abstract presentation. This is because in such societies, people are used to turning to each other in moments of crisis and social distress (Abel and McQueen 2020). Due to the misconception associated with the phrase social distancing, Abel and McQueen suggested the replacement of the phrase with ‘spatial distancing,’ which is the distance between individuals or objects. On the other shared responsibilities constituting people’s social and cultural contexts is ‘social closeness,’ hence demystifying the confusion. These insights inform the need to clarify words and phrases used for public health awareness to avoid misconceptions and misinterpretations. Such steps would ensure the effectiveness of communication towards reaching public health objectives and goals at the community and international level.
5.5 Limitation to Enjoyment of Human Rights during the COVID-19 Pandemic
The analysis revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic greatly impacted on people’s lives and their rights. From the human rights perspective, the participants reported limitations to full enjoyment of rights such as the right to worship, right to movement, social-cultural rights, children’s rights to play, and rights to education among others. Despite the fact that these restrictions were imposed in order to save lives, they were not without controversy. In explaining this controversy, a participant lamented that
we are really at crossroads due to the outbreak of coronavirus. It is like the world is likely to experience an emergency of new streams of human rights such as right to life and right to death. This is because a vast majority of the people are confronted with difficult choices of life and death, whether to stay safe at home, and die of hunger, or risk going out to work and expose themselves to the virus. The new realities could possibly breed new dimensions of interpreting human rights and how one can enjoy them.
South African Participant
It has not getting economically easy as days go on. I am thinking of the lost income through salary reductions, reduced working hours, leave without payment and total job losses. For instance, the closer of schools and cancellation of the 2020 academic year for primary and secondary schools in Kenya led to many private school teachers jobless. Further, looking at the travel industry and other hospitality businesses have incurred historical losses, you can think of how people’s privileges and lifestyle have been disrupted.
Kenyan Participant
The limitations of these rights have resulted into various social, economic, health and political consequences. It affected both the old and the young, especially school-age children. The spinoffs of these impacts are perhaps aggression and violence at the domestic level. For instance, cases of domestic violence rose alarmingly in South Africa, perhaps due to constrained relationships between family members. This is because, when lockdown was enforced, many people were not allowed to relocate, especially those who were in countries and cities most affected by the virus. The uncertainty about the end of the virus exacerbated the anxiety and fear of the future, hence affecting commitments in relationships. The shift in work schedules and frustrations related to jobs losses exposed possible victims to their offenders. Being in enclosed environments with the offenders undermines one rights to safety and life.
Some of the lockdown regulations such as stay and work from home provided an opportunity for some offenders to spend longer times with victims. This allowed them to torment their victims with ease. Such situations result into health challenges, which may include emotional and psychological distress. You can see in reports and media news of the possible mental health issues at present and in future. This might be devastating for poor communities.
Tanzanian Participant
We should expect and be prepared to deal with mental illness as a result of loss of lives, loss in investments, stress and depression, and anxiety. Due to fear of infection, people are likely to be hesitant in providing or giving hand of help during an emergency. This is likely to endanger and compromise the promptness and benevolence of the public during accidents and other health emergency scenarios.
Nigerian Participant
The above views highlight the fear and stigmatization likely to be associated with the virus and erosion of emphatic and sympathetic values that people enjoy from each other. Implicitly, this would undermine the dignity and worth of the people if such fear and perceptions last for a long period of time.
6 Discussion
The analysis revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic and its related regulations has had adverse effects on human life. The social life characterized by activities such as weddings, funerals and burials, communal meetings, entertainment, and sporting events were among the most affected due to regulations such as social distancing. This is because person-to-person interactions were minimized and discouraged across the globe. From a social development perspective, human interactions are important in promoting human development, cohesiveness, and integration in the communities. Thus, as noted by some previous studies, the absence of these activities can affect the social and economic well-being of people and communities (Haleem et al. 2020; Ozili and Arun 2020). According to Ozili and Arun (2020), the COVID-19 pandemic presented an important sociological consequence in the world by showing how social, economic, and health anxiety among families, households, and between communities (countries, regions, and continents) can change lifestyles. The social, economic, and health consequences attributed to COVID-19 portray how a society can easily be disempowered. For instance, the disruption of cultural activities and limitations to movement and work interfered with people’s inherent human rights. Perhaps, it is for these reasons that social distancing as a regulation to combat the spread of COVID-19 attracted criticisms from politicians, policy analysts, and the citizens (Ozili and Arun 2020; Wilder-Smith & Freedman 2020). To counter these adverse effects of the disease, African governments must begin to strategize on rebuilding the communities to restore their sociological functions. This is important because social support reduces stress and anxiety and enhances the healing process of individuals and communities from social, economic, and health crises (Abel and McQueen 2020). Social support and human interactions are of paramount importance when many people were confined in their spaces. It is worth noting that confinement at home may have a detrimental effect on mental health for children and youth who seek pleasure from outdoor activities, as well as the elderly who depend on other people for their survival. For communities and families having suffered disconnection during the COVID-19 pandemic, social policies focusing on reconstruction, reintegration, and renaissance should be formulated to address social fragmentation. Such programs would present an opportunity for social service providers such as social workers as advocates of a harmonious relationships in families and communities to play critical role in post coronavirus pandemic era.
According to the UN (2020b) and Mohler et al. (2020), episodes of domestic violence were increasing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Perhaps, this is because of extended periods of contact between potential offenders and victims at the household level. The regulations curtailing movements perhaps hindered victims such as women and children from fleeing unsafe environments. Such incidences point to the gaps of the COVID-19-related regulations in curbing the spread of the disease and protecting the already vulnerable populations. Previous health crises, such as the Ebola epidemic in Sierra Leone, contributed to the disruption of social routines and diminished protection from government structures, and created an enabling environment for social vices (Peak, et al, 2018; UN 2020b). The social consequences emanating from COVID-19-related regulations and the disease itself require deeper analysis to unearth the intricacies of the policies in place. Arguably, it is for this reason that the AU & Africa CDC (2020b) advised that the implementation of distancing measures may not be feasible in some communities such as the informal settlements. They also cautioned that the implementation of these measures would likely cause more harm than good by denying vulnerable groups access to healthcare and other requisite social support from the community. Such views could be perceived to be sources of confusion in adhering to and observing regulations related to the COVID-19 pandemic by the citizens in African countries. Further, the AU advice to its member states to protect individuals with comorbidities and the elderly by ‘shielding or cocooning’ attracts various interpretations, which could result into misconceptions about the disease. Ideally, this could downplay the primary objective of social distancing and other regulations in mitigating the spread of the virus in communities.
7 Conclusion
Unequivocally, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic brought a state of disarray, apathy, uncertainty, and despondency. It is even more unnerving when the majority of people cannot predict their future. The findings suggest serious misconceptions and impacts of pandemic-related regulations in some African countries. The findings also suggest the likelihood of an emergence of a new way of life, which runs counter to social, cultural, and economic well-being and human rights. Therefore, the public health machinery, the governments, non-government organizations, and social service providers such as social workers have a critical role to play in bringing a sense of normalcy in the society during and post COVID-19 pandemic. This is because of the likelihood of a voluntary or habitual need to continue maintaining ‘social distance,’ or the desire to seek high levels of social engagement. These two ends may be problematic to the social functioning of the society.
References
Abel, Thomas and David McQueen. 2020. “The COVID-19 pandemic calls for spatial distancing and social closeness: not for social distancing!” International Journal of Public Health 65(3):231.
African Union (AU) & Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC). 2020a. Africa Joint Continental Strategy for COVID-19 Outbreak. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Africa Union Commission.
African Union (AU) & Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC). 2020b. Guidance on Community Physical Distancing During COVID-19 Pandemic. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: African Union Commission.
Allcott, Hunt, Levi Boxell, Jacob C. Conway, Matthew Gentzkow, Michael Thaler, and David Y. Yang. 2020. “Polarization and Public Health: Partisan Differences in Social Distancing during the Coronavirus Pandemic.” Working Paper 26946. National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w26946.
Brooks, Samantha K., Rebecca K. Webster, Louise E. Smith, Lisa Woodland, Simon Wessely, Neil Greenberg, and Gideon J. Rubin. 2020. “The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence.” The Lancet 395(10227):912–920.
Centre for Disease Control (CDC). 2020. “Social Distancing: Keep a Safe Distance to Slow the Spread.” Retrieved May 5, 2020. (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/social-distancing.html).
Chen, Haohui, Weipan Xu, Cecile Paris, Andrew Reeson, and Xun Li. 2020. “Social distance and SARS memory: impact on the public awareness of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak.” medRxiv.org. (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/03/16/2020.03.11.20033688.full.pdf).
Ebrahim, Amina. 2020. “COVID-19 and socioeconomic impact in Africa: The case of South Africa.” United Nations University World Institute for Development. (https://doi.org/10.35188/UNU-WIDER/WBN/2020-2).
Elliot, Larry. 2020. “Prepare for the coronavirus global recession.” The Guardian. (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/mar/15/prepare-for-the-coronavirus-global-recession).
Evans, Jenni. 2020. “Western Cape govt calls for Sassa to reopen some offices as food protests escalate.” News24. Retrieved April 20, 2020. (https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/western-cape-govt-calls-for-sassa-to-reopen-some-offices-as-food-protests-escalate-20200416).
Gilbert, Marius, Giulia Pullano, Francesco Pinotti, Eugenio Valdano, Chiara Poletto, Pierre-Yves Boëlle, Eric D’Ortenzio, Yazdan Yazdanpanah, et al. 2020. “Preparedness and vulnerability of African countries against importations of COVID-19: a modelling study.” The Lancet 395(10227):871–877.
Gössling, Stefan, Daniel Scott, and C. Michael Hall. 2020. “Pandemics, tourism and global change: A rapid assessment of COVID-19.” Journal of Sustainable Tourism 29(1):1–20.
Greenstone, Michael and Vishan Nigam. 2020. “Does Social Distancing Matter?” Working Paper No. 2020–26. Becker Friedman Institute for Economic, University of Chicago.
Haleem, Abid, Mohd Javaid, Raju Vaishya. 2020. “Effects of COVID 19 pandemic in daily life.” Current Medicine Research and Practice 10(2):78–79.
Hatchett, Richard J., Carter E. Mecher, and Marc Lipsitch. 2007. “Public health interventions and epidemic intensity during the 1918 influenza pandemic.” PNAS 104(18):7582–7587.
Horowitz, Julia. 2020. “The global coronavirus recession is beginning.” CNN. (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/16/economy/global-recession-coronavirus/index.html).
IASSW, ICSW, & IFSW. 2016. Global Agenda for Social Work and Social Development: Second Report, Promoting the Dignity and Worth of Peoples. International Federation of Social Workers: Berne, Switzerland.
Jeong, Hyunsuk, Hyeon Woo Yim, Yeong-Jun Song, Moran Ki, Jung-Ah Min, Juhee Cho, and Jeong-Ho Chae. 2016. “Mental health status of people isolated due to Middle East Respiratory Syndrome.” Epidemiology and Health 38:e2016048.
Johns Hopkins Medicine. 2020. “Coronavirus, Social and Physical Distancing and Self-Quarantine.” Retrieved May 5, 2020. (https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-social-distancing-and-self-quarantine).
Kelso, Joel K., George J. Milne, and Heath Kelly. 2009. “Simulation suggests that rapid activation of social distancing can arrest epidemic development due to a novel strain of influenza.” BMC Public Health 9:117.
Maliszewska, Maryla, Aaditya Mattoo, and Dominique van der Mensbrugghe. 2020. “The Potential Impact of COVID-19 on GDP and Trade: A Preliminary Assessment.” Policy Research Working Paper 9211. World Bank Group, East Asia and the Pacific Region.
Marchiori, Massimo. 2020. COVID-19 and the Social Distancing Paradox: dangers and solutions. European Institute for Science, Media and Democracy.
Mo Ibrahim Foundation. 2020. “COVID-19 in Africa: A Call for Coordinated Governance, Improved Health Structures and Better Data.” (https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/2020%20COVID-19%20in%20Africa.pdf).
Mohler, George, Andrea L. Bertozzi, Jeremy Carter, Martin B. Short, Daniel Sledge, George E. Tita, Craig D. Uchida, and P. Jeffrey Brantingham. 2020. “Impact of social distancing during COVID-19 pandemic on crime in Los Angeles and Indianapolis.” Journal of Criminal Justice 68(May-June):101692.
Moore, W. Gyude and Tolbert Nyenswah. 2020. “How can we prepare for Coronavirus? Learn from Liberia’s experience with Ebola.” Mail & Guardian. (https://mg.co.za/article/2020-03-08-how-can-we-prepare-for-coronavirus-learn-from-liberias-experience-with-ebola/).
National Treasury Department. 2020. “Supplementary Budget Speech 2020.” Republic of South Africa. Retrieved June 24, 2020. (http://www.treasury.gov.za/documents/National%20Budget/2020S/speech/speech.pdf).
Nkengasong, John N. and Wessam Mankoula. 2020. “Looming threat of COVID-19 infection in Africa: act collectively, and fast.” The Lancet 395(10227):841–842.
Ozili, Peterson K. 2020. “COVID-19 in Africa: socio-economic impact, policy response and opportunities.” International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. DOI:10.1108/IJSSP-05-2020-0171.
Ozili, Peterson K. and Thankom Arun. 2020. “Spillover of COVID-19: Impact on the Global Economy.” SSRN Electronic Journal. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3562570.
Peak, Corey M., Amy Wesolowski, Elisabeth Zu Erbach-Schoenberg, Andrew J. Tatem, Erik Wetter, Xin Lu, Daniel Power, Elaine Weidman-Grunewald, Sergio Ramos, Simon Moritz, Caroline O. Buckee, and Linus Bengtsson. 2018. “Population mobility reductions associated with travel restrictions during the Ebola epidemic in Sierra Leone: use of mobile phone data.” International Journal of Epidemiology 47(5):1562–1570.
Qian, Meirui and Jianli Jiang. 2020. “COVID-19 and social distancing.” Journal of Public Health. (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-020-01321-z).
Reluga, Timothy C. 2010. “Game Theory of Social Distancing in Response to an Epidemic.” PLoS Computational Biology 6(5):e1000793.
United Nations (UN). 2020a. Policy brief: Impact of COVID-19 in Africa. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Economic Commission for Africa.
United Nations (UN). 2020b. COVID-19 in Africa: Protecting lives and economies. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Economic Commission for Africa.
Wilder-Smith, A. and D.O. Freedman. 2020. “Isolation, quarantine, social distancing and community containment: pivotal role for old-style public health measures in the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak.” Journal of Travel Medicine 27(2):1–4.
World Economic Forum. 2020. “This is how smart city technology can be used to tell if social distancing is working.” Retrieved May 5, 2020. (https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/smart-cities-technology-coronavirus-covid19/).
World Health Organization (WHO). 2020a. “Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.” Retrieved June 20, 2020. (https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019).
World Health Organization (WHO). 2020b. “Ebola outbreak 2014–2016.” Retrieved June 20, 2020. (https://www.who.int/csr/disease/ebola/en/).
