Transport Reviews

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/ttrv20

COVID-19 passenger transport measures and their

impacts

Ruth Shortall, Niek Mouter & Bert Van Wee

To cite this article: Ruth Shortall, Niek Mouter & Bert Van Wee (2022) COVID-19
passenger transport measures and their impacts, Transport Reviews, 42:4, 441-466, DOI:
10.1080/01441647.2021.1976307

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.1976307

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group

Published online: 21 Sep 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 12438

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 51 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ttrv20
TRANSPORT REVIEWS
2022, VOL. 42, NO. 4, 441–466
https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.1976307

COVID-19 passenger transport measures and their impacts

Ruth Shortalla, Niek Moutera and Bert Van Weeb
a
TU Delft, Delft, Netherlands; bFaculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of
Technology, Delft, Netherlands

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Governments all over the world have had to implement various Received 1 February 2021
policy measures in order to curb the spread of COVID-19, Accepted 30 August 2021
impacting many people’s lives and livelihoods. Combinations of
KEYWORDS
measures targeting the transportation sector and other aspects of COVID19; Corona; passenger
social life have been implemented with varying degrees of transport; policy; social
success in different countries. This paper proposes a classification impact
of COVID-19 measures aimed at passenger mobility. We
distinguish the categories “avoidance of travel”, “modal shift” and
“improvement of quality”. Per category, we distinguish different
types of measures and effects (social, economic and
environmental). Next, we review the literature on COVID-19
measures for passenger mobility, after which we discuss the
policy relevance of our findings and propose a research agenda.
We conclude that broad or integral assessments of measures on
all socially relevant effects are rare. Also, few studies exist to
determine the effects of individual measures and deal with
combinations of measures instead. Studies on social or economic
effects focus on partial direct effects (e.g. turnover of the
transport sector, effect of mobility measures on commuter traffic)
and do not elaborate on indirect effects (e.g. changes in
household expenditure, stress levels). Finally, there is a greater
focus in the literature on intermediary health indicators (e.g.
travel behaviour) but less on the actual spread of COVID-19 or
indeed on other indirect health effects of measures (e.g. due to
air pollution, more exercise, etc).

1 Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic has far-reaching consequences for the transport sector. In many
cities, public transport use decreased by more than 90% during the initial stages of the
first wave’s lock-down (Van Oort & Cats, 2020). The aviation sector worldwide has also
been adversely affected. Governments are under pressure to relax travel regulations, or
even to tighten them, but it is not very clear what the health risks of doing so may be.
Results from previous research on SARS are not easily applicable, as the characteristics
of COVID-19 and SARS differ significantly in terms of the infectious period, transmissibility,
clinical severity and extent of community spread (Wilder-Smith, Chiew, & Lee, 2020).

CONTACT Ruth Shortall [email protected]

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
442 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

Countries and cities have been forced to act fast in implementing travel-related measures
without always fully understanding their effects on propagation risks, economic and
social consequences, or on people’s well-being, even though needs for such insights
exist (Hale, Petherick, Phillips, & Webster, 2020). This paper aims to address those
needs, as far as possible, by reviewing the literature on COVID-19 passenger transport
measures that was available up to the end of 2020, with an update in May 2021. More
specifically our paper aims to (1) provide a structure for COVID-19 transport measures
and their impact on common policy goals, (2) give an overview of findings in this area
and (3) synthesise the literature, discuss its policy relevance and suggest avenues for
future research. We review measures worldwide, and their direct impacts (on travel and
activities) and indirect impacts on other social (mental and physical health or safety),
economic or environmental impacts. As many papers will still follow, and many new
insights are sure to emerge in the coming years, we explicitly only provide an intermedi-
ate view. We limit ourselves to passenger mobility and focus on the modes of transport
plane, car, bus, tram, metro, bicycle and walking.
Section 2 first describes the methodology, Section 3 presents the results, and finally,
Section 4 summarises the main conclusions and provides reflections on the policy impli-
cations and suggestions for future research.

2 Method
We follow the methodological suggestion for literature review papers of Van Wee and
Banister (2016), making explicit the databases, search strategy, snowballing strategy
and additional selection criteria. A literature review was performed on academic and
grey literature or databases relating to transport sector COVID-19 policy measures.
Both initial measures and phase-out strategies are considered relevant. Most of the litera-
ture we found concerned the period of the first wave. We did not include all references we
found, but selected representative examples in each category of literature (see Section 3
and Table A3).
Since the publication of peer-reviewed papers is slower than the evolution of COVID-
19, we fill in knowledge gaps with grey literature, selecting high-quality media news
outlets and the most significant in terms of their findings and in terms of their quality
only. Our detailed methodology is found in appendix 3. We acknowledge there is some
subjectivity in our choice of materials and that our literature list is bound to be incomplete
due to the constant appearance of new publications about COVID-19. We do think our
analytical framework (Appendix 1) and conceptualisation of links between measures
and impacts (Appendix 2) are not sensitive to the selection of literature, but some of
the empirical findings could be influenced to some extent.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Analytical framework
Based on the literature found and analytical thinking, we have created Table A1 (Appen-
dix 1), which provides a categorisation of measures and impacts. Table A1 makes it clear
that we can classify measures into those that make people travel less, those that influence
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 443

the choice of transport mode, and those that aim to reduce the spread of the virus of
people travelling by public transport. Effects are categorised according to the most
common policy goals we found in the literature, i.e. the social goals of physical/ mental
health or safety, and the goals of economic health and environmental sustainability.
The effect of some measures in relation to these goals can be positive or negative. For
example, some people may find working from home more pleasant than working on
site (e.g. because they spend less time travelling), but others may find it unpleasant
(e.g. because they miss out on social contacts, or are less able to work undisturbed at
home). We organise Section 3 according to Table A1. Appendix 2 further conceptualises
the intermediary links between the measures and impacts.

3.2 Overview
In total, 280 grey literature sources and 258 academic papers about measures or impacts
of COVID-19 measures were collected and considered relevant. Over half (57%) of all
papers found related to social impacts, whilst economic and environmental impacts
made up around 17% each. Around 5% of papers covered various impacts (impacts in
more than one category) and the remaining papers (6) were about measures themselves.
Papers on social impacts were focused largely on the direct impacts of COVID-19 (trans-
port) measures on travel behaviour or mobility patterns (45%) or indirect impacts such as
impacts on physical health (22%) or psychological and mental health impacts (13%).
Other topics covered included impacts on road safety and accidents, impacts on percep-
tions or risk perceptions or impacts on health-related behaviours. Papers on economic
impacts covered a greater diversity of topics, with employment, productivity and costs
being dominant (direct) impacts. We hardly found literature on indirect economic
impacts, such as those related to job and residential locations. The majority of papers
on environmental impacts related to impacts on air quality. Other topics covered included
impacts on GHG emissions, noise pollution or water quality.
205 papers were focused on a particular country or region. Of these, 37% were from
Asia, 28% were from Europe, 18% from U.S.A./Canada, 6% from Africa, 5% from South
America and the remainder from Australia, New Zealand and the Middle East. We
limited the number of references because of the journal’s guidelines. A full list of refer-
ences is available at request via the first author of this paper.

3.3 Results: common policy goals and associated strategies and measures
3.3.1 Measures that avoid use of shared or public transport
Although studies of the spread of COVID-19 in public transport vary widely in their
assumptions, virus dynamics, demand or operational characteristics, many show that
the virus is transmissible in public transport to some degree (Hörcher, Singh, &
Graham, 2020). By reducing the contact and exposure of customers within public or
shared transport it is hoped that the spread of the virus can be curtailed. “Avoid”
measures should reduce the need or possibility to travel in the first place, by reducing
the demand for, or supply of transport and may be voluntary or policy induced. By the
end of March 2020, more than a hundred countries had implemented some combination
of these measures (Parady, Taniguchi, & Takami, 2020). Other shared mobility services
444 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

(ride-hailing, bikesharing, carsharing and micromobility) and private cars may also be
subject to measures (ACAPS, 2020; Hale et al., 2020).

3.3.1.1. Required closure of non-essential services and large gatherings. Rationale:

Demand-side “avoid” measures aim for a direct effect on travel or activities through the
required closing or reduction of businesses, work places or non-essential services.
Supply-side measures have the direct effect of reducing the supply of public transport,
e.g. by suspension.

Direct effects: The closure of non-essential services and restrictions on gatherings overall
achieved the desired effect of reducing travel to non-essential destinations. By May 2020,
retail and recreation trips decreased by 40–65% from a January baseline across all regions,
although trips to retail and recreation fell less in low-income countries (Medimorec, Enri-
quez, Hosek, & Peet, 2020). Latin American/Caribbean countries saw the biggest decrease
of 66% on average. In Italy, mobility trends associated with tourism, retail, and services
reduced by over 90% during the first lockdown beginning March 2020 (Bonaccorsi
et al., 2020). In the U.S.A., commuting in major cities had halved by end of March (Klein
et al., 2020). Similar trends were observed in Japan (Morita, Nakamura, & Hayashi,
2020). Some governments deliberately reduced or even suspended public transport: in
China, intra-city public transport was suspended in 136 cities and inter-city travel was pro-
hibited by 219 cities (Tian et al., 2020).

Social, economic or environmental impacts: In terms of reducing the spread of the virus, the
most effective measures (based on a study of 175 countries) have been found to be those
that reduced contacts, e.g. cancelling of public events and restrictions on private gather-
ings, or school and workplace closures, each causing decreases of 12% or greater in the
number of daily infections six weeks after introduction (Askitas, Tatsiramos, & Verheyden,
2021). A U.S.A. study (Courtemanche, Garuccio, Le, Pinkston, & Yelowitz, 2020) found
shelter-in-place orders and the closure of public places to be most effective, with
shelter-in-place orders leading to a ∼9% reduction of the COVID-19 case growth rate
after 3 weeks. However, Li et al. (2021) found that in the U.S.A., while stay-at-home
orders and workplace closures were the most effective initially, effectiveness of all
measures decreased over time as people stopped complying.
Cancelling leisure activities or workplace trips may create social isolation, stress,
boredom and negatively affect subjective well-being and mental health (Zhang, Wang,
Rauch, & Wei, 2020). People with disabilities have been particularly affected by a
reduced access to public transport (Cochran, 2020). People who had to stop working com-
pletely were the worst affected (Zhang et al., 2020). In Germany, average life satisfaction
decreased in the early stages of the pandemic (Zacher & Rudolph, 2020). In Ireland, well-
being increased due to spending time outdoors, gardening or taking care of children
whereas activities like remote meetings or home-schooling children were particularly
stressful (Lades, Laffan, Daly, & Delaney, 2020). Student’s experiences of the closure of
schools and universities have not been positive. In the U.S.A., 13% of students will have
a delayed graduation, 40% have lost a job, internship, or a job offer, and 29% expect to
earn less at age 35. Lower income students are worse affected and are 55% more likely
to have delayed graduation (Aucejo, French, Paola, Araya, & Zafar, 2020).
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 445

Closure of schools, businesses and services has a detrimental effect on the economy,
however, few studies have examined indirect economic impacts of these measures.
Obviously, the transport sector has been adversely affected, with many transit agencies
facing revenue deficits (Hu & Chen, 2021). Transport workers who rely on daily wages
to survive have suffered most due to suspension of transport services (e.g. Indonesia, Phi-
lippines) (Ecomobility.org, 2020a). Preliminary evidence suggests that consumer spending
for over 1 million small U.S. business may be reduced by 40%. School closures in the U.S.
could be costing the economy up to £1.2 billion per week (Ahammer, Halla, & Lackner,
2020). By May in the U.S. active business owners fell 15% with the highest losses sustained
by African-American, Latin, Asian and immigrant businesses (Fairlie, 2020). Not all
countries may have been affected equally. In the Netherlands, one early survey revealed
that only 1% of respondents lost their job or went bankrupt (de Haas, Faber, & Hamersma,
2020). Some services have benefited such as Taiwanese small farmers who benefited over
agribusinesses when online shoppers increased the demand for grains, fresh fruit and
vegetables (Chang & Meyerhoefer, 2020).
The environmental effects of closing non-essential services have not been studied
explicitly, however environmental impacts of combined COVID-19 measures are
described in Section 3.3.4.

3.3.1.2. Requests to work from home where possible. Rationale: Measures that reduce
the need to travel to work prevent contact in the workplace or transportation especially
during peak times (OECD, 2020a). Most governments have requested that people work
from home where possible. Otherwise, companies may be requested to allow flexible
working hours or staggered working shifts or opening hours to avoid crowding for
commuters.

Direct effects: A study of 100 countries found that 40–60% of workers were working
from home during the period March–May 2020 (Shibayama, Sandholzer, Laa, &
Brezina, 2021). By mid-April 2020, in all regions, trips to workplaces decreased by
40%, with a particularly high decrease in high-income countries, probably due to the
higher availability of teleworking arrangements (Medimorec et al., 2020) and possibly
due to the higher share of office jobs in these countries. In Asia, telework was a
major factor in preventing contagion in densely populated cities like Hong Kong,
Seoul and Tokyo (OECD, 2020a). By April, 37% of workers in Europe were teleworking
(Eurofound, 2020). A survey of 2000 global organisations showed that 47% of compa-
nies managed to transition to remote work in around two days and the majority in less
than a week. The main challenges with telework related to setting up IT hardware,
infrastructure and security (Walters, 2020). As teleworking is not possible for everyone,
in Rio de Janeiro industry and service sectors staggered their working hours (OECD,
2020a) and in France, regions agreed with businesses to stagger arrival and departure
times in businesses (OECD, 2020a).

Social, economic and environmental impacts: Among less educated, lower-income, and
people of colour (e.g. in the U.S.A.), use of public transport reduced less due to the
nature of their profession and as a result, these groups may have suffered higher death
rates (Hu & Chen, 2021).
446 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

Surveys show a majority of workers view remote working positively, due to factors like
flexible hours, no need to commute and being at home (Hensher, Wei, Beck, & Balbontin,
2021; IBM, 2020; Walters, 2020), although 38% of workers globally missed physical inter-
action (Walters, 2020). Negatively perceived factors of working from home include lack of
distinction between work and home life, poor eating habits, loss of self-discipline,
absence of IT department, longer working hours and frequent video calls (Statista,
2020), disruption from family members, less effective collaboration and lack of focus
(Hensher et al., 2021).
Regarding worker productivity with teleworking, a global survey carried out in April/
May 2020 found 23% of professionals reported lower productivity, 32% reported no
change and 45% reported increased productivity, while 78% of employers observed
equal or increased productivity during the lockdown. Increased productivity has been
attributed to no commute or better focus (Walters, 2020). In Australia, research shows
that after 2 waves of the pandemic, attitudes toward working from home are generally
positive and productivity is relatively high, with many workers expressing a desire, sup-
ported by employers, to work from home in the future (Beck, Hensher, & Wei, 2020). In
the U.S.A., a survey found that a majority of firms did not have productivity loss due to
remote working (Bartik, Cullen, Glaeser, Luca, & Stanton, 2020). Bin, Andruetto, Susilo,
and Pernestål (2021) carry out a study on the adoption of digitised alternatives for
various activities (e.g. entertainment) and find that long term adoption of online alterna-
tives are correlated with personality and socio-demographic group.
A positive side-effect of working from home (e.g. in Australia) has been reduced con-
gestion, which may continue after the pandemic, since workers are keen to work from
home one or two days a week if they can (Hensher & Beck, 2020). After three months
of restrictions in Australia, there was a large reduction (54%) in annual time costs for com-
muters much of which was associated with reduced congestion (Hensher et al., 2021).
Otherwise in general, little study has been done on the environmental impacts of tele-
working during the pandemic. The indirect or longer term economic impacts of the
shift to teleworking (e.g. location decisions, changing office set-ups) during the COVID-
19 pandemic have hardly been studied either and are thus an interesting avenue for
future research.

3.3.1.3. Domestic travel restrictions. Rationale: travel restrictions aim to restrict mobility
and range from giving advice against non-essential travel to banning all non-essential
travel (e.g. via suspension or drastic limitation of public transport). Travel restrictions
may be local or national (Dunford et al., 2020). Essential travel may include essential deliv-
ery transport, the transport of medical personnel, retail and wholesale employees,
employees of strategic infrastructures (water, energy, transport, etc.), security personnel,
etc. (OECD, 2020a). Restrictions may be enforced by requests for compliance, or more
stringently by introducing fines or penalties for noncompliance, or requiring proof of per-
mission to travel (Hale et al., 2020).

Direct effects: Travel restrictions or bans are considered most effective when combined
with other measures like closing entertainment venues, and banning public gatherings
(Chinazzi et al., 2020). Stringency and timing have varied significantly between countries
(Hale et al., 2020). Countries have tended to increase the stringency of their measures as
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 447

their situation worsened (Hussain, 2020). In the early stages of the pandemic (Feb-April),
some Asian countries never moved beyond national recommendations (e.g. Japan, South
Korea, Taiwan, Macau, Singapore, Hong Kong), which most people adhered to, whilst
other countries went straight into local or national lockdowns with full travel bans
(China, Vietnam, Iran) (Dunford et al., 2020). In Europe, several countries, like France,
Italy or Spain, implemented full national lockdowns early on, limiting all non-essential
travel, whereas others (e.g. Sweden or the Netherlands) only made requests to restrict
movement. In the Netherlands, for example, people were asked to stay home but they
could move freely while maintaining 1.5 m distance from each other. Offenders were
fined 390€ (de Haas et al., 2020). By the end of March, almost every European country
had implemented a full or partial lockdown, apart from Sweden, Iceland, Latvia and
Hungary.

Social, economic or environmental impacts: Although multiple recent studies propose that
mobility restrictions reduce contagion, there is no clear evidence that suspending mass
transport reduces spread (Musselwhite et al., 2020). Evidence from France and Japan
suggests no higher risk in public transport than anywhere else, once people wear
masks and follow health guidelines and social distancing (O’Sullivan, 2020). In an Italian
study, Cartenì, Di Francesco, and Martino, (2021) found a correlation between the trans-
port accessibility of an area and the number of COVID-19 cases and suggest that indiscri-
minate lockdowns for all areas may be inappropriate and that lockdowns should be
applied based on the transport accessibility of an area.
Nonetheless, travel restrictions may have contributed to saving lives in many countries.
In the U.S.A. California’s stay at home orders may have reduced COVID-19 cases by 125.5–
219.7 per 100,000 population between March and April (Friedson, McNichols, Sabia, &
Dave, 2020). COVID-19 cases fell by 44% in 40 states three weeks after initial stay at
home orders (Dhaval, Friedson, Matsuzawa, & Sabia, 2020). In contrast, an estimated
400 jobs were lost per life saved during this period (Friedson et al., 2020). In India, on
the other hand, travel restrictions left millions of migrant workers without the means
to earn money, and as a result, causing a mass exodus from major cities to other
Indian states. It has been estimated that this could have a significant impact on the
number of active COVID-19 cases in these states (Maji, Choudhari, & Sushma, 2020).
Avoid measures have similar social impacts. A Chinese study showed that lack of social
interaction due to remote work or travel restrictions, and limitations of exercise during
lockdowns negatively impacted life satisfaction and distress levels (Zhang et al., 2020).
Dutch surveys showed that around 40% of people were unhappy with less social inter-
action (de Haas et al., 2020). Travel restrictions may also cause increased economic
inequality and cut people off from vital services. In Italy, a full suspension of public trans-
port impacted lower income regions most adversely (Bonaccorsi et al., 2020). Developing
countries have suffered higher human costs due to hunger, starvation, denial of medical
care or suicide (Elsa, 2020). In several African countries, COVID-19 measures have been
proven unsuitable (Tinto, 2020), for instance, curfews, on top of transport restrictions
caused crowding as citizens rush to get home in time, increasing the risk of infection (Van-
guard News Nigeria, 2020). Many African nations are dependent on donor aid so may not
be able to provide financial support or testing services. People may face the dilemma of
starving or getting sick. In Nigeria, travel restrictions prevented households from fetching
448 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

water or soap for basic hygiene purposes, exacerbating health risks (Adegboyega, 2020).
In Kenya, in one survey on the impact of COVID-19 measures, 86% of respondents
reported a total or partial loss of income and 74% reported eating less or skipping
meals due to having too little money for food (Quaife et al., 2020).
The environmental effects of domestic travel restrictions have not been studied expli-
citly, however environmental impacts of combined COVID-19 measures, including mobi-
lity restrictions, are described in Section 3.3.4.

3.3.1.4 International travel restrictions. Rationale: A recent study shows that in Europe,
the COVID-19 outbreak closely followed global mobility patterns of air passenger travel
(Linka, Peirlinck, Sahli Costabal, & Kuhl, 2020). Various measures such as flight suspen-
sions, partial or full border closures, prohibiting or quarantining travellers from certain
regions or banning non-citizens from entering have been implemented around the world.

Direct effects: When the virus first appeared, several countries brought in initial restrictions
on flights from China, or required visitors from at-risk areas to be quarantined on arrival.
COVID-19 quickly spread across several borders, which prompted measures that restrict
movements between countries. The WHO, for example, issued recommendations for
such measures (WHO, 2020). As well as this, measures have been put in place for detection
and management of suspected cases at points of entry, including ports, airports and
ground crossings. In Europe, countries implemented border closure at different times
and to different degrees. Some applied measures like screening and 14-day quarantines
for passengers from high-risk regions early on, whilst others waited and opted for stricter
measures such as partial border closures or banning non-residents or travellers from high-
risk regions (Sabat et al., 2020). Airline strategic responses in Europe can be grouped into
retrenchment, persevering, innovating, exit and resume. Retrenchment, measures that
aim to substantially reducing cost and minimise cash burn, were a major immediate
response strategy, and persevering has also been important for most airlines, with the
help of government subsidies. Some airlines innovated by e.g. switching to cargo
rather than passenger travel whilst others failed or waited until signs of easing restrictions
(Albers & Rundshagen, 2020).

Social, economic and environmental impacts: Due to flight suspensions, international and
domestic flights fell to an all-time low around May 2020, with a subsequent recovery in
domestic flights (Sun, Wandelt, & Zhang, 2021a). In the U.S.A., domestic air traffic fell
by 71% in May 2020, in spite of government financial support under the CARES act
(Hotle & Mumbower, 2021).
While the success of some countries, e.g. New Zealand or Taiwan at reducing COVID
deaths has been attributed in part to early border controls/closure (Summers et al.,
2020), the effectiveness of international travel controls at curtailing the spread of the
virus has been criticised since many countries did not implement them soon enough,
instead waiting until the virus had spread domestically (Sun et al., 2021a). In July, the
WHO warned that a one-size-fits all model limiting international travel does not makes
sense because outbreaks develop differently in different countries. The EU has now
implemented a traffic light system to guide countries, in an attempt to make international
travel restrictions “fairer” (European Union, 2021).
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 449

The longer term impact on aviation is unclear due to uncertainties in passenger predic-
tion and there is much discussion on how tele-activities, improvements in rail networks or
new technologies and policies may influence the sector (Sun et al., 2021a). In the early
stages of the pandemic, the impact of travel restrictions was larger for the international
air travel market, since domestic markets kept some level of activity. However, experts
predict that business-related travel will be adversely impacted due to increased telework-
ing skills, event cancellation and reduced marketing and travel budgets (Suau-Sanchez,
Voltes-Dorta, & Cugueró-Escofet, 2020). In June, the ICAO estimated the impact of
COVID-19 on world passenger air traffic (combined domestic and international) to
amount to a loss of USD400 billion gross operating revenues (ICAO, 2020) and found
that in 2020, capacity was likely to be reduced by around 50%. Airline labour, especially
in major airlines, is likely to bear the brunt of the decline and recovery could be in the
region of four and six years (Sobieralski, 2020). On the other hand, the rail sector is
likely to benefit from reduced air travel (Sánchez et al., 2020). A UBS report has found
that the COVID-19 pandemic could accelerate the shift of passengers from air to rail,
post-lockdown, with greater than expected growth in the rail industry over the next
ten years (Burroughs, 2020).
Few studies have been carried out in relation to the social or environmental impact of
international travel restrictions by themselves. In Australia at time of writing, the borders
are still closed and international flights are limited. This is expected to lead to a 50%
reduction in international students with a subsequent loss of 57% annual revenue from
international education (Munawar, Khan, Qadir, Kouzani, & Mahmud, 2021).
Since the aviation industry contributes around 3% of global GHG emissions, we can
assume that these emissions have dropped significantly for the time being, however, posi-
tive effects are likely to be short-lived (Le Quéré et al., 2020).

3.3.2 Measures to shift passengers to other modes

Rationale: Shifting passengers away from public or shared transport modes may reduce
contagion. In large cities like London, New York, Paris and Tokyo, it is estimated that
even with an over 30% reduction in trips due to telework or mode changes, 2–3
million trips per day must still be taken (OECD, 2020b), by other means than cars as
cities cannot cope with increases in mixed traffic modes (Veryard & Perkins, 2018). Micro-
mobility, especially individual modes, reduces risk of contagion, and takes up less space
than motorised transportation in cities, thus avoiding traffic congestion. Bikeways could
have a person throughput of 7500 per hour and footpaths 9000 per hour (NACTO, 2020a).

Direct effects: Various measures have been implemented around the world to encourage
mode changes. In a review of case studies worldwide, Nikitas, Tsigdinos, Karolemeas,
Kourmpa, and Bakogiannis (2021) identify policies that encourage biking during the pan-
demic, including infrastructure-based (cycling infrastructure, bike sharing, tactical
urbanism, regeneration of roads) or measures-based (traffic calming, car bans, speed
limits, one-way streets, e-bike subsidies). Other reported measures include filtering or
banning non-local traffic, shared streets, fast-tracking planned walking or biking facilities,
providing bike parking or bike-sharing facilities, subsidies or funding schemes for bike
purchase or repair, one-way walking, adjusting signal timing at crossings, removing
parking at recreational areas (Pedbikeinfo, 2020).
450 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

Social, economic and environmental impacts: In general, more bike trips have been taken
over longer distances for commuting or leisure purposes (Nikitas et al., 2021). Changes in
cycling were observed between 2019 and 2020 by (Buehler & Pucher, 2021) with the EU
seeing a growth of 8% on average, the U.S.A. of 16%.
Major cities like New York or Philadelphia have already experienced shifts to active
transport modes, with increases in cycling especially (IEA, 2020). Over 150 cities (e.g.
London, Bogota, Barcelona, Paris or Milan) have planned to promote active transport
via temporary or dedicated cycling and walking infrastructure or widened footpaths
(OECD, 2020b). In New York, there was a modal shift from subway to bike sharing (Teixeira
& Lopes, 2020). In April 2020, 20% of regular U.S.A. public transport users said they would
stop using it and 28% said they will use it less often after the pandemic (IBM, 2020).
However, changes to more active modes have not always been welcomed by commu-
nities. For instance, in the U.K., villagers were unhappy with cyclists passing through
and potentially spreading the virus (Sherwood, 2020).
Reallocation of street space has posed challenges. Pavements in many cities are not
wide enough to accommodate social distancing. Making space for pedestrians on
roadways requires reducing traffic speeds to 30 km/h (OECD, 2020b). Traffic priority
rules may have to be changed to avoid crowding at junctions (OECD, 2020b).
Cycling injuries increased in London due to an increase in cycling (Mumtaz, Cymerman,
& Komath, 2021).
Bike sales increased to the point that finding a bike became difficult in the U.K. due
to shops going out of stock (Sherwood, 2020). In the U.S.A., leisure bike sales
increased 121% and electric bikes 85%. Bike service and repairs has also profited (Sta-
tista, 2020). However, in some countries shared mobility was not considered as an
essential service and forbidden. Some operators, therefore, suffered huge losses
(OECD, 2020b).
Although it is still too early to fully determine the social impacts of COVID-19 shift
measures from the literature, previous research shows that investments in active trans-
port pay off by reducing traffic congestion, in some cases accidents and associated
costs as well as CO2 emissions (FLOW, 2018). “Shift” measures may actually reduce bus
travel time by up to 40%, reduce car traffic and save millions of hours in car travel time
(FLOW, 2018). Health benefits from promoting active transport could save public health
budgets billions (OECD, 2020b). For example, if every Londoner walked or cycled for 20
minutes a day, the U.K.’s public health system could save GBP 1.7 billion in treatment
costs over the next 25 years (Mayor of London, 2020b).
In spite of the various measures to encourage active or micromobility modes, many
people have been turning to private cars (Rivoli, 2020) especially in cities where cars
were already the more dominant mode. In many major cities (e.g. Berlin, Los Angeles,
Chicago, Auckland and Sydney), car usage was almost back to pre-COVID levels by
June (Lawrie & Stone, 2020). A March survey in China suggested that 66% of people pre-
ferred to drive after the pandemic, compared to 24% before, with more consumers likely
to buy a car in the future (Chui, 2020). An increase in unsafe driving behaviour was
observed in some countries e.g. Greece and Saudi Arabia (Katrakazas, Michelaraki, Seka-
dakis, & Yannis, 2020) but due to reduced mobility, overall traffic accidents reduced in
e.g. Spain (Saladié, Bustamante, & Gutiérrez, 2020) and U.S.A. (Sutherland, McKenney, &
Elkbuli, 2020).
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 451

3.3.3 Measures to improve quality and safety of public and shared transport
Rationale: Improving the quality and safety of public and shared transport maintains
options to travel, and with important advantages for the economy and those who
need transport urgently. Shared and public transport have the highest perceived risk
profiles of all modes (Richert, Martin, & Schrader, 2020), but improving their quality
helps improve perceptions and encourage its continued use. Tirachini and Cats (2020)
review measures such as physical distancing, use of facemasks and hygiene, sanitisation
and ventilation. Gkiotsalitis and Cats (2020) identify further measures as part of strategic
planning (e.g. station skipping), tactical planning (e.g. reduced frequency or timetable
changes) or operational planning (e.g. crowd management, vehicle holding and speed
control). Here we discuss common quality improvement measures of implementing
social distancing to avoid crowding, improving hygiene and managing demand.

3.3.3.1. Additional space/social distancing. Rationale: To reduce viral spread, the WHO
recommends keeping at least 1 m distance or using facemasks, which can help reduce the
distance required (Chen, 2020).

Direct effects: Kamga and Eickemeyer (2021) reviewed social distancing measures used in
public transport in the U.S.A. and Canada and found that these related to preventing
crowding and limiting numbers of people at stations; physical distancing on platforms;
employee protection; rear boarding; partition of drivers cabin; tape line behind driver;
staggered seating; limiting capacity or additional vehicles; longer trains. Countries vary
in the limits they have placed on public transport capacity, e.g. Columbia began at
35%, the U.K. at 10% (Ardila-Gomez, 2020). In China, buses operate at 50% capacity or
less and on-board cameras are used to enforce this rule (Wong, 2020). Measures taken
in the aviation industry include barriers between boarding gates, blocking middle seats
or forbidding carry-on luggage into the cabin (Benita, 2021).

3.3.3.2. Hygiene and health measures. Rationale: Tirachini and Cats (2020) find a consen-
sus on the effectiveness of using facemasks properly and hygiene, sanitisation and venti-
lation for stopping viral spread in public transport. Health screening of passengers and
staff, e.g. via thermal imaging or temperature identifies potential infections or helps track-
ing and tracing (IATA, 2020). Frontline interaction measures include automatic opening of
all doors at any station to prevent direct contact (OECD, 2020b), rear-door boarding or no
physical fare collection (NACTO, 2020b).

Direct effects: Across Asia, measures such as providing hand sanitiser in public transport and
stations, sanitising vehicles after each trip, enhanced air filters and ventilation, UV lights for
disinfection and the use of cleaning robots have been implemented (Wong, 2020). In Seoul,
if a potential COVID-19 carrier breaches self-isolation, location history is tracked and a ster-
ilisation team is deployed to perform additional sterilisation (Mediahub Seoul, 2020). Some
transit agencies have reduced front-line interactions by e.g. banning non-essential access to
buildings and/or shutting down ticket kiosks or customer service facilities (Transit, 2020).
In Korea, the ministry of transport used an existing smart cities platform to help auto-
mate contact tracing by combining police data and data from telecommunications and
452 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

credit card companies, resulting in a system that could trace an individual in around 10
minutes. Although the platform deals with sensitive private information, the policy of
sharing contact tracing information had already been previously legislated and
debated years before COVID-19 (Lee & Lee, 2020).

3.3.3.3. Capacity management for public transport. Rationale: Capacity management

measures help to maintain a particular capacity in public transport vehicles and stations.
E.g. Increasing public transport frequency makes up for reduced capacity, reduces queues,
waiting times and overcrowding (OECD, 2020b). Tirachini & Cats (2020) suggest various
options such as on-demand services; reserved slot booking; travel permits for specific
groups; pricing management or peak spreading. Hörcher et al. (2020) also summarise
five management methods: (i) inflow control with queueing, (ii) time and space-depen-
dent pricing, (iii) capacity reservation with advance booking, (iv) slot auctioning and (v)
tradeable travel permit schemes. Due to individual limitations, these are likely to be
more successful if several are implemented simultaneously.

Direct effects: Capacity management measures have been implemented in several cities. In
San Francisco, operators reduced service to meet lowered demand, prioritising routes for
essential works (NACTO, 2020b). Hamburg is monitoring the load factor of journeys and
adjusting scheduled services to suit the passenger volume (Hamburg, 2020). In Beijing, a
public transport booking and appointments app provides staggered access to public
transport stations (Salo, 2020). In Fukuoka (Japan) riders get information on subway con-
gestion levels by time slot on the city’s website (Richards et al., 2020), and in Catalonia, an
app integrated into the real-time passenger information system provides information
about crowding in buses (Polis Network, 2020). Increasing public transport frequency
has been implemented in New York, Florida, and Houston (NACTO, 2020b). Popup bus
lanes have also been implemented in order to meet demand and reduce congestion. In
New York, 20 new miles of emergency bus lanes were added (Carlson, 2020) and in Scot-
land, GBP19 million has been allocated to popup bus lanes (Bol, 2020).

3.3.3.4. Social, economic and environmental impacts of improved measures. So far,

few academic studies have examined the social, economic or environmental impacts of
measures to improve the safety and quality of public transport. Tirachini and Cats
(2020) note the adverse financial impact on public transport operators worldwide, in
spite of government support, from increased costs of hygiene measures, losses of
revenue from reduced capacity and rear door boarding and decreased demand. They
also note that maintaining high-quality public transport is a matter of social equity
since many low-income groups will continue to use it during the pandemic.
Limits on capacity and physical distancing have been difficult to implement in public
transport in many countries. Social distancing in Mumbai’s suburban railway system, with
the highest passenger density in the world has stretched bus services beyond capacity
(Aklekar, 2020). In London, social distancing was described as “impossible” in the
period following the lockdown, since keeping 2 metres distance in the bus or tube was
very difficult due to the amount of people and few people wore masks. Increasing fre-
quency was hindered due to staff being ill or needing to self-isolate or shield (BBC
News, 2020). Due to decreased capacity (and demand), transport providers are losing
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 453

huge amounts of revenue. San Francisco’s BART system, for instance, lost 88% of its rider-
ship and needed emergency funding (Welle & Avelleda, 2020). In countries where govern-
ment support for transport operators is low, implementing social distancing in vehicles
has driven up the price of tickets for those who must continue to travel to work,
putting their livelihoods at risk or stranding them. For example, in Abuja, Nigeria
(Ripples Nigeria, 2020).
In terms of capacity management, ensuring predictable speeds and traffic conditions is
challenging, especially in cities with high congestion (Ardila-Gomez, 2020). Some
countries may not have additional vehicle capacity, e.g. Lima, Peru (Ecomobility.org,
2020b).
It is still unclear whether some hygiene measures in transport provide adequate pro-
tection against COVID-19 and whether they are sustainable over time because of man-
power and logistical issues (Musselwhite et al., 2020) and their potential to create
bacterial resistance (Yam, 2020). Furthermore, compliance with rules such as mandatory
facemasks, or acceptance of surveillance varies between countries. In Korea, for
example, people are accustomed to wearing masks, are not as concerned with individual
freedom or privacy, compared to other countries (Sonn, 2020). People may not always
follow advice for wearing facemasks, e.g. in Ghana (Dzisi & Dei, 2020).

3.3.4 Impacts of combined measures

Since measures are often introduced in combination (Parady et al., 2020), or in rapid suc-
cession (IMF, 2020), the contribution of individual measures is often not easy to deter-
mine. For example, for public transport, the combination of closing activities or
workplaces, restrictions on public transport itself and the perceived risk of travellers
even when restrictions are lifted or voluntary reductions have impacted ridership
(Hörcher et al., 2020; IMF, 2020). While literature on economic impacts shows diverse
effects without a clear pattern as yet, for social impacts, a large portion of the literature
we found concerned impacts on physical health (including viral spread), psychological
or mental health and impacts on travel behaviour or mobility patterns.
Many studies investigate the direct impact of combined COVID-19 measures on mobi-
lity behaviours in different countries (e.g. Hu & Chen, 2021; Shibayama et al., 2021).
However, in terms of the effectiveness of individual measures, very little literature is avail-
able. The few studies that exist on psychological health impacts of combined COVID-19
measures, e.g. (Zhang et al., 2020) suggest that a lack of social interaction negatively
impacts mental health or well-being impacts. With regard to physical health, various
studies, e.g. (Chinazzi et al., 2020; Tian et al., 2020) have investigated the impact of
social distancing or lockdown measures on the spread of the virus or reproduction
number, and there is a general consensus that such measures have been effective
(Hörcher et al., 2020). As a general rule, with a combination of measures, the effect on
social distancing and viral spread depends on the degree of stringency of the measures,
with stricter combinations of measures having more effects (Hussain, 2020). Early results
suggest that in New Zealand or Taiwan, extremely low death rates were attributable to
early and stringent combined measures (Summers et al., 2020). In low to middle-
income countries the combined measures may be less effective due to a lack of proper
implementation, e.g. in Indonesia (Suraya, Nurmansyah, Rachmawati, Al Aufa, & Koire,
2020) or lack of compliance e.g. in Brazil (Jorge et al., 2020).
454 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

A few studies attempt to disentangle the effectiveness of individual measures at

curbing the spread of the virus. One study (Askitas et al., 2021) using data from 175
countries, found that since contact reducing measures were often introduced first, any
restrictions introduced afterwards, e.g. movement or public transport restrictions did
not make much difference because human mobility was already reduced. Studies in
the U.S.A. (Courtemanche et al., 2020; Li et al., 2021) show staying at home/shelter-in-
place measures resulted in the least viral spread, but compliance with measures tends
to drop over time, suggesting that public information measures could be more important
than mobility restrictions for longer term containment of the virus.
Packages of measures that influence mobility behaviour naturally also have environ-
mental effects. First of all, emissions of air pollutants, CO2 and noise are lower when
the volume of traffic decreases. In addition, the spread of the COVID-19 virus has been
shown to be promoted by fine particle concentrations, and so lower concentrations
seem to lead to less virus spread (Magazzino, Mele, & Schneider, 2020) combinations of
measures have reduced energy use in all sectors, including transport. Globally, CO2 emis-
sions from mobility have decreased (Le Quéré et al., 2020).

4 Synthesis, policy relevance and further research

4.1. Synthesis
The results of Section 3.3 show that the categorisation of measures and effects as pre-
sented in Table A1 is appropriate. Almost all literature fits the structure of Table A1. We
did find some additional results, such as the influence of transport (and other) measures
on water quality (Braga, Scarpa, Brando, Manfè, & Zaggia, 2020), but because the influence
of the transport sector on water quality is limited anyway, we did not include that topic in
Table A1 as it falls under “environment”.
Furthermore, the literature mostly shows impacts of (combinations of) measures, often
in only one area, for example the demand for public transport. Reports on combined
effects are lacking, as are integral assessments of the combined effects on the various
areas from Table A1. We did not come across any cost–benefit analyses or multi-criteria
analyses of (combinations of) transport measures.
Many studies report the effects of combinations of measures, making it difficult to
determine the contribution of individual measures, although early results suggest that
the closure of venues and work places has been more effective than mobility restriction
in containing the virus, albeit with subsequent negative impacts on mental health and
well-being.
The studies that report mobility effects only describe the direct effects on, e.g. commu-
ter traffic, and do not elaborate on indirect effects. The theory of constant travel time
budgets shows that, measured over a large group of people, people have a constant
travel time budget (see for example Mokhtarian & Chen, 2004). Perhaps people who
work at home all day are more likely to go out in the evening for social or recreational
reasons, so it is interesting to investigate the influence on total mobility behaviour.
Furthermore, the literature that looks at health effects mainly reports the effects of
transport measures on intermediary health indicators, such as the degree of social distan-
cing or travel behaviour, but not their effects on the actual spread of the COVID-19 virus.
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 455

This is understandable, as it is very difficult to isolate the contribution of transport-related

measures from those of other measures.
In addition, there are few studies that look at the direct and indirect health effects.
Indirect effects include health effects through air pollution, exercise, stress and well-
being. Those studies that have looked at well-being and mental health generally report
a negative impact of travel restriction measures. Measures that lead to more walking
and cycling will, almost by definition, have positive health effects, both through more
exercise and higher levels of wellbeing.
Studies that report economic effects focus on partial direct effects, for instance on the
turnover of the public transport sector, or state of the aviation industry. We found only a
few studies that also looked at indirect effects. Suppose that people stop spending money
on a holiday by plane and spend it on a new bicycle or furniture as an alternative use of
their money, then there are indirect economic effects. The impact of COVID-19 on the GNP
of various countries has been widely reported in popular media, but this obviously con-
cerns all COVID-19 measures, not just those aimed at transport.

4.2. Policy relevance

Due to the above limitations, it is extremely difficult to provide ready-made policy rec-
ommendations on which measures are desirable or not, and in which context. Context
factors include characteristics of a city, region or country, as well as the state of virus
spread. However, it seems plausible to assume that measures that lead to more cycling
and walking (at the expense of the car or public transport) score more positively than
measures that lead to less travel.
Furthermore, it is plausible to assume that measures that entail travel restrictions have
less of a negative impact in regions where good ICT facilities are standard, and where ICT
can more often substitute for on-site activities. For example, a higher percentage of office
jobs leads to less negative impact from travel restrictions than a low percentage of office
jobs (and more jobs in manufacturing, distribution, education and health, for example).
For policy, it is of great importance that extensive research is carried out worldwide
into the complex effects of measures on virus spread (and related health), well-being,
stress, mental health, indirect health effects, economic effects and the environment.
Recent research has shown that citizens may weigh these impacts very differently
(Chorus, Sandorf, & Mouter, 2020). Moreover, it is of great importance to map integral
health effects through different routes, possibly using the concept of QALY (Quality
Adjusted Life Years), and to relate those effects to economic effects, so that policies
aimed at virus spread (in the context of this paper: aimed at the transport sector, but
of course also in general) can be compared to other health policies. We suspect that
the availability of large data sets (big data) will play an important role in future research
on COVID-19 in general and on transport in particular.

4.3. Future research

Future research should include contextual factors, i.e. factors influencing measures and
effects. For instance, based on the literature currently found, transport-related measures
seem to work less well and have more adverse effects in poorer and less developed
456 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

countries, while countries with higher acceptance of surveillance technology may find it
easier to contain the virus. Secondly we still poorly understand the infection risks of trans-
port activities and related measures. This is particularly important because there are indi-
cations that the impact of transport-related measures on virus spread may be less than
previously thought e.g. (Li et al., 2021). Third, the combined effects of measures, as men-
tioned above, are understudied. Fourth, this can also be said for indirect effects e.g.
broader economic effects or longer-term effects and – a fifth topic – the integral health
effects. Finally, we advise more research into all pros and cons of (combinations of)
policy measures, using evaluation frameworks like a cost–benefit analysis, or a multi-cri-
teria analysis. We included grey literature, but with more publications on COVID-19 and
transport, we expect that future literature reviews could rely more on journal publications,
downplaying the role of grey literature.

Acknowledgements
We thank three anonymous reviewers for their useful suggestions. ZonMw, the Netherlands Organ-
ization for Health Research and Development, funded the project leading to this paper.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Funding
This work was supported by Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development [grant
number 10430032010001].

References
ACAPS. (2020, November). COVID-19 government measures dataset. Retrieved from https://www.
acaps.org/covid-19-government-measures-dataset
Adegboyega, A. (2020, November). Coronavirus: Many households lack enough water, soap for hand-
washing – NBS. Retrieved from https://www.premiumtimesng.com/coronavirus/403003-coronavi
rus-many-households-lack-enough-water-soap-for-handwashing-nbs.html
Ahammer, A., Halla, M., & Lackner, M. (2020). Mass gathering contributed to early COVID-19 spread:
Evidence from US sports. Covid Economics, 2 (30).
Aklekar, R. (2020, November). COVID-19: Mumbai needs more bus services for the public, can 1,500
school buses chip in? Retrieved from https://www.mid-day.com/articles/covid-19-mumbai-
needs-more-transport-facility-can-1-500-school-buses-chip-in/22932241
Albers, S., & Rundshagen, V. (2020). European airlines’ strategic responses to the COVID-19 pan-
demic (January-May, 2020). Journal of Air Transport Management, 87(June), 101863. doi:10.
1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101863
Ardila-Gomez, A. (2020, November). In the fight against COVID-19, public transport should be the hero,
not the villain. Retrieved from https://blogs.worldbank.org/transport/fight-against-COVID-19-
public-transport-should-be-hero-not-villain%0A%0A
Askitas, N., Tatsiramos, K., & Verheyden, B. (2021). Estimating worldwide effects of non-pharma-
ceutical interventions on COVID-19 incidence and population mobility patterns using a mul-
tiple-event study. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 1–13. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-81442-x
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 457

Aucejo, E. M., French, J. F., Paola, M., Araya, U., & Zafar, B. (2020). The impact of Covid-19 on student
experiences and expectations: Evidence from a survey (Nber Working Paper Series Gender).
Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w27392
Bartik, A., Cullen, Z., Glaeser, E. L., Luca, M., & Stanton, C. (2020). What jobs are being done at home
during the COVID-19 crisis? Evidence from firm-level surveys. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/
ssrn.3634983
BBC News. (2020, November). Coronavirus: Social distancing “impossible” on London commute. Retrieved
from https://www-bbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-52645366
Beck, M. J., Hensher, D. A., & Wei, E. (2020). Slowly coming out of COVID-19 restrictions in Australia:
Implications for working from home and commuting trips by car and public transport. Journal of
Transport Geography, 88(August), 102846. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102846
Benita, F. (2021). Human mobility behavior in COVID-19: A systematic literature review and biblio-
metric analysis. Sustainable Cities and Society, 70(April), 102916. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2021.102916
Bin, E., Andruetto, C., Susilo, Y., & Pernestål, A. (2021). The trade-off behaviours between virtual and
physical activities during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic period. European Transport
Research Review, 13(1), doi:10.1186/s12544-021-00473-7
Bol, D. (2020, November). Pop-up bus lanes set for Scottish towns and cities to encourage commuters
to avoid cars. Retrieved from https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18588188.pop-up-bus-
lanes-set-scottish-towns-cities-encourage-commuters-avoid-cars/
Bonaccorsi, G., Pierri, F., Cinelli, M., Flori, A., Galeazzi, A., Porcelli, F., … Pammolli, F. (2020). Economic
and social consequences of human mobility restrictions under COVID-19. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
Braga, F., Scarpa, G. M., Brando, V. E., Manfè, G., & Zaggia, L. (2020). COVID-19 lockdown measures
reveal human impact on water transparency in the Venice lagoon. Science of The Total
Environment, 736, 139612. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139612
Buehler, R., & Pucher, J. (2021). COVID-19 impacts on cycling, 2019–2020. Transport Reviews, 1–8.
doi:10.1080/01441647.2021.1914900
Burroughs, D. (2020, April). Rail industry faces strong growth post-coronavirus, UBS says. Retrieved
from https://www.railjournal.com/policy/rail-industry-to-expect-strong-growth-post-coronavirus-
ubs-says/
Carlson, J. (2020). NYC adds 20 miles of busways and bus lanes, 40 miles short of the MTA’s request.
Retrieved from https://gothamist.com/news/nyc-adds-20-miles-busways-and-bus-lanes-40-mile
s-short-mtas-request
Cartenì, A., Di Francesco, L., & Martino, M. (2021). The role of transport accessibility within the spread
of the coronavirus pandemic in Italy. Safety Science, 133(September 2020), 104999. doi:10.1016/j.
ssci.2020.104999
Chang, H.-H., & Meyerhoefer, C. (2020). COVID-19 and the demand for online food shopping services:
Empirical evidence from Taiwan. (NBER Working Paper No. 27427).
Chen, S. (2020). Coronavirus can travel twice as far as official ‘safe distance’ and stay in air for 30 min,
Chinese study finds. Retrieved from https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3074351/
coronavirus-can-travel-twice-far-official-safe-distance-and-stay
Chinazzi, M., Davis, J. T., Ajelli, M., Gioannini, C., Litvinova, M., Merler, S., … Vespignani, A. (2020). The
effect of travel restrictions on the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak.
Science, 368(6489), 395–400. doi:10.1126/science.aba9757
Chorus, C., Sandorf, E. D., & Mouter, N. (2020). Diabolic dilemmas of COVID-19: An empirical study
into Dutch society ‘ s trade-offs between health impacts and other effects of the lockdown.
Munich Personal RePEc Archive, (100575).
Chui, J. (2020). Impact of coronavirus to new car purchase in China. Ipsos, (March). Retrieved from
https://www.ipsos.com/en/impact-coronavirus-new-car-purchase-china
Cochran, A. L. (2020). Impacts of COVID-19 on access to transportation for people with disabilities.
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 8(September), 100263. doi:10.1016/j.trip.
2020.100263
458 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

Courtemanche, C., Garuccio, J., Le, A., Pinkston, J., & Yelowitz, A. (2020). Strong social distancing
measures in the United States reduced the covid-19 growth rate. Health Affairs, 39(7), 1237–
1246. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00608
de Haas, M., Faber, R., & Hamersma, M. (2020). How COVID-19 and the Dutch ‘intelligent lockdown’
change activities, work and travel behaviour: Evidence from longitudinal data in the Netherlands.
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 6, 100150. doi:10.1016/j.trip.2020.100150
Dhaval, D., Friedson, A., Matsuzawa, K., & Sabia, J. (2020). When do shelter-in-place orders fight covid-
19 best? Policy heterogeneity across states and adoption time (NBER Working Paper Series)
Dunford, D., Dale, B., Stylianou, N., Lowther, E., Ahmed, M., & Arenas, I. d. l. T. (2020, May).
Coronavirus: The world in lockdown in maps and charts. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/
news/world-52103747
Dzisi, E. K. J., & Dei, O. A. (2020). Adherence to social distancing and wearing of masks within public
transportation during the COVID 19 pandemic. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary
Perspectives, 7, 100191. doi:10.1016/j.trip.2020.100191
Ecomobility.org. (2020a). COVID-19-focus-on-cities-and-transport-responses-south-east-asia. Retrieved
from https://ecomobility.org/COVID-19-focus-on-cities-and-transport-responses-south-east-asia/
Ecomobility.org. (2020b, November). Transport responses South America. Retrieved from https://
ecomobility.org/COVID-19-focus-on-cities-and-transport-responses-south-america/
Elsa, E. (2020, November). The human cost of India’s coronavirus lockdown: Deaths by hunger, starvation,
suicide and more. Retrieved from https://gulfnews.com/world/asia/india/the-human-cost-of-indias-
coronavirus-lockdown-deaths-by-hunger-starvation-suicide-and-more-1.1586956637547
Eurofound. (2020). Covid-19 data. Retrieved from http://eurofound.link/COVID19data
European Union. (2021, May). Reopen EU. Retrieved from https://reopen.europa.eu/en
Fairlie, R. (2020). The impact of covid-19 on small business owners: Continued losses and the partial
rebound in May 2020. National Bureau of Economic Research, (July(May)). doi:10.1017/
CBO9781107415324.004
FLOW. (2018). Walking, cycling and congestion, (635998).
Friedson, A., McNichols, D., Sabia, J., & Dave, D. (2020). Did California’s shelter-In-place order work?
Early coronavirus-related public health effects. National Bureau of Economic Research. doi:10.
3386/w26992
Gkiotsalitis, K., & Cats, O. (2020). Public transport planning adaption under the COVID-19 pandemic
crisis: Literature review of research needs and directions. Transport Reviews. doi:10.1080/
01441647.2020.1857886
Google. (2021a, May). Google IGO list. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aQj-
MOSep_2S5yja_IxDRpRwqdhMXzxzTmtDZO4UK40/edit?hl=en&hl=en#gid=0
Google. (2021b, May). Google IGO search engine. Retrieved from https://cse.google.com/cse/home?
cx=006748068166572874491:55ez0c3j3ey
Hale, T., Petherick, A., Phillips, T., & Webster, S. (2020). Variation in government responses to COVID-19
(Working Paper). Retrieved from www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/covidtracker
Hamburg, (City of). (2020). Verstärkung stark beanspruchter Linien / Taxis & MOIA verstärken
Nachtverkehr. Retreived from https://www.hamburg.de/pressearchiv-fhh/13768850/2020-03-29-
bwvi-bus-und-bahn/?fbclid=IwAR23HFXo5GtNM7-BVE4K3qjxLzxRve17TvlCtIWD5Dg95AQ_
H7q9Eg-U1Dk
Hensher, D., & Beck, M. (2020). COVID has proved working from home is the best policy to beat con-
gestion. Retrieved May 26, 2021, from https://theconversation.com/covid-has-proved-working-
from-home-is-the-best-policy-to-beat-congestion-148926
Hensher, D. A., Wei, E., Beck, M. J., & Balbontin, C. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on cost outlays for car
and public transport commuting - The case of the greater Sydney metropolitan area after three
months of restrictions. Transport Policy, 101(December 2020), 71–80. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.12.003
Hörcher, D., Singh, R., & Graham, D. J. (2020). Social distancing in public transport: Mobilising new
technologies for demand management under the COVID-19 crisis. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.
2139/ssrn.3713518. (0123456789).
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 459

Hotle, S., & Mumbower, S. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on domestic U.S. Air travel operations and
commercial airport service. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 9(December
2020), 100277. doi:10.1016/j.trip.2020.100277
Hu, S., & Chen, P. (2021). Who left riding transit? Examining socioeconomic disparities in the impact
of COVID-19 on ridership. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 90
(December 2020), 102654. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2020.102654
Hussain, A. H. M. B. (2020). Stringency in policy responses to covid-19 pandemic and social distan-
cing behavior in selected countries. SSRN Electronic Journal, (April). doi:10.2139/ssrn.3586319
IATA. (2020). Preventing spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): guideline for airports: Fourth
edition, 2019. Retrieved from https://www.iata.org/contentassets/7e8b4f8a2ff24bd5a6edcf380
c641201/airport-preventing-spread-of-coronavirus-disease-2019.pdf
IBM. (2020, November). IBM study: COVID-19 is significantly altering U.S. consumer behavior and plans
post-crisis. Retrieved from https://newsroom.ibm.com/2020-05-01-IBM-Study-COVID-19-Is-
Significantly-Altering-U-S-Consumer-Behavior-and-Plans-Post-Crisis
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). (2020, June). Effects of novel coronavirus (COVID-19)
on civil aviation: Economic impact analysis air transport bureau contents. Retrieved from https://
www.icao.int/sustainability/Documents/COVID-19/ICAO_Coronavirus_Econ_Impact.pdf
International Energy Agency (IEA). (2020). Changes in transport behaviour during the Covid-19 crisis.
Retrieved November 25, 2020, from https://www.iea.org/articles/changes-in-transport-behavio
ur-during-the-COVID-19-crisis
International Monetary Fund (IMF). (2020). The great lockdown: Dissecting The economic effects;
World Economic Outlook, chapter 2, October 2020. World Economic Outlook, 2 (October), 65–84.
Jorge, D. C. P., Rodrigues, M. S., Silva, M. S., Cardim, L. L., da Silva, N. B., Silveira, I. H., … Oliveirac, J. F.
(2020). Assessing the nationwide impact of COVID-19 mitigation policies on the transmission rate
of SARS-CoV-2 in Brazil. MedRxiv. doi:10.1101/2020.06.26.20140780
Kamga, C., & Eickemeyer, P. (2021). Slowing the spread of COVID-19: Review of “social distancing”
interventions deployed by public transit in the United States and Canada. Transport Policy, 106
(March), 25–36. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.03.014
Katrakazas, C., Michelaraki, E., Sekadakis, M., & Yannis, G. (2020). A descriptive analysis of the effect of
the COVID-19 pandemic on driving behavior and road safety. Transportation Research
Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 7, 100186. doi:10.1016/j.trip.2020.100186
Klein, B., LaRock, T., McCabe, S., Torres, L., Privitera, F., Lake, B., … Vespignani, A. (2020). Assessing
changes in commuting and individual mobility in major metropolitan areas in the United States
during the COVID-19 outbreak. Retrieved from https://www.networkscienceinstitute.org/
publications/assessing-changes-in-commuting-and-individual-mobility-in-major-metropolitan-
areas-in-the-united-states-during-the-covid-19-outbreak
Lades, L. K., Laffan, K., Daly, M., & Delaney, L. (2020). Daily emotional well-being during the COVID-19
pandemic. British Journal of Health Psychology, 1–10. doi:10.1111/bjhp.12450
Lawrie, I., & Stone, J. (2020, November). How to avoid cars clogging our cities during coronavirus recov-
ery. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/how-to-avoid-cars-clogging-our-cities-during-
coronavirus-recovery-140744
Lee, D., & Lee, J. (2020). Testing on the move: South Korea’s rapid response to the COVID-19 pan-
demic. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 5, 100111. doi:10.1016/j.trip.2020.
100111
Le Quéré, C., Jackson, R. B., Jones, M. W., Smith, A. J. P., Abernethy, S., Andrew, R. M., … Peters, G. P.
(2020). Temporary reduction in daily global CO2 emissions during the COVID-19 forced confine-
ment. Nature Climate Change, 1–8. doi:10.1038/s41558-020-0797-x
Li, Y., Li, M., Rice, M., Zhang, H., Sha, D., Li, M., … Yang, C. (2021). The impact of policy measures on
human mobility, COVID-19 cases, and mortality in the US: A spatiotemporal perspective.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(3), 1–25. doi:10.3390/
ijerph18030996
Linka, K., Peirlinck, M., Sahli Costabal, F., & Kuhl, E. (2020). Outbreak dynamics of COVID-19 in Europe
and the effect of travel restrictions. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical
Engineering, 1–8. doi:10.1080/10255842.2020.1759560
460 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

Magazzino, C., Mele, M., & Schneider, N. (2020). The relationship between air pollution and COVID-
19-related deaths: An application to three French cities. Applied Energy, 279(August), 115835.
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115835
Maji, A., Choudhari, T., & Sushma, M. B. (2020). Implication of repatriating migrant workers on
COVID-19 spread and transportation requirements. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary
Perspectives, 7, 100187. doi:10.1016/j.trip.2020.100187
Mayor of London. (2020). Mayor and Commissioner set out vision for getting Londoners active.
Retrieved from https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/setting-out-a-vision-for-
getting-londoners-active
Mediahub Seoul. (2020). 코로나19 막아라’ 버스정류소, 손잡이도 방역 소독. Retrieved from http://
mediahub.seoul.go.kr/archives/1272185
Medimorec, N., Enriquez, A., Hosek, E., & Peet, K. (2020). Impacts of COVID-19 on mobility on urban
mobility. 3 (May), 1–23. Retrieved from https://slocat.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/SLOCAT_
2020_COVID-19-Mobility-Analysis.pdf
Mokhtarian, P. L., & Chen, P. C. (2004). TTB or not TTB that is the question: A review and analysis of
the empirical literature on travel time (and money) budgets. Transportation Research Part A, 38(9–
10), 643–675.
Morita, H., Nakamura, S., & Hayashi, Y. (2020). Changes of urban activities and behaviors due to
COVID-19 in Japan. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3594054
Mumtaz, S., Cymerman, J., & Komath, D. (2021). Cycling-related injuries during COVID-19 lockdown:
A north London experience. Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction. doi:10.1177/
19433875211007008. 194338752110070.
Munawar, H. S., Khan, S. I., Qadir, Z., Kouzani, A. Z., & Mahmud, M. A. P. (2021). Insight into the impact
of COVID-19 on Australian transportation sector: An economic and community-based perspec-
tive. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(3), 1–24. doi:10.3390/su13031276
Musselwhite, C., et al. (2020). Editorial JTH 16 –The coronavirus disease COVID-19 and implications
for transport and health. 1(January).
National Association of City Transport Officials (NACTO). (2020a). Designing to move people.
Retrieved from https://nacto.org/publication/transit-street-design-guide/introduction/why/
designing-move-people/
National Association of City Transport Officials (NACTO). (2020b). Rapid response: Emerging practices
for transit agencies. Retrieved November 27, 2020, from https://nacto.org/COVID19-rapid-
response-tools-for-transit-agencies/
Nikitas, A., Tsigdinos, S., Karolemeas, C., Kourmpa, E., & Bakogiannis, E. (2021). Cycling in the
era of COVID-19: Lessons learnt and best practice policy recommendations for a more bike-centric
future.
OECD. (2020a). Cities policy responses. (May), 1–55.
OECD. (2020b). Re-spacing our cities for resilience. International Transport Forum, (May), 1–10.
Retrieved from https://www.itf-oecd.org/covid-19
O’Sullivan, F. (2020, December). In Japan and France, riding transit looks surprisingly safe. Retrieved from
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-09/japan-and-france-find-public-transit-seems-
safe
Parady, G., Taniguchi, A., & Takami, K. (2020). Analyzing risk perception and social influence effects
on self-restriction Behavior in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: First results. SSRN
Electronic Journal, 1–30. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3618769
Pedbikeinfo. (2020). Local actions to support walking and cycling during social distancing dataset.
Retrieved from http://pedbikeinfo.org/resources/resources_details.cfm?id=5209
Polis Network. (2020, November). Catalonia launches app to show passengers bus occupancy levels.
Retrieved from https://www.polisnetwork.eu/article/catalonia-launches-app-to-show-passengers
-bus-occupancy-levels/?id=122791
Quaife, M., van Zandvoort, K., Gimma, A., Shah, K., McCreesh, N., Prem, K., … Austrian, K. (2020). The
impact of COVID-19 control measures on social contacts and transmission in Kenyan informal
settlements. MedRxiv, 1–11. doi:10.1101/2020.06.06.20122689
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 461

Richards, T. J., Rickard, B., Nair, S., Wright, A. L., Sonin, K., Driscoll, J., & OECD (2020). Cities policy
responses. Tackling coronavirus (COVID-19) contributing to a global effort. 8(1), 2–25. doi:10.
1016/j.prostaglandins.2020.106408
Richert, J., Martin, I. C., & Schrader, S. (2020). Beyond the immediate crisis: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic
and public transport strategy.
Ripples Nigeria. (2020, November). COVID-19: Transport operators lose N200bn in 3 months.
Retrieved from https://www.ripplesnigeria.com/covid-19-transport-sd-operators-lose-n200bn-in-
3-months/
Rivoli, D. (2020). Traffic increases again as New Yorkers opt for cars over public transport due to pan-
demic. Retrieved from https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2020/05/14/new-yorkers-
opt-for-cars-over-public-transport-in-coronavirus-times-
Sabat, I., Neuman-Böhme, S., Varghese, N. E., Barros, P. P., Brouwer, W., van Exel, J., … Stargardt, T.
(2020). United but divided: Policy responses and people’s perceptions in the EU during the
COVID-19 outbreak. Health Policy. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.06.009
Saladié, Ò, Bustamante, E., & Gutiérrez, A. (2020). COVID-19 lockdown and reduction of traffic acci-
dents in tarragona province, Spain. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 8. doi:10.
1016/j.trip.2020.100218
Salo, J. (2020, November). Beijing tests ‘subway by appointment’ to reduce coronavirus crowding.
Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/03/04/beijing-tests-subway-by-appointment-to-reduce
-coronavirus-crowding/
Sánchez, C., Armando, M., Zanuy, C., Tardivo, A., Martín, C. S., Carrillo Zanuy, A., & Zanuy, A. C. (2020).
Alessio Tardivo Covid-19 impact in transport, an essay from the railways’ systems research perspec-
tive. Retrieved from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Sherwood, H. (2020, November). Coronavirus cycling boom makes a good bike hard to find. Retrieved
from https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/may/09/coronavirus-cycling-boom-makes-
a-good-bike-hard-to-find
Shibayama, T., Sandholzer, F., Laa, B., & Brezina, T. (2021). Impact of covid-19 lockdown on commut-
ing: A multi-country perspective. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 21(1),
70–93. doi:10.18757/ejtir.2021.21.1.5135
Sobieralski, J. B. (2020). COVID-19 and airline employment: Insights from historical uncertainty
shocks to the industry. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 5, 100123. doi:10.
1016/j.trip.2020.100123
Sonn, J. W. (2020, November). Coronavirus: South Korea’s success in controlling disease is due to its
acceptance of surveillance. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-south-
koreas-success-in-controlling-disease-is-due-to-its-acceptance-of-surveillance-134068
Statista. (2020). Leading annoyances to employees while working from home during the coronavirus
outbreak in the United States as of June 2020. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/
statistics/1140404/leading-annoyances-working-from-home-during-coronavirus-us/
Suau-Sanchez, P., Voltes-Dorta, A., & Cugueró-Escofet, N. (2020). An early assessment of the impact
of COVID-19 on air transport: Just another crisis or the end of aviation as we know it? Journal of
Transport Geography, 86(May), 102749. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102749
Summers, D. J., Cheng, D. H. Y., Lin, P. H. H., Barnard, D. L. T., Kvalsvig, D. A., Wilson, P. N., & Baker,
P. M. G. (2020). Potential lessons from the Taiwan and New Zealand health responses to the
COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Regional Health – Western Pacific, 4(August), 100044. doi:10.
1016/j.lanwpc.2020.100044
Sun, X., Wandelt, S., & Zhang, A. (2021a). On the degree of synchronization between air transport
connectivity and COVID-19 cases at worldwide level. Transport Policy, 105(October 2020), 115–
123. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.03.005
Suraya, I., Nurmansyah, M. I., Rachmawati, E., Al Aufa, B., & Koire, I. I. (2020). The impact of large-scale
social restrictions on the incidence of covid-19: A case study of four provinces in Indonesia.
Kesmas, 15(2), 49–53. doi:10.21109/KESMAS.V15I2.3990
Sutherland, M., McKenney, M., & Elkbuli, A. (2020). Vehicle related injury patterns during the COVID-
19 pandemic: What has changed? American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 38(9), 1710–1714.
doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2020.06.006
462 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

Teixeira, J. F., & Lopes, M. (2020). The link between bike sharing and subway use during the COVID-
19 pandemic: The case-study of New York’s Citi bike. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary
Perspectives, 6, 100166. doi:10.1016/j.trip.2020.100166
Tian, H., Liu, Y., Li, Y., Wu, C. H., Chen, B., Kraemer, M. U. G., … Dye, C. (2020). An investigation of
transmission control measures during the first 50 days of the COVID-19 epidemic in China.
Science (New York, N.Y.), 368(6491), 638–642. doi:10.1126/science.abb6105
Tinto, B. (2020). Spreading of SARS-CoV-2 in West Africa and assessment of risk factors. 1–9.
Tirachini, A., & Cats, O. (2020). COVID-19 and public transportation: Current assessment, prospects,
and research needs. Journal of Public Transportation, 22(1). doi:10.5038/2375-0901
Transit. (2020, November). Front-line interactions. Retrieved from https://resources.transit.app/
article/268-front-line-interactions
Vanguard News Nigeria. (2020). Starve or get sick: Africa’s lockdown dilemma. Retrieved from https://
www.vanguardngr.com/2020/04/starve-or-get-sick-africas-lockdown-dilemma/
Van Oort, N., & Cats, O. (2020). Public transport and shared mobility during and after a social distancing
society. TU Delft.
Van Wee, B., & Banister, D. (2016). How to write a literature review paper? Transport Reviews, 36(2),
278–288. doi:10.1080/01441647.2015.1065456
Veryard, D., & Perkins, S. (2018). Integrating urban public transport Systems and cycling. Summary
and conclusions of the ITF roundtable on integrated and Sustainable urban transport 24-25 April
2017, Tokyo. International Transport Forum. Retrieved from https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/
default/files/docs/integrating-urban-public-transport-systems-cycling-roundtable-summary_0.
pdf
Walters, R. (2020). Returning to the new world of work. Robert Walters.
Welle, B., & Avelleda, S. (2020, November). Safer, more sustainable transport in a post-COVID-19 world.
Retrieved from https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/04/coronavirus-public-transport-stimulus-
packages
Wilder-Smith, A., Chiew, C. J., & Lee, V. J. (2020). Can we contain the COVID-19 outbreak with the
same measures as for SARS? The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 20(5), e102–e107. doi:10.1016/
S1473-3099(20)30129-8
Wong, Y. Z. (2020, November). To limit coronavirus risks on public transport, here’s what we can learn
from efforts overseas. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/to-limit-coronavirus-risks-on-
public-transport-heres-what-we-can-learn-from-efforts-overseas-133764
World Health Organisation. (2020). Management of ill travellers at points of entry – international air-
ports, ports and ground crossings – in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak interim guidance.
(February), 1–7.
Yam, E. L. Y. (2020). COVID-19 will further exacerbate global antimicrobial resistance. Journal of
Travel Medicine, 27(6), 1–2. doi:10.1093/jtm/taaa098
Zacher, H., & Rudolph, C. W. (2020). Individual differences and changes in subjective wellbeing
during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. American Psychologist. doi:10.1037/
amp0000702
Zhang, S. X., Wang, Y., Rauch, A., & Wei, F. (2020). Unprecedented disruption of lives and work:
Health, distress and life satisfaction of working adults in China one month into the COVID-19 out-
break. Psychiatry Research, 288(March), 112958. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112958
 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 463

Appendices
Appendix 1: Analytical framework

Table A1. COVID-19 transport measures and their impacts (social, economic, environmental) on
common policy goals.
Policy Goals
Physical health and (Environmental)
Strategy Policy measures safety Mental health Economy Sustainability
Avoid (public and shared transport)
Require closure of non- Reduced transmission Lower subjective Job/income loss Lower GHG
essential services of virus/lives saved well-being and life Business losses emissions and
Less health damage satisfaction levels Student energy use
from air pollution, disadvantage
accidents, noise Online business
growth
Request for tele-activities Higher/lower Reduced /increased Lower GHG
(e.g. work from home, subjective well- productivity emissions and
teleconferences, etc) being and life Income loss energy use
satisfaction levels Higher household
Higher social energy use
inequity
Travel restrictions (e.g. stay- Reduced transmission Lower subjective Job/income loss Lower GHG
at-home requests, travel of virus well-being and life Business losses emissions, energy
restrictions, travel ban, Less health damage satisfaction levels Online business use and noise
curfew) from air pollution, Increased growth pollution
accidents, noise, but psychological Economic Higher household
reduced physical distress segregation energy use
health from
inactivity
Shift (from public or shared transport to other modes to compensate lost capacity)
Promote micromobility Less transmission of Higher subjective Losses for the Lower GHG
(e.g. increase capacity of the virus, and well-being and life transport sector, emissions, energy
bike or scooter sharing; therefore less satisfaction levels especially public use and noise
reallocate street space) damage to health transport, pollution
Less damage to Benefits for
health due to air travellers through
pollution, noise additional
More or less possibilities for
accidents travel
Promote active transport Less transmission of
(e.g. expand bike lanes, the virus, and
reduce speed limit) therefore less
damage to health
Health benefits
through more
exercise
Less damage to
health due to air
pollution, noise
More or less
accidents

(Continued)
464 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

Table A1. Continued.

Policy Goals
Physical health and (Environmental)
Strategy Policy measures safety Mental health Economy Sustainability
Improve (quality and safety of public and shared transport)
Ensure adequate social Reduced transmission Reduced Maintain essential Lower GHG
distance space in public of virus psychological functioning of emissions and
transport distress economy noise pollution
(e.g. maximum number of Increased costs
passenger per vehicle;
clearly mark passenger
spacing requirements in
vehicles/ stations / stops)
Improved hygiene (e.g.
disinfection, facemasks)
Capacity Management (e.g.
advanced ticket purchase,
staggered access
Increased frequency of
public transport via
popup bus lanes;
additional fleet)

Appendix 2: Links between measures and impacts

Figure A1. Links between measures and impacts.

 TRANSPORT REVIEWS 465

Appendix 3: Detailed methodology and search strategy

Our literature review involved two stages. Searches for academic literature (peer reviewed journal
papers only) were performed on Scopus and Google Scholar and searches for grey literature per-
formed with Google searches, between 9 June and 1 October 2020. An update of academic litera-
ture was carried out in May 2021. (Grey literature refers to non-reviewed publications, but still solid
research; such as studies from well-respected non-academic research institutes).

Search terms
Keyword combinations used for academic and grey literature searches were used as follows:

(1) “Covid 19” OR “covid19” OR “COVID-19” OR “coronavirus” OR “SARS-CoV-2”

(2) “Measures” OR “response(s)” OR “roadmap” OR “intervention” OR “strategy” OR “strategies” OR
“transition” OR “recovery” OR “policy” OR “policy response” OR “phase-out” OR “phase-out”
strategy’ OR “exit strategy(ies)”; OR “lifting restrictions” OR “phased lifting”
(3) “transport” OR “transportation” OR “mobility”
(4) “Impact” OR “behaviour” OR “travel” OR “travel behaviour” OR “perceptions” OR “transport” OR
“mobility” OR “mobility”

In each case, we searched for a combination of two or more of these strings. Due to the novelty
of the topic, citations were not considered an important filter.

Search engines, government and news websites

A search of websites was carried out using the google IGO (international governmental organis-
ation) search engine (Google, 2021b) which searches a number of IGOs (Google, 2021a). A search
of websites of other international organisations for information on measures e.g. in the form of
fact sheets or guidelines, was performed. Primary sources were: European Commission/EU sites,
UNECE, ITF, IRU, IMF, ILO, ICAO, IEA, EuroControl, IATA, UNCTAD, UN-Habitat, UN-WTO, WTTC.
Governmental websites in several languages, for individual countries, were searched for reports,
briefings etc. (e.g. ministries of transportation, health, etc.) Additional sites were snowballed from
these sources where appropriate. The application and impacts of COVID-19 measures are still evol-
ving and the academic literature is still catching up. Therefore, news websites or blogs were also
searched as needed in order to create a more up to date picture of the experiences of the measures
in different countries.
Among all sources mentioned, a number of research databases with records of the types of
COVID-19 (transport) measures worldwide were found and searched (Table C1).
Table A2. Databases of COVID-19 transport measures.
Database Description
ACAPS Data on all types of coronavirus measures worldwide (e.g. public health measures, social
distancing, governance) including transport measures.
Oxford OxGCRT Tracks and compares worldwide government responses to COVID-19
EU COVID-19 transport Database on transport measures in member states
measures
IRU Database on impact on freight and passenger transport (updated regularly)
ITF Measures for road passenger and freight transport in ITF member countries
Covid Mobility Works Mobility responses to COVID-19
UNECE Databases on impacts of Covid-19 on road, rail, maritime transport and border crossings
Pedbike Dataset on local actions to support walking and cycling during social distancing

Selection criteria for academic papers

An initial selection of potentially relevant papers was made based on a quick screening and snow-
balling of titles and abstracts appearing in Google Scholar and Scopus search results. Inclusion cri-
teria were then applied to screen the academic papers for relevance:
466 R. SHORTALL ET AL.

. Published March 2020 onwards

. Peer reviewed
. Research article
. English language
. Focus on empirical evidence of impacts of transport measures

Results of the search strategy

Phase 1: In total, 280 relevant grey literature sources were found and these provided the basis for
our analytical framework in which we synthesised the main policy goals and associated measures
from grey literature sources (Appendix 1). Of these sources, 67 were cited in our first submission.
As well as this, 312 academic papers were found in an initial selection of which 172 were considered
relevant based on selection criteria. Of these 51 were cited in our first submission.
Phase 2: After an update in May 2021, 1 new grey literature source was found and 6 grey litera-
ture papers were removed from the text in favour of academic sources. 110 new academic papers
were found, of which 86 were considered relevant, bringing the total number of relevant academic
papers for the entire review to 258.
Table A3. Results of literature search.
Phase 1: June–October 2020s
Grey Academic
Initial selection 279 312
After screening n/a 172
Included in paper 67 51
Phase 2: Update, May 2021
Initial selection 1 110
After screening n/a 86
Included in paper 1 40
Total relevant 280 258
Total included in paper 62 91

The academic literature consisted of mostly studies of the impacts of various COVID-19 measures
(252 papers), with only 6 papers about measures themselves. The 252 papers were categorised
according to the type of impact: social (e.g. health, behaviour, psychological) economic (e.g. unem-
ployment, distributional impacts, informal sector) or environmental (e.g. air and water pollution,
noise, GHGs).