巴西auxílio紧急和严格的社会距离政策:对流动和非工作旅行的影响

L. Barberia, K. Piazza
{"title":"巴西auxílio紧急和严格的社会距离政策:对流动和非工作旅行的影响","authors":"L. Barberia, K. Piazza","doi":"10.14201/rlop.26591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Non-pharmaceutical interventions to increase physical distancing have been instrumental in mitigating the spread of COVID-19. Governments have enacted stringent public health policies that impose limits on mobility outside the household. However, for containment policies to be effective, there is a growing understanding that emergency aid programs must be designed to ensure that the most vulnerable receive financial and in-kind aid resources to support their ability to “stay at home.” In this study, we use survey data from an Oxford \nUSP-FGV collaborative research initiative to empirically assess the effectiveness of these two policies in reducing mobility with an eye to those at-risk or living in conditions of poverty in eight Brazilian capitals. We learn that, in general, neither stringent public health policies and receipt nor promised receipt of the Auxílio Emergencial were effective in limiting mobility outside of the home. We do, however, find limited evidence that receipt or promised receipt of the Auxílio Emergencial marginally limited non-work trips outside of the home, especially in city/state combinations with stringent public health policies. We conclude by discussing the policy implications of our findings.","PeriodicalId":52748,"journal":{"name":"Revista Latinoamericana de Opinion Publica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The auxílio emergencial and stringent social distancing policies in Brazil: the impact on mobility and non-work travel outside the home\",\"authors\":\"L. Barberia, K. Piazza\",\"doi\":\"10.14201/rlop.26591\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Non-pharmaceutical interventions to increase physical distancing have been instrumental in mitigating the spread of COVID-19. Governments have enacted stringent public health policies that impose limits on mobility outside the household. However, for containment policies to be effective, there is a growing understanding that emergency aid programs must be designed to ensure that the most vulnerable receive financial and in-kind aid resources to support their ability to “stay at home.” In this study, we use survey data from an Oxford \\nUSP-FGV collaborative research initiative to empirically assess the effectiveness of these two policies in reducing mobility with an eye to those at-risk or living in conditions of poverty in eight Brazilian capitals. We learn that, in general, neither stringent public health policies and receipt nor promised receipt of the Auxílio Emergencial were effective in limiting mobility outside of the home. We do, however, find limited evidence that receipt or promised receipt of the Auxílio Emergencial marginally limited non-work trips outside of the home, especially in city/state combinations with stringent public health policies. We conclude by discussing the policy implications of our findings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Latinoamericana de Opinion Publica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Latinoamericana de Opinion Publica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14201/rlop.26591\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Latinoamericana de Opinion Publica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14201/rlop.26591","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

增加身体距离的非药物干预措施有助于缓解COVID-19的传播。各国政府制定了严格的公共卫生政策,限制家庭以外的人员流动。然而,要使遏制政策发挥作用,人们日益认识到,紧急援助项目的设计必须确保最弱势群体获得财政和实物援助资源,以支持他们“待在家里”的能力。在本研究中,我们使用牛津大学USP-FGV合作研究计划的调查数据,以经验评估这两项政策在减少流动性方面的有效性,着眼于巴西八个首都的风险人群或生活在贫困条件下的人群。我们了解到,总的来说,无论是严格的公共卫生政策,还是收到或承诺收到Auxílio紧急情况,都不能有效地限制家庭以外的活动。然而,我们确实发现有限的证据表明,Auxílio紧急情况的收据或承诺收据略微限制了家庭以外的非工作旅行,特别是在公共卫生政策严格的城市/州组合中。最后,我们讨论了研究结果的政策含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The auxílio emergencial and stringent social distancing policies in Brazil: the impact on mobility and non-work travel outside the home
Non-pharmaceutical interventions to increase physical distancing have been instrumental in mitigating the spread of COVID-19. Governments have enacted stringent public health policies that impose limits on mobility outside the household. However, for containment policies to be effective, there is a growing understanding that emergency aid programs must be designed to ensure that the most vulnerable receive financial and in-kind aid resources to support their ability to “stay at home.” In this study, we use survey data from an Oxford  USP-FGV collaborative research initiative to empirically assess the effectiveness of these two policies in reducing mobility with an eye to those at-risk or living in conditions of poverty in eight Brazilian capitals. We learn that, in general, neither stringent public health policies and receipt nor promised receipt of the Auxílio Emergencial were effective in limiting mobility outside of the home. We do, however, find limited evidence that receipt or promised receipt of the Auxílio Emergencial marginally limited non-work trips outside of the home, especially in city/state combinations with stringent public health policies. We conclude by discussing the policy implications of our findings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信