Urban density, household overcrowding and the spread of COVID-19 in Australian cities

Abstract

The UN-Habitat World Cities Report 2020 highlighted that overcrowded housing, not urban density, is the major contributing factor to the spread of COVID-19. The relatively successful ability of densely populated cities such as Seoul, Singapore, Tokyo and New York City to manage virus spread supports this. We hypothesise that, given the complexity of the interaction between people and place, the relative contribution of density and crowding to the spread of infectious diseases may be contingent on local factors. To directly compare the role of urban density and household overcrowding, we examine each in relation to COVID-19 incidence in the three largest cities in Australia, Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, as the pandemic unfolded from July 2021 to January 2022. Using ecological models adjusted for spatial autocorrelation and area-level measures of age and socio-economic factors, we assess the association between population density, overcrowding in homes, and COVID-19 infections in local neighbourhoods. Challenging prevailing assumptions, we find evidence for an effect of both density and overcrowding on COVID-19 infections depending on the city and area within cities; that is, depending on the local context. For example, in the southwestern suburbs of Sydney, the case rate decreases by between 0.4 and 6.4 with every one-unit increase in gross density however the case rate increases by between 0.01 and 9.6 with every one-unit increase in total overcrowding. These findings have important implications for developing pandemic response strategies: public health measures that target either density (e.g., lockdowns and restricted range of travel) or overcrowding (e.g., restricting number of people relative to dwelling, mask-wearing indoors, vaccination prioritisation) must be cognisant of the geographically local contexts in which they are implemented.