Abstract

BackgroundAfter the lockdown of Wuhan on January 23, 2020, the government used community-based pandemic prevention and control as the core strategy to fight the pandemic, and explored a set of standardized community pandemic prevention measures that were uniformly implemented throughout the city. One month later, the city announced its first lists of “high-risk” communities and COVID-19-free communities. Under the standardized measures of pandemic prevention and mitigation, why some communities showed a high degree of resilience and effectively avoided escalation, while the situation spun out of control in other communities? This study investigated: 1) key factors that affect the effective response of urban communities to the pandemic, and 2) types of COVID-19 susceptible communities.MethodsThis study employs the crisp-set qualitative comparative analysis method to explore the influencing variables and possible causal condition combination paths that affect community resilience during the pandemic outbreak. Relying on extreme-case approach, 26 high-risk communities and 14 COVID-19 free communities were selected as empirical research subjects from the lists announced by Wuhan government. The community resilience assessment framework that evaluates the communities’ capacity on pandemic prevention and mitigation covers four dimensions, namely spatial resilience, capital resilience, social resilience, and governance resilience, each dimension is measured by one to three variables.ResultsThe results of measuring the necessity of 7 single-condition variables found that the consistency index of “whether the physical structure of the community is favorable to virus transmission” reached 0.9, which constitutes a necessary condition for COVID-19 susceptible communities. By analyzing the seven condition configurations with high row coverage and unique coverage in the obtained complex solutions and intermediate solutions, we found that outbreaks are most likely to occur in communities populated by disadvantaged populations. However, if lacking spatial-, capital-, and governance resilience, middle-class and even wealthy communities could also become areas where COVID-19 spreads easily.ConclusionsThree types of communities namely vulnerable communities, alienated communities, and inefficient communities have lower risk resilience. Spatial resilience, rather than social resilience, constitutes the key influencing factor of COVID-19-susceptible communities, and the dual deficiencies of social resilience and governance resilience are the common features of these communities.

Highlights

  • After the lockdown of Wuhan on January 23, 2020, the government used community-based pandemic prevention and control as the core strategy to fight the pandemic, and explored a set of standardized community pandemic prevention measures that were uniformly implemented throughout the city

  • Factor of COVID-19-susceptible communities, and the dual deficiencies of social resilience and governance resilience are the common features of these communities

  • (1)whether the physical structure of the community is favorable to virus transmission(physical structure) (2)whether it is a community populated by vulnerable groups (3)whether it is a young community (4)whether communities have few social organizations (5) whether the number of Party committee branches is small (Party committee) (6)whether it is a non-advanced/demonstrative community (7)whether residents have complained to the community administrators due to their poor implementation of anti-pandemic measures Whether it is a COVID-19 susceptible community

Read more

Summary

Introduction

After the lockdown of Wuhan on January 23, 2020, the government used community-based pandemic prevention and control as the core strategy to fight the pandemic, and explored a set of standardized community pandemic prevention measures that were uniformly implemented throughout the city. Under the standardized measures of pandemic prevention and mitigation, why some communities showed a high degree of resilience and effectively avoided escalation, while the situation spun out of control in other communities? Besides the residents’ committee, each community has got a Party branch (general branch) composed of at least three Party members, and several sub-branches according to the number of Party members in the community These Party branches play an important role in the daily governance of the community, and objectively bring important human resources to the governance of urban communities when the resident committees is seriously insufficient in this issue. In addition to residents’ committees and Party branches, China’s community governance organizations include property management agencies and homeowners’ autonomous organizations, namely homeowners’ committees These four institutions constitute the four carriages of the community governance structure [7]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.