IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0003170.html

A comparative analysis of COVID-19 physical distancing policies in South Africa and Uganda

Author

Listed:
  • Sana Mohammad
  • Emma Apatu
  • Lydia Kapiriri
  • Elizabeth Alvarez

Abstract

COVID-19 responses internationally have depended on physical distancing policies to manage virus transmission, given the initial absence of treatments and limitations on vaccine availability. Different jurisdictions have different contexts affecting their responses such as past epidemic experience, ratings of epidemic preparedness, and income level. COVID-19 responses in African countries have not been well-studied. A qualitative multiple embedded case study design was used to examine the COVID-19 policies in South Africa and Uganda from January 2020 to November 2021. This study included a documentary review using government websites and reports, news articles, and peer-reviewed journal articles to obtain data on policy responses and contextual factors. Epidemiological data were collected from public sources. Key informant interviews with relevant stakeholders were used to confirm findings and cover missing information. A comparative analysis was conducted to explore differences in implementation of different types of physical distancing policies and potential consequences of lifting or prolonging public health measures. South African and Ugandan policy responses included physical distancing measures such as lockdown, international travel bans, school closures, public transportation measures, and curfew, in addition to socioeconomic relief programs and vaccinations. Differences between jurisdiction policy responses existed in terms of overarching strategy, timing, and stringency. This study provided in-depth comparisons of COVID-19 policy responses and relevant contextual factors in South Africa and Uganda. The study showed how contextual factors such as population age, geographic distribution, and recent epidemic response experience can influence COVID-19 transmission and response. The study also showed differences in overall strategy, timing, and strictness of epidemic management policies in these jurisdictions. These findings suggest it may be important to have sustained, strict measures to limit the spread of COVID-19 and manage the course of a pandemic, which need to be further explored alongside other important social and economic pandemic outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Sana Mohammad & Emma Apatu & Lydia Kapiriri & Elizabeth Alvarez, 2024. "A comparative analysis of COVID-19 physical distancing policies in South Africa and Uganda," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(7), pages 1-27, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0003170
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0003170
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0003170&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003170?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wang, Di & Mao, Zhifei, 2021. "A comparative study of public health and social measures of COVID-19 advocated in different countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(8), pages 957-971.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xiaojing Li & Xiangping Tan, 2025. "Framing government during COVID-19 pandemic: comparing Sino-US newspapers in issue attention cycle and hierarchical government representation," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Zhao, Junying & Kim, Myongjin & Westbrook, Gabrielle & Bratzler, Dale W, 2022. "A comparative study of COVID-19 emergency funds allocated to the health sector: US, UK, and Canada," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(6), pages 493-503.
    3. Williams, Iestyn & Kapiriri, Lydia & Vélez, Claudia-Marcela & Aguilera, Bernardo & Danis, Marion & Essue, Beverley & Goold, Susan & Noorulhuda, Mariam & Nouvet, Elysee & Razavi, Donya & Sandman, Lars, 2024. "How did European countries set health priorities in response to the COVID-19 threat? A comparative document analysis of 24 pandemic preparedness plans across the EURO region," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    4. Ming-Sin Choong & Ying-Che Hsieh & Chan-Yuan Wong, 2024. "Resilient or Resistant: Pandemic Crisis and Early Observations of Different Preventive Capabilities from Cumulativeness of Scientific Research Points of View," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 11976-12005, September.
    5. Broihanne, Marie-Hélène & Plotkina, Daria & Kleimeier, Stefanie & Göritz, Anja S. & Hoffmann, Arvid O.I., 2025. "Corrigendum to “How COVID-19 illness perceptions and individual shocks are associated with trust during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, France, Germany, and South Africa” [Health policy (2024) 105178]," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Di Wang & Jiahui Lu, 2022. "How News Agencies’ Twitter Posts on COVID-19 Vaccines Attract Audiences’ Twitter Engagement: A Content Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-20, February.
    7. Kulle, Anna-Corinna & Schumacher, Stefanie & von Bieberstein, Frauke, 2026. "Prosocial versus self-interested appeals in offline health communication: A randomized trial of framed messages during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    8. Jimmy Martin-Delgado & Aurora Mula & Rafael Manzanera & Jose Joaquin Mira, 2022. "Measuring the Impact of Future Outbreaks? A Secondary Analysis of Routinely Available Data in Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-14, October.
    9. Przemysław Śleszyński & Paulina Legutko-Kobus & Mark Rosenberg & Viktoriya Pantyley & Maciej J. Nowak, 2022. "Assessing Urban Policies in a COVID-19 World," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-19, April.
    10. Wang, Binhua & Ping, Yuan, 2022. "A comparative analysis of COVID-19 vaccination certificates in 12 countries/regions around the world: Rationalising health policies for international travel and domestic social activities during the pandemic," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(8), pages 755-762.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0003170. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.