essay on the lockdown

• Newsletters

Site search

• Israel-Hamas war
• Home Planet
• 2024 election
• Supreme Court
• All explainers
• Future Perfect

Filed under:

Read these 12 moving essays about life during coronavirus

Artists, novelists, critics, and essayists are writing the first draft of history.

Share this story

• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on Twitter
• Share this on Reddit
• Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: Read these 12 moving essays about life during coronavirus

The world is grappling with an invisible, deadly enemy, trying to understand how to live with the threat posed by a virus . For some writers, the only way forward is to put pen to paper, trying to conceptualize and document what it feels like to continue living as countries are under lockdown and regular life seems to have ground to a halt.

So as the coronavirus pandemic has stretched around the world, it’s sparked a crop of diary entries and essays that describe how life has changed. Novelists, critics, artists, and journalists have put words to the feelings many are experiencing. The result is a first draft of how we’ll someday remember this time, filled with uncertainty and pain and fear as well as small moments of hope and humanity.

At the New York Review of Books, Ali Bhutto writes that in Karachi, Pakistan, the government-imposed curfew due to the virus is “eerily reminiscent of past military clampdowns”:

Beneath the quiet calm lies a sense that society has been unhinged and that the usual rules no longer apply. Small groups of pedestrians look on from the shadows, like an audience watching a spectacle slowly unfolding. People pause on street corners and in the shade of trees, under the watchful gaze of the paramilitary forces and the police.

His essay concludes with the sobering note that “in the minds of many, Covid-19 is just another life-threatening hazard in a city that stumbles from one crisis to another.”

Writing from Chattanooga, novelist Jamie Quatro documents the mixed ways her neighbors have been responding to the threat, and the frustration of conflicting direction, or no direction at all, from local, state, and federal leaders:

Whiplash, trying to keep up with who’s ordering what. We’re already experiencing enough chaos without this back-and-forth. Why didn’t the federal government issue a nationwide shelter-in-place at the get-go, the way other countries did? What happens when one state’s shelter-in-place ends, while others continue? Do states still under quarantine close their borders? We are still one nation, not fifty individual countries. Right?

Award-winning photojournalist Alessio Mamo, quarantined with his partner Marta in Sicily after she tested positive for the virus, accompanies his photographs in the Guardian of their confinement with a reflection on being confined :

The doctors asked me to take a second test, but again I tested negative. Perhaps I’m immune? The days dragged on in my apartment, in black and white, like my photos. Sometimes we tried to smile, imagining that I was asymptomatic, because I was the virus. Our smiles seemed to bring good news. My mother left hospital, but I won’t be able to see her for weeks. Marta started breathing well again, and so did I. I would have liked to photograph my country in the midst of this emergency, the battles that the doctors wage on the frontline, the hospitals pushed to their limits, Italy on its knees fighting an invisible enemy. That enemy, a day in March, knocked on my door instead.

In the New York Times Magazine, deputy editor Jessica Lustig writes with devastating clarity about her family’s life in Brooklyn while her husband battled the virus, weeks before most people began taking the threat seriously:

At the door of the clinic, we stand looking out at two older women chatting outside the doorway, oblivious. Do I wave them away? Call out that they should get far away, go home, wash their hands, stay inside? Instead we just stand there, awkwardly, until they move on. Only then do we step outside to begin the long three-block walk home. I point out the early magnolia, the forsythia. T says he is cold. The untrimmed hairs on his neck, under his beard, are white. The few people walking past us on the sidewalk don’t know that we are visitors from the future. A vision, a premonition, a walking visitation. This will be them: Either T, in the mask, or — if they’re lucky — me, tending to him.

Essayist Leslie Jamison writes in the New York Review of Books about being shut away alone in her New York City apartment with her 2-year-old daughter since she became sick:

The virus. Its sinewy, intimate name. What does it feel like in my body today? Shivering under blankets. A hot itch behind the eyes. Three sweatshirts in the middle of the day. My daughter trying to pull another blanket over my body with her tiny arms. An ache in the muscles that somehow makes it hard to lie still. This loss of taste has become a kind of sensory quarantine. It’s as if the quarantine keeps inching closer and closer to my insides. First I lost the touch of other bodies; then I lost the air; now I’ve lost the taste of bananas. Nothing about any of these losses is particularly unique. I’ve made a schedule so I won’t go insane with the toddler. Five days ago, I wrote Walk/Adventure! on it, next to a cut-out illustration of a tiger—as if we’d see tigers on our walks. It was good to keep possibility alive.

At Literary Hub, novelist Heidi Pitlor writes about the elastic nature of time during her family’s quarantine in Massachusetts:

During a shutdown, the things that mark our days—commuting to work, sending our kids to school, having a drink with friends—vanish and time takes on a flat, seamless quality. Without some self-imposed structure, it’s easy to feel a little untethered. A friend recently posted on Facebook: “For those who have lost track, today is Blursday the fortyteenth of Maprilay.” ... Giving shape to time is especially important now, when the future is so shapeless. We do not know whether the virus will continue to rage for weeks or months or, lord help us, on and off for years. We do not know when we will feel safe again. And so many of us, minus those who are gifted at compartmentalization or denial, remain largely captive to fear. We may stay this way if we do not create at least the illusion of movement in our lives, our long days spent with ourselves or partners or families.

Novelist Lauren Groff writes at the New York Review of Books about trying to escape the prison of her fears while sequestered at home in Gainesville, Florida:

Some people have imaginations sparked only by what they can see; I blame this blinkered empiricism for the parks overwhelmed with people, the bars, until a few nights ago, thickly thronged. My imagination is the opposite. I fear everything invisible to me. From the enclosure of my house, I am afraid of the suffering that isn’t present before me, the people running out of money and food or drowning in the fluid in their lungs, the deaths of health-care workers now growing ill while performing their duties. I fear the federal government, which the right wing has so—intentionally—weakened that not only is it insufficient to help its people, it is actively standing in help’s way. I fear we won’t sufficiently punish the right. I fear leaving the house and spreading the disease. I fear what this time of fear is doing to my children, their imaginations, and their souls.

At ArtForum , Berlin-based critic and writer Kristian Vistrup Madsen reflects on martinis, melancholia, and Finnish artist Jaakko Pallasvuo’s 2018 graphic novel Retreat , in which three young people exile themselves in the woods:

In melancholia, the shape of what is ending, and its temporality, is sprawling and incomprehensible. The ambivalence makes it hard to bear. The world of Retreat is rendered in lush pink and purple watercolors, which dissolve into wild and messy abstractions. In apocalypse, the divisions established in genesis bleed back out. My own Corona-retreat is similarly soft, color-field like, each day a blurred succession of quarantinis, YouTube–yoga, and televized press conferences. As restrictions mount, so does abstraction. For now, I’m still rooting for love to save the world.

At the Paris Review , Matt Levin writes about reading Virginia Woolf’s novel The Waves during quarantine:

A retreat, a quarantine, a sickness—they simultaneously distort and clarify, curtail and expand. It is an ideal state in which to read literature with a reputation for difficulty and inaccessibility, those hermetic books shorn of the handholds of conventional plot or characterization or description. A novel like Virginia Woolf’s The Waves is perfect for the state of interiority induced by quarantine—a story of three men and three women, meeting after the death of a mutual friend, told entirely in the overlapping internal monologues of the six, interspersed only with sections of pure, achingly beautiful descriptions of the natural world, a day’s procession and recession of light and waves. The novel is, in my mind’s eye, a perfectly spherical object. It is translucent and shimmering and infinitely fragile, prone to shatter at the slightest disturbance. It is not a book that can be read in snatches on the subway—it demands total absorption. Though it revels in a stark emotional nakedness, the book remains aloof, remote in its own deep self-absorption.

In an essay for the Financial Times, novelist Arundhati Roy writes with anger about Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s anemic response to the threat, but also offers a glimmer of hope for the future:

Historically, pandemics have forced humans to break with the past and imagine their world anew. This one is no different. It is a portal, a gateway between one world and the next. We can choose to walk through it, dragging the carcasses of our prejudice and hatred, our avarice, our data banks and dead ideas, our dead rivers and smoky skies behind us. Or we can walk through lightly, with little luggage, ready to imagine another world. And ready to fight for it.

From Boston, Nora Caplan-Bricker writes in The Point about the strange contraction of space under quarantine, in which a friend in Beirut is as close as the one around the corner in the same city:

It’s a nice illusion—nice to feel like we’re in it together, even if my real world has shrunk to one person, my husband, who sits with his laptop in the other room. It’s nice in the same way as reading those essays that reframe social distancing as solidarity. “We must begin to see the negative space as clearly as the positive, to know what we don’t do is also brilliant and full of love,” the poet Anne Boyer wrote on March 10th, the day that Massachusetts declared a state of emergency. If you squint, you could almost make sense of this quarantine as an effort to flatten, along with the curve, the distinctions we make between our bonds with others. Right now, I care for my neighbor in the same way I demonstrate love for my mother: in all instances, I stay away. And in moments this month, I have loved strangers with an intensity that is new to me. On March 14th, the Saturday night after the end of life as we knew it, I went out with my dog and found the street silent: no lines for restaurants, no children on bicycles, no couples strolling with little cups of ice cream. It had taken the combined will of thousands of people to deliver such a sudden and complete emptiness. I felt so grateful, and so bereft.

And on his own website, musician and artist David Byrne writes about rediscovering the value of working for collective good , saying that “what is happening now is an opportunity to learn how to change our behavior”:

In emergencies, citizens can suddenly cooperate and collaborate. Change can happen. We’re going to need to work together as the effects of climate change ramp up. In order for capitalism to survive in any form, we will have to be a little more socialist. Here is an opportunity for us to see things differently — to see that we really are all connected — and adjust our behavior accordingly. Are we willing to do this? Is this moment an opportunity to see how truly interdependent we all are? To live in a world that is different and better than the one we live in now? We might be too far down the road to test every asymptomatic person, but a change in our mindsets, in how we view our neighbors, could lay the groundwork for the collective action we’ll need to deal with other global crises. The time to see how connected we all are is now.

The portrait these writers paint of a world under quarantine is multifaceted. Our worlds have contracted to the confines of our homes, and yet in some ways we’re more connected than ever to one another. We feel fear and boredom, anger and gratitude, frustration and strange peace. Uncertainty drives us to find metaphors and images that will let us wrap our minds around what is happening.

Yet there’s no single “what” that is happening. Everyone is contending with the pandemic and its effects from different places and in different ways. Reading others’ experiences — even the most frightening ones — can help alleviate the loneliness and dread, a little, and remind us that what we’re going through is both unique and shared by all.

Will you support Vox today?

We believe that everyone deserves to understand the world that they live in. That kind of knowledge helps create better citizens, neighbors, friends, parents, and stewards of this planet. Producing deeply researched, explanatory journalism takes resources. You can support this mission by making a financial gift to Vox today. Will you join us?

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via

Next Up In Culture

Sign up for the newsletter today, explained.

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

Thanks for signing up!

Check your inbox for a welcome email.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please enter a valid email and try again.

The controversy over Harrison Butker’s misogynistic commencement speech, explained

Raw milk is more dangerous than ever. So why are sales surging?

Teletherapy can really help, and really hurt

The Supreme Court decides not to trigger a second Great Depression

Inside the bombshell scandal that prompted two Miss USAs to step down

What young voters actually care about

COVID-19 Lockdown: My Experience

When the lockdown started, I was ecstatic. My final year of school had finished early, exams were cancelled, the sun was shining. I was happy, and confident I would be OK. After all, how hard could staying at home possibly be? After a while, the reality of the situation started to sink in.

The novelty of being at home wore off and I started to struggle. I suffered from regular panic attacks, frozen on the floor in my room, unable to move or speak. I had nightmares most nights, and struggled to sleep. It was as if I was stuck, trapped in my house and in my own head. I didn't know how to cope.

However, over time, I found ways to deal with the pressure. I realised that lockdown gave me more time to the things I loved, hobbies that had been previously swamped by schoolwork. I started baking, drawing and writing again, and felt free for the first time in months. I had forgotten how good it felt to be creative. I started spending more time with my family. I hadn't realised how much I had missed them.

Almost a month later, I feel so much better. I understand how difficult this must be, but it's important to remember that none of us is alone. No matter how scared, or trapped, or alone you feel, things can only get better.  Take time to revisit the things you love, and remember that all of this will eventually pass. All we can do right now is stay at home, look after ourselves and our loved ones, and look forward to a better future.

View the discussion thread.

Related Stories

Looking back on lockdown days

Art class and self care during the pandemic

We'll Walk Together

A Race to What Finish Line

C 2019 Voices of Youth. All Rights Reserved. 

Essay on Lockdown

Students are often asked to write an essay on Lockdown in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Lockdown

What is a lockdown.

A lockdown is when people must stay where they are, usually due to an emergency. This can happen for different reasons, like a dangerous person in the area or a disease outbreak. During a lockdown, you can’t go to places like school or the park. It’s a rule to keep everyone safe.

Lockdown and Staying Home

In a lockdown, you stay home to avoid getting sick or spreading germs. Schools and shops may close, and you might not see your friends for a while. It’s important to listen to adults and stay inside.

Learning in Lockdown

Even in a lockdown, you can keep learning. Schools might do classes online, so you can study from home. You’ll use a computer or tablet to see your teacher and classmates. It’s different but still a way to learn.

Fun at Home

Lockdown doesn’t mean you can’t have fun. You can play games, read, or do crafts. It’s a chance to spend time with family and try new hobbies. Remember, it’s not forever, just for now.

250 Words Essay on Lockdown

A lockdown is when people must stay where they are, usually in their homes, to stay safe. This can happen when there is a big problem, like a dangerous virus spreading. During a lockdown, schools, offices, and shops can close, and people must work, study, and shop from home if they can.

Why Lockdowns Happen

Lockdowns are used to stop people from getting sick or hurt. When too many people get sick at once, hospitals can get too busy. By staying home, fewer people get sick at the same time, and hospitals can help everyone who needs it.

Life During Lockdown

Life changes a lot in a lockdown. You can’t visit friends or go to the park like before. Many turn to books, games, and the internet to learn and have fun. Families spend more time together, and people find new ways to connect, like video calls.

Challenges of Lockdown

Lockdowns can be hard. People might miss their friends or feel sad and worried. It’s not easy to stay inside for a long time. Some people also worry about their jobs and money if they can’t go to work.

After a Lockdown

When a lockdown ends, things slowly start to open again, like schools and stores. It’s important to be careful and listen to rules to keep everyone safe. Lockdown teaches us to be strong, care for each other, and that by working together, we can handle big challenges.

500 Words Essay on Lockdown

A lockdown is when people are told to stay where they are, usually in their homes, because of an emergency. This could be because of a health crisis, like a big outbreak of sickness, or for safety reasons, like when there’s a danger in the community. During a lockdown, schools, offices, and shops may close, and people have to follow special rules.

Reasons for a Lockdown

Lockdowns are used to keep people safe. For example, if a new sickness is spreading very quickly and making lots of people ill, a lockdown can help stop it from reaching more people. It’s like hitting the pause button on normal life so that the problem doesn’t get bigger.

Life During a Lockdown

When there’s a lockdown, daily life changes a lot. People can’t go to school or work like they usually do. Instead, they might have classes or meetings online. Being at home all the time can be hard. Families have to find new ways to stay busy and happy without leaving their houses. This can mean playing games, reading, or learning new hobbies.

The Good and the Bad

Lockdowns can be helpful because they keep people safe from danger. With fewer people moving around, it’s easier for doctors and nurses to take care of those who are sick. But lockdowns can also be tough. People might miss their friends or family members who don’t live with them. Some people might even feel sad or worried because of all the changes.

Following Rules

During a lockdown, it’s important to follow the rules set by leaders. This usually means staying home unless you need to get something important like food or medicine. Washing hands and keeping clean is also very important to stay healthy. People who work in hospitals or stores might still go to work to help others.

Learning from Lockdown

A lockdown can teach us many things. We learn to be patient and to take care of each other. We also learn how to solve problems in new ways, like studying from home or talking to friends and family online. It shows us that by working together and helping each other, we can get through tough times.

After the Lockdown

When a lockdown ends, things slowly start to go back to normal. Schools and shops open again, and people can go outside more. But it’s important to remember what was learned during the lockdown. We should keep washing our hands well and stay home if we feel sick, so we can keep ourselves and others safe.

Lockdowns are not easy, but they are sometimes necessary to protect everyone’s health and safety. By understanding what a lockdown is, why it happens, and how to deal with it, we can all do our part to help during these times. And when it’s over, we can appreciate being able to go out and see our friends and family even more.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Lithuania
• Essay on Do You Believe In Love At First Sight
• Essay on Doctor Career

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest essay

Teenagers Are Struggling, and It’s Not Just Lockdown

By Emily Esfahani Smith

Ms. Esfahani Smith is a doctoral student in clinical psychology and the author of “The Power of Meaning.” At the beginning of the pandemic, she wrote about how a key to surviving the mental-health trials of isolation is to look for meaning rather than happiness.

When schools shut down last spring, Carson Roubison, a charter school student in Phoenix, was initially relieved. There were some difficulties in those early days at home — when classes went online, Carson and his parents , both public-school teachers, had to share the sole family computer. But Carson’s stress levels fell as school became less demanding during the transition to distance learning.

“I wasn’t aware of the giant impact the pandemic would have,” he said, “so I was excited, to be honest, to have some time off school.”

But things changed in the fall. The academic load went back to prepandemic levels, even though learning was still remote. Carson, a senior, struggled to stay motivated. His mental health suffered. He hoped to attend community college the following fall, but grew increasingly “terrified” that the education he’d received in high school over the past year would leave him unprepared.

“I’m afraid I’m going to get to community college,” he said, “and be held to the same standards as past students, and fail. That’s the biggest source of my anxiety.”

Carson’s story is not unique. The pandemic has taken a toll on the mental health of millions. But adolescents have been hit especially hard. According to a national poll conducted in January by the University of Michigan’s C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital, 46 percent of parents say their teenagers ’ mental health has worsened during the pandemic. More alarmingly, a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that the proportion of 12- to 17-year-olds visiting emergency rooms for mental health reasons rose 31 percent for most of 2020 compared with 2019. And this is all on top of an already existing mental health crisis among young people.

While many experts believe that the reason adolescents are struggling today is that they’re away from friends and school, a closer look at the research reveals a more complicated picture. According to psychologists who study adolescent resilience, one of the biggest threats to the well-being of today’s teenagers is not social isolation but something else — the pressure to achieve, which has intensified over the past year.

Psychologists define resilience as the ability to adapt well to stress. For decades, they have studied why some kids are more resilient in adversity than others. Suniya Luthar , emerita professor of psychology at Columbia’s Teachers College and a leading resilience researcher, believes the pandemic is a “natural experiment” that can help answer that question: When you expose adolescents to an event that changes their lives significantly, how do they cope?

Dr. Luthar began her career studying resilience among urban youth living in poverty in Connecticut in the 1990s. At the urging of one of her students at Yale, where she was teaching, she also started studying teenagers living in middle- and upper-middle-class suburbs like Westport, Conn., where many of the parents are high-achieving professionals who emphasize the value of status and achievement to their children.

Comparing these students with the poor, urban adolescents, she was shocked to discover that the suburban children were doing worse on drug and alcohol abuse. They also had higher rates of anxiety and depression as compared with national norms. Researchers knew that social conditions were important determinants of resilience, but they hadn’t known that living in success-oriented cultures was a risk factor.

In the years since, Dr. Luthar and her colleagues at Authentic Connections , a research group that works to foster resilience in school communities, have studied tens of thousands of teenagers attending “high-achieving schools,” which she defines as public and private institutions where students on average score in the top third on standardized tests. The students in these samples come from a variety of racial, regional and socioeconomic backgrounds. In one group of students Dr. Luthar studied, for example, one-third were members of ethnic and racial minorities and one-quarter came from homes where at least one parent did not attend college.

But regardless of these differences, many of them were struggling in the same way. In a paper published in 2020 in the academic journal American Psychologist, Dr. Luthar and her colleagues — the psychological researchers Nina Kumar and Nicole Zillmer — reviewed three decades’ worth of research findings showing that adolescents at high-achieving schools suffer from symptoms of clinical depression and anxiety at rates three to seven times higher than national norms for children their age.

What’s driving their misery, the research shows, is the pressure to excel in multiple academic and extracurricular pursuits. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation suggest children living in an achievement-oriented culture are at risk for adjustment problems, like those facing more predictable forms of adversity, such as poverty and trauma.

The pandemic offered a rare reprieve for students — at first. Since 2019, Dr. Luthar and her colleagues have surveyed thousands of adolescents each year at public and private schools across the nation. Replicating findings of earlier research, these students reported suffering from anxiety and depression at higher rates than national norms before the pandemic. But when schools closed last spring, something unexpected happened — the well-being of these students actually improved . As classes and exams were canceled, grading moved to pass/fail and extracurricular activity ceased, they reported lower levels of stress, anxiety and depression compared with 2019.

But these improvements were short-lived. Dr. Luthar and her colleagues found that beginning in the fall of 2020, as schoolwork ramped back up, the mental health of adolescents returned to prepandemic levels or worse. According to research that will be published in Social Policy Report, a quarterly publication of the Society for Research in Child Development, the strongest predictor of depression among these students was perceived parental criticism and unreachable standards.

“Even though I’m trying my best, it never really goes the way I wished,” a student Dr. Luthar studied wrote, “and my mother adds stress because she is always saying that I NEED to have a 90 or higher averages in all my classes.”

Other research supports these findings. In a nationally representative study conducted by NBC News and Challenge Success, a nonprofit affiliated with Stanford’s education school, researchers studied over 10,000 high school students in the fall of 2020. Comparing the experience of these students with about 65,000 adolescents surveyed between 2018 and February 2020, these researchers, too, found that many students reported feeling more stressed about school during the fall of 2020 than before the pandemic. A chief cause of their stress: the pressure to achieve.

Nearly half of all students reported that the pressure to do well in school had increased since 2019, and over half said their school-related stress over all had risen. Grades, workload, time management, lack of sleep and college fears were the most commonly cited sources of stress. These findings held across socioeconomically diverse schools. At underresourced schools, students were more likely to report being stressed about family finances, according to Denise Pope, a founder of Challenge Success, but the top stressors were still grades, assessments and college.

“My school is giving too much work,” a 10th grader in this study wrote, “even though times are tough for everyone. At first, this was just a break from school, but now all I feel is stress, anxiety and pain.”

Parents appear to play a big role in this phenomenon. Fifty-seven percent of students said that their parents’ expectations for their performance stayed the same during the pandemic, while 34 percent said their expectations increased. The stereotype of the adolescent aloof from parental influence doesn’t seem to apply to these students, who report feeling more stressed about family pressure than peer pressure.

When Dr. Pope asks parents to define success, they inevitably say that they want their children to be happy and healthy, have loving relationships and give back to society. But when she asks children how they define success, many describe a narrow path: getting good grades, going to college and securing a high-paying job.

Dr. Pope believes the gap is due in part to how parents praise their kids. Many parents reward their children when they perform well, which sends a signal to the kids that the approval and love of their parents depends on how much they’re achieving. So inevitably, if they believe they are falling short of their parents’ expectations, their sense of worth and well-being suffers.

Larger cultural forces are also pushing students to define success narrowly. As inequality rises and two major recessions in the past decade have left millions out of work, many students may feel compelled to climb the ladder to ensure their economic security as adults. College admissions at top-tiered schools has become more selective over the same period of time, leaving students competing harder for fewer spots — only to receive an education that will likely leave them or their parents in debt for many years to come.

If we want more-resilient kids coming out of the pandemic, then we need to heed a lesson of this past year — that the pressure to achieve is crushing the spirits of many young people and should be dialed back. Parents can play a vital role here. They can help ease their children’s anxiety by reminding them that where they attend college will not make or break them — and that getting Bs does not equal failure.

They can encourage them to prioritize their health and well-being by getting enough sleep and making time for play and leisure. And above all, they can teach their children that loss is an inevitable part of life by speaking to them about the grief of the past year. This doesn’t mean parents should necessarily lower their standards. But they might emphasize different benchmarks for achievement, like those they themselves claim to most value for their children — happiness, health and love.

If you are having thoughts of suicide, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255 (TALK). You can find a list of additional resources at SpeakingOfSuicide.com/resources .

Emily Esfahani Smith is the author of “ The Power of Meaning: Finding Fulfillment in a World Obsessed With Happiness .”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram .

• High contrast
• Representative
• Work for UNICEF
• Press centre

Search UNICEF

Things we learned to appreciate more during covid-19 lockdown, curfews helped tomislav’s family appreciate the value of living in an intergenerational household and spending quality time together.

• Available in:

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is of a scale most people alive today have never seen. Lockdowns and curfews to contain the spread of the virus impacted the way children learn, the way their families earn a living, and how safe they feel in their homes and communities. Despite the ongoing threat, countries around the world are starting to lift restrictions. As we question whether we will ever go back to what we once knew to be “normal”, its worth taken a step back to see how we can build on what we have learned to build back a better world for children.

As a journalist, UNICEF photographer Tomislav Georgiev was one of the rare professionals with a permit to go out during the curfews and capture images of the deserted streets of the capital. But he discovered that in times like this, the most valuable images can be found closer to home. He turned his lenses from the outside world to capture photos of his own family with a loving eye. In a household where four generations live together, Tomislav captured scenes of play, family celebrations, sharing, exploring and learning new skills.

“I realized that no matter how much time we think we have; at the end of the day, what I came to appreciate was that we simply don’t spend enough quality time with our families,” says Tomislav.

Days in lockdown were an opportunity for children to reinvent ways of play and learning,  exploring their immediate environment and making the most of what they had available. Building resilience in children is one way we help them to cope in difficult moments.

Curfews were also a time to help children learn responsibility and their role in contributing in   our own way to find a solution to collective problems. “The silent understanding of my children was simply astonishing. We stay home, no questions asked, no demands to go and play with friends. Their lives have completely changed, yet they seem to grasp the importance of their contribution better than most adults,” says Tomislav.

During curfews many learned about the importance of being creative with the scarce resources and limited physical space they had at home. Also, many came to appreciate that small acts of kindness and gratitude to other family members helps to boost emotional wellbeing.

Some even learned new skills but what matters most is learning to appreciate the emotional connections made between different generations.  Its these connections that help us to develop the emotional resilience’s we need to get through stressful times.

“It is true – this crisis has taken its toll on humanity. However, it also provided an opportunity for generations to unite and perhaps begun to shape our younger generations to think differently about their own individual roles and how we as individuals can all contribute in our own way to find a solution to collective problems,” says Tomislav.

UNICEF remains committed to its mission to provide essential support, protection and information as well as hope of a brighter day for every child. UNICEF stands united with one clear promise to the world: we will get through this together, for every child .

Related topics

More to explore.

Ministry of Health, USAID, UNICEF and WHO launch “Protected Together – Vaccines Work” Information and Vaccination Caravan

Children cannot afford prolonged disruptions to learning

COVID-19 vaccine caravan brings information and vaccines closer to citizens

Ministry of Health supported by WHO, UNICEF and USAID is organizing a caravan to bring COVID-19 information and vaccines closer to citizens

What We’ve Learned About So-Called ‘Lockdowns’ and the COVID-19 Pandemic

By Lori Robertson

Posted on March 8, 2022

SciCheck Digest

Plenty of peer-reviewed studies have found government restrictions early in the pandemic, such as business closures and physical distancing measures, reduced COVID-19 cases and/or mortality, compared with what would have happened without those measures. But conservative news outlets and commentators have seized on a much-criticized, unpublished working paper that concluded “lockdowns” had only a small impact on mortality as definitive evidence the restrictions don’t work.

Multiple lines of evidence back the use of face masks to protect against the coronavirus, although some uncertainty remains as to how effective mask interventions are in preventing spread in the community.

Lab tests, for example, show that certain masks and N95 respirators can partially block exhaled respiratory droplets or aerosols, which are thought to be the primary ways the virus spreads.

Observational studies, while limited, have generally found mask-wearing to be associated with a  reduced   risk  of contracting the virus or  fewer   COVID-19   cases  in a community.

A  few   randomized controlled  trials have found that providing free masks and encouraging people to wear them results in a small to moderate reduction in transmission, although these results have  not always  been statistically significant.

Masks should not be viewed as foolproof, as no mask is thought to offer complete protection to the wearer or to others. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that people wear the most protective mask that fits well and can be worn consistently. Loosely woven cloth masks are the least protective. Layered, tightly woven cloth masks offer more protection, while well-fitting surgical masks and KN95 respirators provide even more protection and N95 respirators are the most protective.

Link to this

In the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, as the virus spread around the globe, many countries implemented restrictions on movement and social gatherings in an effort to flatten the curve — or reduce sharp spikes in caseloads to avoid overwhelming health care facilities. Without vaccines or evidence-based treatments, these non-pharmaceutical interventions, or NPIs, were the only public health measures available for months to combat the pandemic.

There have been a lot of studies assessing whether and to what extent so-called “lockdowns” and various NPIs have been effective, and plenty of research that has concluded these measures can limit transmission, or reduce cases and deaths. For instance, a study published in Nature in June 2020 found that “major non-pharmaceutical interventions—and lockdowns in particular—have had a large effect on reducing transmission” in 11 European countries. It estimated what would have happened if the transmission of the virus hadn’t been reduced, finding that 3.1 million deaths “have been averted owing to interventions since the beginning of the epidemic.” The estimate doesn’t account for behavior changes or the impact of overwhelmed health systems.

In May 2020, the same journal published a study that estimated the number of cases in mainland China would have been “67-fold higher” by the end of February 2020 without a combination of non-pharmaceutical interventions.

But one working paper posted online in January — and not peer-reviewed — has gotten a lot of attention in conservative circles for its conclusion that “lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality.” The paper, which is an analysis of other studies, has been touted as a “Johns Hopkins University study,” but it’s not a product of the university’s Bloomberg School of Public Health, whose vice dean — among other public health experts — has criticized the paper.

“The working paper is not a peer-reviewed scientific study,” Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, vice dean of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said in a Feb. 8 statement sent to us in an email. “To reach their conclusion that ‘lockdowns’ had a small effect on mortality, the authors redefined the term ‘lockdown’ and disregarded many peer-reviewed studies. The working paper did not include new data, and serious questions have already been raised about its methodology.”

Sharfstein said that early on “when so little was known about COVID-19, stay-at-home policies kept the virus from infecting people and saved many lives. Thankfully, these policies are no longer needed, as a result of vaccines, masks, testing, and other tools that protect against life-threatening COVID-19 infections.”

The authors of the working paper are economists: Steve H. Hanke , a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute and founder and co-director of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise; Jonas Herby , a special adviser at the Center for Political Studies in Copenhagen, Denmark; and Lars Jonung , a professor emeritus at Sweden’s Lund University.

Fox News published a Feb. 4 story questioning why other mainstream media outlets hadn’t written stories about the working paper, saying there had been “a full-on media blackout,” and “Fox & Friends” co-host Brian Kilmeade asked in a Facebook post , “Will some people get an apology after this?” On Feb. 21, former Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin posted a video to Facebook highlighting the working paper and asking if lockdowns were about “power,” not “safety.”

But the non-peer-reviewed paper isn’t the definitive or final word on lockdowns, and the attention it has received has, in turn, sparked criticism of the paper’s analysis.

Criticisms of the Working Paper

The working paper was a literature review and meta-analysis , meaning it searched the available scientific literature and identified studies that met certain criteria, and then combined similar studies statistically to reach a conclusion. It identified 24 papers, published or posted as of early July 2021, that met its criteria for the meta-analysis — 17 of which were peer-reviewed. Among the criticisms: The paper excluded many relevant studies, broadly defined “lockdown,” and overwhelmingly based one of its headline figures on a study whose conclusions it rejected. That study also didn’t estimate the delayed effect of government restrictions on death rates a few weeks later, according to experts we consulted. Instead, it only assessed the effect of current death rates on current policies.

Excluded research. One of the criticisms is that the working paper excluded a lot of relevant research. The paper said it considered “difference-in-difference” studies, which would compare outcomes in areas or populations that were subject to a restriction with those that were not, and limited its analysis to the impact on mortality. The paper excluded studies that use modeling on mortality, that compare before and after a “lockdown” and that consider the timing of restrictions. Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz , an epidemiologist working on his Ph.D. at the University of Wollongong in Australia, said in a long Twitter thread: “Many of the most robust papers on the impact of lockdowns are, by definition, excluded.”

He called the working paper “a very weak review that doesn’t really show much, if anything.” It excluded “modelled counterfactuals,” which would compare what happened with what would have happened without the intervention. “Because this is the most common method used in infectious disease assessments, this has the practical impact of excluding most epidemiological research from the review,” Meyerowitz-Katz said.

Hanke told us: “Models are fine if they are based on empirical observations,” meaning from experience, “rather than assumptions. In those circumstances, models are able to reliably forecast the real world. But the models used during the pandemic have been inaccurate, as they, for the most part, have not been based on empirical observations but assumptions,” he said in an email. “A prime example of modelers gone astray is the Imperial College London study of March 16, 2020.”

That March 2020 report , early in the pandemic, estimated that 2.2 million lives would be lost in the U.S. in “the (unlikely) absence of any control measures or spontaneous changes in individual behaviour.” As we’ve written before , it wasn’t intended to be a practical estimate, as doing absolutely nothing was, in the author’s words, “unlikely.”

One of the authors of that report has been critical of Hanke’s working paper. Neil Ferguson, director of the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Jameel Institute, Imperial College London, said in a statement that the working paper “does not significantly advance our understanding of the relative effectiveness of the plethora of public health measures adopted by different countries to limit COVID-19 transmission.”

Ferguson said that NPIs “are intended to reduce contact rates between individuals in a population, so their primary impact, if effective, is on transmission rates. Impacts on hospitalisation and mortality are delayed, in some cases by several weeks. In addition, such measures were generally introduced (or intensified) during periods where governments saw rapidly growing hospitalisations and deaths. Hence mortality immediately following the introduction of lockdowns is generally substantially higher than before. Neither is lockdown a single event as some of the studies feeding into this meta-analysis assume; the duration of the intervention needs to be accounted for when assessing its impact.”

Ferguson said because NPIs affect transmission rates, “the appropriate outcome measures to consider are growth rates (of cases or deaths) over time, with appropriate time lags – not total cases or deaths.”

Definition of “lockdown.” The working paper also had a very broad definition of “lockdown”: “Lockdowns are defined as the imposition of at least one compulsory, non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI),” it said. “NPIs are any government mandate that directly restrict peoples’ possibilities, such as policies that limit internal movement, close schools and businesses, and ban international travel.”

The paper did not examine the impact of voluntary behavior or recommendations, as opposed to mandates. “Our definition does not include governmental recommendations, governmental information campaigns, access to mass testing, voluntary social distancing, etc., but do include mandated interventions such as closing schools or businesses, mandated face masks etc.”

The paper then divided the 24 studies it considered into three groups: studies using a stringency index for restrictions, studies on shelter-in-place orders and those looking at specific NPIs. The last category included 11 studies on various measures, including face mask policies and limits on gatherings.

Stringency index studies. The authors examined seven studies on the impact of more severe restrictions, calculating from those studies that, compared with a policy of recommendations, “lockdowns in Europe and the United States only reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average” — the figure that conservatives have cited . But six of the seven studies concluded that lockdown policies helped reduce mortality, and the 0.2% figure is overwhelmingly based on one study that mistakenly estimated the wrong effect, according to economists we consulted. 

The studies in this group used the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker , which looked at government responses worldwide to the pandemic and created a stringency index, measuring how strict the measures were over time. The index is from 0 to 100, with 100 being the most stringent restrictions. For instance, the OxCGRT heat map shows that many countries around the world had stringency levels above 70 in April 2020. 

The working paper calculates mortality impact estimates for each of the seven studies aiming to show the effect of the average mandated restrictions in Europe and the United States early in the pandemic compared with a policy of only recommendations. The paper then calculates a weighted average, giving more weight to studies that said their findings were more precise. Nearly all of the weight — 91.8% — goes to one study, even though the working paper rejects the conclusions of that study. 

That study — coauthored by Carolyn Chisadza , a senior lecturer in economics at the University of Pretoria, and published on March 10, 2021, in the journal Sustainability — looked at a sample of countries between March and September 2020 and concluded: “Less stringent interventions increase the number of deaths, whereas more severe responses to the pandemic can lower fatalities.”

The working paper claims the researchers’ conclusion is incorrect — but it uses the study’s estimates, saying the figures show an increase in mortality due to “lockdowns.”

Chisadza told us in an email that the study showed: “Stricter lockdowns will reduce the rate of deaths than would have occurred without lockdown or too lenient of restrictions.” But Hanke said the data from Chisadza and her colleagues only show that “stricter lockdowns will reduce mortality” relative to “the worst possible lockdown,” meaning a more lenient lockdown that, under the study, was associated with the highest rate of deaths.

We reached out to a third party about this disagreement. Victor Chernozhukov , a professor in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Department of Economics and the Statistics and Data Science Center, along with Professor Hiroyuki Kasahara and Associate Professor Paul Schrimpf , both with the Vancouver School of Economics at the University of British Columbia — the authors of another study that was included in the working paper — looked at the Chisadza study and provided FactCheck.org with a peer review of it . They found the Chisadza study only measured the correlation between current death growth rates and current policies. It did not show the lagged effect of more stringent policies, implemented three weeks prior, on current death growth rates, which is what one would want to look at to evaluate the effectiveness of “lockdowns.”

In an email and in a phone interview, Chernozhukov told us the Chisadza study made an “honest mistake.” He said the working paper is “deeply flawed” partly because it relies heavily on a study that “estimates the wrong effect very precisely.”

In their review, Chernozhukov, Kasahara and Schrimpf write that the Chisadza et al. study “should be interpreted as saying that the countries currently experiencing high death rates (or death growth rates) are more likely to implement more stringent current policy. That is the only conclusion we can draw from [the study], because the current policy can not possibly influence the current deaths,” given the several weeks of delay between new infections and deaths.

The effect that should be examined for the meta-analysis is “the effect of the previous (e.g., 3 week lagged) policy stringency index on the current death growth rates.”

Chernozhukov, Kasahara and Schrimpf conducted a “quick reanalysis of similar data” to the Chisadza study, finding results that “suggest that more stringent policies in the past predict lower death growth rates.” Chernozhukov said much more analysis would be needed to further characterize this effect, but that it is “actually quite substantial.”

If the Chisadza study were removed from the working paper, according to one of the paper’s footnotes, the result would be a weighted average reduction in mortality of 3.5%, which Hanke said doesn’t change the “overall conclusions.” He said it “simply demonstrates the obvious fact that the conclusions contained in our meta-analysis are robust.”

But experts have pointed out other issues with the meta-analysis. Chernozhukov also said the paper “excluded a whole bunch of studies,” including synthetic control method studies, which evaluate treatment effects. He also questioned the utility of looking at a policy index that considers the U.S. as a whole, lumping all the states together. He said the meta-analysis is “not credible at all.”

Among the other six stringency index studies included in the meta-analysis, only one concluded that its findings suggested “lockdowns” had zero effect on mortality. In a review of 24 European countries’ weekly mortality rates for the first six months of 2017-2020, the study, published in CESifo Economic Studies , found “no clear association between lockdown policies and mortality development.” The author and Herby , one of the authors of the working paper, have written for the American Institute for Economic Research , which facilitated the controversial Great Barrington Declaration , an October 2020 statement advocating those at low risk of dying from COVID-19 “live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection,” while those at “highest risk” are protected.

The other studies found lockdown policies helped COVID-19 health outcomes. For instance, a CDC study published in the agency’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report in January 2021, on the experience of 37 European countries from Jan. 23 to June 30, 2020, concluded that “countries that implemented more stringent mitigation policies earlier in their outbreak response tended to report fewer COVID-19 deaths through the end of June 2020. These countries might have saved several thousand lives relative to countries that implemented similar policies, but later.”

A working paper from Harvard University’s Center for International Development , which looked at 152 countries from the beginning of the pandemic until Dec. 31, 2020, found that “lockdowns tend to significantly reduce the spread of the virus and the number of related deaths.” But the effect fades over time, so lengthy (after four months) or second-phase “lockdowns” don’t have the same impact.

A study published in World Medical & Health Policy in November 2020 — that looked at whether 24 European countries responded quickly enough — found that the fluctuating containment measures, from country to country and over time, “prohibited a clear association with the mortality rate.” But it said “the implementation speed of these containment measures in response to the coronavirus had a strong effect on the successful mitigation of fatalities.”

Many studies found restrictions worked. Meyerowitz-Katz noted that the working paper authors disagreed with the conclusions of other studies included in the review, pointing to one included in the group of shelter-in-place orders. Meyerowitz-Katz said that study “found that significant restrictions were effective, but is included in this review as estimating a 13.1% INCREASE in fatalities.”

That study, by Yale School of Management researchers, published by The Review of Financial Studies in June 2021 , developed “a time-series database” on several types of restrictions for every U.S. county from March to December 2020. The authors concluded: “We find strong evidence consistent with the idea that employee mask policies, mask mandates for the general population, restaurant and bar closures, gym closures, and high-risk business closures reduce future fatality growth. Other business restrictions, such as second-round closures of low- to medium-risk businesses and personal care/spa services, did not generate consistent evidence of lowered fatality growth and may have been counterproductive.” The authors said the study’s “findings lie somewhere in the middle of the existing results on how NPIs influenced the spread of COVID-19.”

In terms of hard figures on fatality reductions, the study said the estimates suggest a county with a mandatory mask policy would see 15.3% fewer new deaths per 10,000 residents on average six weeks later, compared with a county without a mandatory mask policy. The impact for restaurant closures would be a decrease of 36.4%. But the estimates suggest other measures, including limits on gatherings of 100 people or more, appeared to increase deaths. The authors said one possible explanation of such effects could be that the public is substituting other activities that actually increase transmission of the virus — such as hosting weddings with 99 people in attendance, just under the 100-person limitation.

Another study in the shelter-in-place group is the study by Chernozhukov, Kasahara and Schrimpf, published in the  Journal of Econometrics in January 2021 . It looked at the policies in U.S. states and found that “nationally mandating face masks for employees early in the pandemic … could have led to as much as 19 to 47 percent less deaths nationally by the end of May, which roughly translates into 19 to 47 thousand saved lives.” It found cases would have been 6% to 63% higher without stay-at-home orders and found “considerable uncertainty” over the impact of closing schools. It also found “substantial declines in growth rates are attributable to private behavioral response, but policies played an important role as well.”

The working paper considered 13 studies that evaluated stay-in-place orders, either alone or in combination with other NPIs. The estimated effect on total fatalities for each study calculated by the authors varied quite widely, from a decrease of 40.8% to an increase of 13.1% (the study above mentioned by Meyerowitz-Katz). The authors then combined the studies into a weighted average showing a 2.9% decrease in mortality from these studies on shelter-in-place orders.

Sizable impact from some NPIs. The working paper actually found a sizable decrease in deaths related to closing nonessential businesses: a 10.6% weighted average reduction in mortality. The authors said this “is likely to be related to the closure of bars.” It also calculated a 21.2% weighted average reduction in deaths due to mask requirements, but notes “this conclusion is based on only two studies.”

As with the shelter-in-place group, the calculated effects in the specific NPIs group varied widely – from a 50% reduction in mortality due to business closures to a 36% increase due to border closures. The paper said “differences in the choice of NPIs and in the number of NPIs make it challenging to create an overview of the results.”

“The review itself does refer to other papers that reported that the lockdowns had a significant impact in preventing deaths,” Dr. Lee Riley , chair of the Division of Infectious Disease and Vaccinology at the University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health, told us when we asked for his thoughts on the working paper. “The pandemic has now been occurring long enough that it’s not surprising to begin to see many more reports that now contradict each other. As we all know, the US and Europe went through several periods when they relaxed their lockdowns, which was followed by a resurgence of the cases.”

Riley said that “many of the studies that this review included may suffer from the classic ‘chicken-or-egg’ bias. Whenever there was an increase in cases of deaths, lockdowns got instituted so it’s not surprising that some of the studies showed no impact of the lockdowns. If there was no surge of cases or deaths, most places in the US did not impose restrictions.”

Meyerowitz-Katz noted on Twitter that “the impact of ‘lockdowns’ is very hard to assess, if for no other reason than we have no good definition of ‘lockdown’ in the first place. … In most cases, it seems the authors have taken estimates for stay-at-home orders as their practical definition of ‘lockdown’ (this is pretty common) And honestly, I’d agree that the evidence for marginal benefit from stay-at-home orders once you’ve already implemented dozens of restrictions is probably quite weak.”

But, “if we consider ‘lockdown’ to be any compulsory restriction at all, the reality is that virtually all research shows a (short-term) mortality benefit from at least some restrictions.”

Additional Studies

We’ve already mentioned two studies beyond those in the working paper: the Nature June 2020 study by Imperial College London researchers that estimated interventions in 11 countries in Europe in the first few months of the pandemic reduced transmission and averted 3.1 million deaths; and the Nature May 2020 study that estimated cases in mainland China would have been 67-fold greater without several NPIs by the end of February.

There are many more that aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of various mitigation strategies, not included in the working paper’s analysis.

• A 2020 unpublished observational study — cited in the working paper as the basis for the Oxford stringency index but not included in the analysis — found that more stringent restrictions implemented more quickly led to fewer deaths. “A lower degree of government stringency and slower response times were associated with more deaths from COVID-19. These findings highlight the importance of non-pharmaceutical responses to COVID-19 as more robust testing, treatment, and vaccination measures are developed.” In considering nine NPIs, the authors said the average daily growth rates in deaths were affected by each additional stringency index point and each day that a country delayed reaching an index of 40 on the stringency scale. “These daily differences in growth rates lead to large cumulative differences in total deaths. For example, a week delay in enacting policy measures to [a stringency index of 40] would lead to 1.7 times as many deaths overall,” they wrote.
• A more up-to-date study by many of the same authors, posted July 9, 2021, by the journal Plos One, looked at data for 186 countries from Jan. 1, 2020, to March 11, 2021, a period over which 10 countries experienced three waves of the pandemic. In the first wave in those countries, 10 additional points on the stringency index — in other words more stringent restrictions — “resulted in lower average daily deaths by 21 percentage points” and by 28 percentage points in the third wave. “Moreover, interaction effects show that government policies were effective in reducing deaths in all waves in all groups of countries,” the authors said. 
• A  Dec. 15, 2020, study in Science used data from 41 countries to model which NPIs were most effective at reducing transmission. “Limiting gatherings to fewer than 10 people, closing high-exposure businesses, and closing schools and universities were each more effective than stay-at-home orders, which were of modest effect in slowing transmission,” the authors said. “When these interventions were already in place, issuing a stay-at-home order had only a small additional effect. These results indicate that, by using effective interventions, some countries could control the epidemic while avoiding stay-at-home orders.” The study, like many others, looked at the impact on the reproduction number of SARS-CoV-2, or the average number of people each person with COVID-19 infects at a given time. It notes that a reduction in this number would affect COVID-19 mortality, and that the impact of NPIs can depend on other factors, including when and for how long they are implemented, and how much the public adhered to them.
• A study in  Nature Human Behaviour on Nov. 16, 2020 , considered the impact on the reproduction number of COVID-19 by 6,068 NPIs in 79 territories, finding that a combination of less intrusive measures could be as effective as a national lockdown. “The most effective NPIs include curfews, lockdowns and closing and restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers for an extended period of time. This includes small gathering cancellations (closures of shops, restaurants, gatherings of 50 persons or fewer, mandatory home working and so on) and closure of educational institutions.” The authors said this doesn’t mean an early national lockdown isn’t effective in reducing transmission but that “a suitable combination (sequence and time of implementation) of a smaller package of such measures can substitute for a full lockdown in terms of effectiveness, while reducing adverse impacts on society, the economy, the humanitarian response system and the environment.” They found that “risk-communication strategies” were highly effective, meaning government education and communication efforts that would encourage voluntary behavior. “Surprisingly, communicating on the importance of social distancing has been only marginally less effective than imposing distancing measures by law.”
• Another study in Nature in June 2020 looked at 1,700 NPIs in six countries, including the United States. “We estimate that across these 6 countries, interventions prevented or delayed on the order of 61 million confirmed cases, corresponding to averting approximately 495 million total infections,” the authors concluded. “Without these policies employed, we would have lived through a very different April and May” in 2020, Solomon Hsiang, the lead researcher and director of the Global Policy Laboratory at the University of California at Berkeley, told reporters . The study didn’t estimate how many lives were saved, but Hsiang said the benefits of the lockdown are in a sense invisible because they reflect “infections that never occurred and deaths that did not happen.”
• A more recently published study in Nature Communications in October , by U.K. and European researchers, found that closures of businesses and educational institutions, as well as gathering bans, reduced transmission during the second wave of COVID-19 in Europe — but by less than in the first wave. “This difference is likely due to organisational safety measures and individual protective behaviours—such as distancing—which made various areas of public life safer and thereby reduced the effect of closing them,” the authors said. The 17 NPIs considered by the study led to median reductions in the reproduction number of 77% to 82% in the first wave and 66% in the second wave.
• A February 2021 study in Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science estimated large reductions in infections (by 72%) and deaths (by 76%) in New York City in 2020, based on numerical experiments in a model. “Among all the NPIs, social distancing for the entire population and protection for the elderly in public facilities is the most effective control measure in reducing severe infections and deceased cases. School closure policy may not work as effectively as one might expect in terms of reducing the number of deceased cases,” the authors said.

Near the end of his lengthy Twitter thread on the working paper, Meyerowitz-Katz said he agrees that “a lot of people originally underestimated the impact of voluntary behaviour change on COVID-19 death rates – it’s probably not wrong to argue that lockdowns weren’t as effective as we initially thought.” He pointed to the Nature Communications study mentioned above, showing less of an impact from NPIs in a second wave of COVID-19 and positing individual safety behaviors were playing more of a role in that second wave.

“HOWEVER, this runs both ways,” Meyerowitz-Katz said. “[I]t is also quite likely that lockdowns did not have the NEGATIVE impact most people propose, because some behaviour changes were voluntary!”

He and others examined whether lockdowns were more harmful than the pandemic itself in a 2021 commentary piece in BMJ Global Health . They concluded that “government interventions, even more restrictive ones such as stay-at-home orders, are beneficial in some circumstances and unlikely to be causing harms more extreme than the pandemic itself.” Analyzing excess mortality suggested that “ lockdowns are not associated with large numbers of deaths in places that avoided large COVID-19 epidemics,” such as Australia and New Zealand, they wrote.

Editor’s note:  SciCheck’s COVID-19/Vaccination Project  is made possible by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The foundation has  no control  over FactCheck.org’s editorial decisions, and the views expressed in our articles do not necessarily reflect the views of the foundation. The goal of the project is to increase exposure to accurate information about COVID-19 and vaccines, while decreasing the impact of misinformation.

Herby, Jonas et al. “ A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Lockdowns on COVID-19 Mortality .” Studies in Applied Economics, Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise, Johns Hopkins University. posted Jan 2022.

World Health Organization. “ Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Herd immunity, lockdowns and COVID-19 .” 31 Dec 2020.

Flaxman, Seth et al. “ Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe .” Nature. 584 (2020).

Lai, Shengjie et al. “ Effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions to contain COVID-19 in China .” Nature. 585 (2020).

Sharfstein, Joshua, vice dean of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Statement emailed to FactCheck.org. 8 Feb 2022.

Best, Paul. “ Lockdowns only reduced COVID-19 death rate by .2%, study finds: ‘Lockdowns should be rejected out of hand .'” Fox News. 1 Feb 2022.

Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon. @GidMK. “ This paper has been doing the rounds, claiming that lockdown was useless (the source of the 0.2% effect of lockdown claim). Dozens of people have asked my opinion of it, so here we go: In my opinion, it is a very weak review that doesn’t really show much, if anything 1/n .” Twitter.com. 4 Feb 2022.

Hanke, Steve H., founder and co-director of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise. Email interview with FactCheck.org. 18 Feb 2022.

Ferguson, Neil, director of the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Jameel Institute, Imperial College London. Statement posted by Science Media Centre . 3 Feb 2022.

Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker . Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford. https://covidtracker.bsg.ox.ac.uk/. website accessed 20 Feb 2022.

Chisadza, Carolyn, senior lecturer in economics at the University of Pretoria. Email interview with FactCheck.org. 15 Feb 2022.

Clance, Matthew, associate professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Pretoria. Email interview with FactCheck.org. 16 Feb 2022.

Our World in Data. Cumulative confirmed COVID-19 deaths . website accessed 22 Feb 2022.

Bjornskov, Christian. “ Did Lockdown Work? An Economist’s Cross-Country Comparison .” CESifo Economic Studies. 67.3 (2021).

Fuller, James A. et al. “ Mitigation Policies and COVID-19–Associated Mortality — 37 European Countries, January 23–June 30, 2020 .” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 70.2 (2021).

Goldstein, P. et al. “ Lockdown Fatigue: The Diminishing Effects of Quarantines on the Spread of COVID-19 .” Harvard University Center for International Development. 2021.

Stockenhuber, Reinhold. “ Did We Respond Quickly Enough? How Policy-Implementation Speed in Response to COVID-19 Affects the Number of Fatal Cases in Europe .” World Medical & Health Policy. 12.4 (2020).

Riley, Lee, chair of the Division of Infectious Disease and Vaccinology at the University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health. Email interview with FactCheck.org. 14 Feb 2022.

Spiegel, Matthew and Heather Tookes. “ Business Restrictions and COVID-19 Fatalities .” The Review of Financial Studies. 34.11 (2021).

Chernozhukov, Victor et al. “ Causal impact of masks, policies, behavior on early covid-19 pandemic in the U.S. ” Journal of Econometrics. 220. 1 (2021).

Hale, Thomas et al. “ Global Assessment of the Relationship between Government Response Measures and COVID-19 Deaths .” medrxiv.org. 6 Jul 2020.

Hale, Thomas et al. “ Government responses and COVID-19 deaths: Global evidence across multiple pandemic waves .” Plos One. 9 Jul 2021.

Brauner, Jan M. et al. “ Inferring the effectiveness of government interventions against COVID-19 .” Science. 371.6531 (2020).

Haug, Mils et al. “ Ranking the effectiveness of worldwide COVID-19 government interventions .” Nature Human Behaviour. 4 (2020).

Sharma, Mrinank et al. “ Understanding the effectiveness of government interventions against the resurgence of COVID-19 in Europe .” Nature Communications. 12 (2021).

Yang, Jiannan et al. “ The impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on the prevention and control of COVID-19 in New York City .” Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science. 31.2 (2021).

Achenbach, Joel and Laura Meckler. “ Shutdowns prevented 60 million coronavirus infections in the U.S., study finds .” Washington Post. 8 Jun 2020.

Hsiang, Solomon et al. “ The effect of large-scale anti-contagion policies on the COVID-19 pandemic .” Nature. 584 (2020).

Chernozhukov, Victor et al. “ Comments on the ‘John Hopkins’ Meta Study (Herby et al., 2022) and Chisadza et al. (2021) .” Provided to FactCheck.org. 4 Mar 2022.

Chernozhukov, Victor, professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Department of Economics and the Statistics and Data Science Center. Phone interview with FactCheck.org. 8 Mar 2022.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Published: 27 September 2021

Why lockdown and distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to increase the social class achievement gap

• Sébastien Goudeau   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7293-0977 1 ,
• Camille Sanrey   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3158-1306 1 ,
• Arnaud Stanczak   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2596-1516 2 ,
• Antony Manstead   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7540-2096 3 &
• Céline Darnon   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2613-689X 2  

Nature Human Behaviour volume  5 ,  pages 1273–1281 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

115k Accesses

147 Citations

129 Altmetric

Metrics details

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced teachers and parents to quickly adapt to a new educational context: distance learning. Teachers developed online academic material while parents taught the exercises and lessons provided by teachers to their children at home. Considering that the use of digital tools in education has dramatically increased during this crisis, and it is set to continue, there is a pressing need to understand the impact of distance learning. Taking a multidisciplinary view, we argue that by making the learning process rely more than ever on families, rather than on teachers, and by getting students to work predominantly via digital resources, school closures exacerbate social class academic disparities. To address this burning issue, we propose an agenda for future research and outline recommendations to help parents, teachers and policymakers to limit the impact of the lockdown on social-class-based academic inequality.

Similar content being viewed by others

Large socio-economic, geographic and demographic disparities exist in exposure to school closures

Elementary school teachers’ perspectives about learning during the COVID-19 pandemic

Uncovering Covid-19, distance learning, and educational inequality in rural areas of Pakistan and China: a situational analysis method

The widespread effects of the COVID-19 pandemic that emerged in 2019–2020 have drastically increased health, social and economic inequalities 1 , 2 . For more than 900 million learners around the world, the pandemic led to the closure of schools and universities 3 . This exceptional situation forced teachers, parents and students to quickly adapt to a new educational context: distance learning. Teachers had to develop online academic materials that could be used at home to ensure educational continuity while ensuring the necessary physical distancing. Primary and secondary school students suddenly had to work with various kinds of support, which were usually provided online by their teachers. For college students, lockdown often entailed returning to their hometowns while staying connected with their teachers and classmates via video conferences, email and other digital tools. Despite the best efforts of educational institutions, parents and teachers to keep all children and students engaged in learning activities, ensuring educational continuity during school closure—something that is difficult for everyone—may pose unique material and psychological challenges for working-class families and students.

Not only did the pandemic lead to the closure of schools in many countries, often for several weeks, it also accelerated the digitalization of education and amplified the role of parental involvement in supporting the schoolwork of their children. Thus, beyond the specific circumstances of the COVID-19 lockdown, we believe that studying the effects of the pandemic on academic inequalities provides a way to more broadly examine the consequences of school closure and related effects (for example, digitalization of education) on social class inequalities. Indeed, bearing in mind that (1) the risk of further pandemics is higher than ever (that is, we are in a ‘pandemic era’ 4 , 5 ) and (2) beyond pandemics, the use of digital tools in education (and therefore the influence of parental involvement) has dramatically increased during this crisis, and is set to continue, there is a pressing need for an integrative and comprehensive model that examines the consequences of distance learning. Here, we propose such an integrative model that helps us to understand the extent to which the school closures associated with the pandemic amplify economic, digital and cultural divides that in turn affect the psychological functioning of parents, students and teachers in a way that amplifies academic inequalities. Bringing together research in social sciences, ranging from economics and sociology to social, cultural, cognitive and educational psychology, we argue that by getting students to work predominantly via digital resources rather than direct interactions with their teachers, and by making the learning process rely more than ever on families rather than teachers, school closures exacerbate social class academic disparities.

First, we review research showing that social class is associated with unequal access to digital tools, unequal familiarity with digital skills and unequal uses of such tools for learning purposes 6 , 7 . We then review research documenting how unequal familiarity with school culture, knowledge and skills can also contribute to the accentuation of academic inequalities 8 , 9 . Next, we present the results of surveys conducted during the 2020 lockdown showing that the quality and quantity of pedagogical support received from schools varied according to the social class of families (for examples, see refs. 10 , 11 , 12 ). We then argue that these digital, cultural and structural divides represent barriers to the ability of parents to provide appropriate support for children during distance learning (Fig. 1 ). These divides also alter the levels of self-efficacy of parents and children, thereby affecting their engagement in learning activities 13 , 14 . In the final section, we review preliminary evidence for the hypothesis that distance learning widens the social class achievement gap and we propose an agenda for future research. In addition, we outline recommendations that should help parents, teachers and policymakers to use social science research to limit the impact of school closure and distance learning on the social class achievement gap.

Economic, structural, digital and cultural divides influence the psychological functioning of parents and students in a way that amplify inequalities.

The digital divide

Unequal access to digital resources.

Although the use of digital technologies is almost ubiquitous in developed nations, there is a digital divide such that some people are more likely than others to be numerically excluded 15 (Fig. 1 ). Social class is a strong predictor of digital disparities, including the quality of hardware, software and Internet access 16 , 17 , 18 . For example, in 2019, in France, around 1 in 5 working-class families did not have personal access to the Internet compared with less than 1 in 20 of the most privileged families 19 . Similarly, in 2020, in the United Kingdom, 20% of children who were eligible for free school meals did not have access to a computer at home compared with 7% of other children 20 . In 2021, in the United States, 41% of working-class families do not own a laptop or desktop computer and 43% do not have broadband compared with 8% and 7%, respectively, of upper/middle-class Americans 21 . A similar digital gap is also evident between lower-income and higher-income countries 22 .

Second, simply having access to a computer and an Internet connection does not ensure effective distance learning. For example, many of the educational resources sent by teachers need to be printed, thereby requiring access to printers. Moreover, distance learning is more difficult in households with only one shared computer compared with those where each family member has their own 23 . Furthermore, upper/middle-class families are more likely to be able to guarantee a suitable workspace for each child than their working-class counterparts 24 .

In the context of school closures, such disparities are likely to have important consequences for educational continuity. In line with this idea, a survey of approximately 4,000 parents in the United Kingdom confirmed that during lockdown, more than half of primary school children from the poorest families did not have access to their own study space and were less well equipped for distance learning than higher-income families 10 . Similarly, a survey of around 1,300 parents in the Netherlands found that during lockdown, children from working-class families had fewer computers at home and less room to study than upper/middle-class children 11 .

Data from non-Western countries highlight a more general digital divide, showing that developing countries have poorer access to digital equipment. For example, in India in 2018, only 10.7% of households possessed a digital device 25 , while in Pakistan in 2020, 31% of higher-education teachers did not have Internet access and 68.4% did not have a laptop 26 . In general, developing countries lack access to digital technologies 27 , 28 , and these difficulties of access are even greater in rural areas (for example, see ref. 29 ). Consequently, school closures have huge repercussions for the continuity of learning in these countries. For example, in India in 2018, only 11% of the rural and 40% of the urban population above 14 years old could use a computer and access the Internet 25 . Time spent on education during school closure decreased by 80% in Bangladesh 30 . A similar trend was observed in other countries 31 , with only 22% of children engaging in remote learning in Kenya 32 and 50% in Burkina Faso 33 . In Ghana, 26–32% of children spent no time at all on learning during the pandemic 34 . Beyond the overall digital divide, social class disparities are also evident in developing countries, with lower access to digital resources among households in which parental educational levels were low (versus households in which parental educational levels were high; for example, see ref. 35 for Nigeria and ref. 31 for Ecuador).

Unequal digital skills

In addition to unequal access to digital tools, there are also systematic variations in digital skills 36 , 37 (Fig. 1 ). Upper/middle-class families are more familiar with digital tools and resources and are therefore more likely to have the digital skills needed for distance learning 38 , 39 , 40 . These digital skills are particularly useful during school closures, both for students and for parents, for organizing, retrieving and correctly using the resources provided by the teachers (for example, sending or receiving documents by email, printing documents or using word processors).

Social class disparities in digital skills can be explained in part by the fact that children from upper/middle-class families have the opportunity to develop digital skills earlier than working-class families 41 . In member countries of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), only 23% of working-class children had started using a computer at the age of 6 years or earlier compared with 43% of upper/middle-class children 42 . Moreover, because working-class people tend to persist less than upper/middle-class people when confronted with digital difficulties 23 , the use of digital tools and resources for distance learning may interfere with the ability of parents to help children with their schoolwork.

Unequal use of digital tools

A third level of digital divide concerns variations in digital tool use 18 , 43 (Fig. 1 ). Upper/middle-class families are more likely to use digital resources for work and education 6 , 41 , 44 , whereas working-class families are more likely to use these resources for entertainment, such as electronic games or social media 6 , 45 . This divide is also observed among students, whereby working-class students tend to use digital technologies for leisure activities, whereas their upper/middle-class peers are more likely to use them for academic activities 46 and to consider that computers and the Internet provide an opportunity for education and training 23 . Furthermore, working-class families appear to regulate the digital practices of their children less 47 and are more likely to allow screens in the bedrooms of children and teenagers without setting limits on times or practices 48 .

In sum, inequalities in terms of digital resources, skills and use have strong implications for distance learning. This is because they make working-class students and parents particularly vulnerable when learning relies on extensive use of digital devices rather than on face-to-face interaction with teachers.

The cultural divide

Even if all three levels of digital divide were closed, upper/middle-class families would still be better prepared than working-class families to ensure educational continuity for their children. Upper/middle-class families are more familiar with the academic knowledge and skills that are expected and valued in educational settings, as well as with the independent, autonomous way of learning that is valued in the school culture and becomes even more important during school closure (Fig. 1 ).

Unequal familiarity with academic knowledge and skills

According to classical social reproduction theory 8 , 49 , school is not a neutral place in which all forms of language and knowledge are equally valued. Academic contexts expect and value culture-specific and taken-for-granted forms of knowledge, skills and ways of being, thinking and speaking that are more in tune with those developed through upper/middle-class socialization (that is, ‘cultural capital’ 8 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 ). For instance, academic contexts value interest in the arts, museums and literature 54 , 55 , a type of interest that is more likely to develop through socialization in upper/middle-class families than in working-class socialization 54 , 56 . Indeed, upper/middle-class parents are more likely than working-class parents to engage in activities that develop this cultural capital. For example, they possess more books and cultural objects at home, read more stories to their children and visit museums and libraries more often (for examples, see refs. 51 , 54 , 55 ). Upper/middle-class children are also more involved in extra-curricular activities (for example, playing a musical instrument) than working-class children 55 , 56 , 57 .

Beyond this implicit familiarization with the school curriculum, upper/middle-class parents more often organize educational activities that are explicitly designed to develop academic skills of their children 57 , 58 , 59 . For example, they are more likely to monitor and re-explain lessons or use games and textbooks to develop and reinforce academic skills (for example, labelling numbers, letters or colours 57 , 60 ). Upper/middle-class parents also provide higher levels of support and spend more time helping children with homework than working-class parents (for examples, see refs. 61 , 62 ). Thus, even if all parents are committed to the academic success of their children, working-class parents have fewer chances to provide the help that children need to complete homework 63 , and homework is more beneficial for children from upper-middle class families than for children from working-class families 64 , 65 .

School closures amplify the impact of cultural inequalities

The trends described above have been observed in ‘normal’ times when schools are open. School closures, by making learning rely more strongly on practices implemented at home (rather than at school), are likely to amplify the impact of these disparities. Consistent with this idea, research has shown that the social class achievement gap usually greatly widens during school breaks—a phenomenon described as ‘summer learning loss’ or ‘summer setback’ 66 , 67 , 68 . During holidays, the learning by children tends to decline, and this is particularly pronounced in children from working-class families. Consequently, the social class achievement gap grows more rapidly during the summer months than it does in the rest of the year. This phenomenon is partly explained by the fact that during the break from school, social class disparities in investment in activities that are beneficial for academic achievement (for example, reading, travelling to a foreign country or museum visits) are more pronounced.

Therefore, when they are out of school, children from upper/middle-class backgrounds may continue to develop academic skills unlike their working-class counterparts, who may stagnate or even regress. Research also indicates that learning loss during school breaks tends to be cumulative 66 . Thus, repeated episodes of school closure are likely to have profound consequences for the social class achievement gap. Consistent with the idea that school closures could lead to similar processes as those identified during summer breaks, a recent survey indicated that during the COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom, children from upper/middle-class families spent more time on educational activities (5.8 h per day) than those from working-class families (4.5 h per day) 7 , 69 .

Unequal dispositions for autonomy and self-regulation

School closures have encouraged autonomous work among students. This ‘independent’ way of studying is compatible with the family socialization of upper/middle-class students, but does not match the interdependent norms more commonly associated with working-class contexts 9 . Upper/middle-class contexts tend to promote cultural norms of independence whereby individuals perceive themselves as autonomous actors, independent of other individuals and of the social context, able to pursue their own goals 70 . For example, upper/middle-class parents tend to invite children to express their interests, preferences and opinions during the various activities of everyday life 54 , 55 . Conversely, in working-class contexts characterized by low economic resources and where life is more uncertain, individuals tend to perceive themselves as interdependent, connected to others and members of social groups 53 , 70 , 71 . This interdependent self-construal fits less well with the independent culture of academic contexts. This cultural mismatch between interdependent self-construal common in working-class students and the independent norms of the educational institution has negative consequences for academic performance 9 .

Once again, the impact of these differences is likely to be amplified during school closures, when being able to work alone and autonomously is especially useful. The requirement to work alone is more likely to match the independent self-construal of upper/middle-class students than the interdependent self-construal of working-class students. In the case of working-class students, this mismatch is likely to increase their difficulties in working alone at home. Supporting our argument, recent research has shown that working-class students tend to underachieve in contexts where students work individually compared with contexts where students work with others 72 . Similarly, during school closures, high self-regulation skills (for example, setting goals, selecting appropriate learning strategies and maintaining motivation 73 ) are required to maintain study activities and are likely to be especially useful for using digital resources efficiently. Research has shown that students from working-class backgrounds typically develop their self-regulation skills to a lesser extent than those from upper/middle-class backgrounds 74 , 75 , 76 .

Interestingly, some authors have suggested that independent (versus interdependent) self-construal may also affect communication with teachers 77 . Indeed, in the context of distance learning, working-class families are less likely to respond to the communication of teachers because their ‘interdependent’ self leads them to respect hierarchies, and thus perceive teachers as an expert who ‘can be trusted to make the right decisions for learning’. Upper/middle class families, relying on ‘independent’ self-construal, are more inclined to seek individualized feedback, and therefore tend to participate to a greater extent in exchanges with teachers. Such cultural differences are important because they can also contribute to the difficulties encountered by working-class families.

The structural divide: unequal support from schools

The issues reviewed thus far all increase the vulnerability of children and students from underprivileged backgrounds when schools are closed. To offset these disadvantages, it might be expected that the school should increase its support by providing additional resources for working-class students. However, recent data suggest that differences in the material and human resources invested in providing educational support for children during periods of school closure were—paradoxically—in favour of upper/middle-class students (Fig. 1 ). In England, for example, upper/middle-class parents reported benefiting from online classes and video-conferencing with teachers more often than working-class parents 10 . Furthermore, active help from school (for example, online teaching, private tutoring or chats with teachers) occurred more frequently in the richest households (64% of the richest households declared having received help from school) than in the poorest households (47%). Another survey found that in the United Kingdom, upper/middle-class children were more likely to take online lessons every day (30%) than working-class students (16%) 12 . This substantial difference might be due, at least in part, to the fact that private schools are better equipped in terms of online platforms (60% of schools have at least one online platform) than state schools (37%, and 23% in the most deprived schools) and were more likely to organize daily online lessons. Similarly, in the United Kingdom, in schools with a high proportion of students eligible for free school meals, teachers were less inclined to broadcast an online lesson for their pupils 78 . Interestingly, 58% of teachers in the wealthiest areas reported having messaged their students or their students’ parents during lockdown compared with 47% in the most deprived schools. In addition, the probability of children receiving technical support from the school (for example, by providing pupils with laptops or other devices) is, surprisingly, higher in the most advantaged schools than in the most deprived 78 .

In addition to social class disparities, there has been less support from schools for African-American and Latinx students. During school closures in the United States, 40% of African-American students and 30% of Latinx students received no online teaching compared with 10% of white students 79 . Another source of inequality is that the probability of school closure was correlated with social class and race. In the United States, for example, school closures from September to December 2020 were more common in schools with a high proportion of racial/ethnic minority students, who experience homelessness and are eligible for free/discounted school meals 80 .

Similarly, access to educational resources and support was lower in poorer (compared with richer) countries 81 . In sub-Saharan Africa, during lockdown, 45% of children had no exposure at all to any type of remote learning. Of those who did, the medium was mostly radio, television or paper rather than digital. In African countries, at most 10% of children received some material through the Internet. In Latin America, 90% of children received some remote learning, but less than half of that was through the internet—the remainder being via radio and television 81 . In Ecuador, high-school students from the lowest wealth quartile had fewer remote-learning opportunities, such as Google class/Zoom, than students from the highest wealth quartile 31 .

Thus, the achievement gap and its accentuation during lockdown are due not only to the cultural and digital disadvantages of working-class families but also to unequal support from schools. This inequality in school support is not due to teachers being indifferent to or even supportive of social stratification. Rather, we believe that these effects are fundamentally structural. In many countries, schools located in upper/middle-class neighbourhoods have more money than those in the poorest neighbourhoods. Moreover, upper/middle-class parents invest more in the schools of their children than working-class parents (for example, see ref. 82 ), and schools have an interest in catering more for upper/middle-class families than for working-class families 83 . Additionally, the expectation of teachers may be lower for working-class children 84 . For example, they tend to estimate that working-class students invest less effort in learning than their upper/middle-class counterparts 85 . These differences in perception may have influenced the behaviour of teachers during school closure, such that teachers in privileged neighbourhoods provided more information to students because they expected more from them in term of effort and achievement. The fact that upper/middle-class parents are better able than working-class parents to comply with the expectations of teachers (for examples, see refs. 55 , 86 ) may have reinforced this phenomenon. These discrepancies echo data showing that working-class students tend to request less help in their schoolwork than upper/middle-class ones 87 , and they may even avoid asking for help because they believe that such requests could lead to reprimands 88 . During school closures, these students (and their families) may in consequence have been less likely to ask for help and resources. Jointly, these phenomena have resulted in upper/middle-class families receiving more support from schools during lockdown than their working-class counterparts.

Psychological effects of digital, cultural and structural divides

Despite being strongly influenced by social class, differences in academic achievement are often interpreted by parents, teachers and students as reflecting differences in ability 89 . As a result, upper/middle-class students are usually perceived—and perceive themselves—as smarter than working-class students, who are perceived—and perceive themselves—as less intelligent 90 , 91 , 92 or less able to succeed 93 . Working-class students also worry more about the fact that they might perform more poorly than upper/middle-class students 94 , 95 . These fears influence academic learning in important ways. In particular, they can consume cognitive resources when children and students work on academic tasks 96 , 97 . Self-efficacy also plays a key role in engaging in learning and perseverance in the face of difficulties 13 , 98 . In addition, working-class students are those for whom the fear of being outperformed by others is the most negatively related to academic performance 99 .

The fact that working-class children and students are less familiar with the tasks set by teachers, and less well equipped and supported, makes them more likely to experience feelings of incompetence (Fig. 1 ). Working-class parents are also more likely than their upper/middle-class counterparts to feel unable to help their children with schoolwork. Consistent with this, research has shown that both working-class students and parents have lower feelings of academic self-efficacy than their upper/middle-class counterparts 100 , 101 . These differences have been documented under ‘normal’ conditions but are likely to be exacerbated during distance learning. Recent surveys conducted during the school closures have confirmed that upper/middle-class families felt better able to support their children in distance learning than did working-class families 10 and that upper/middle-class parents helped their children more and felt more capable to do so 11 , 12 .

Pandemic disparity, future directions and recommendations

The research reviewed thus far suggests that children and their families are highly unequal with respect to digital access, skills and use. It also shows that upper/middle-class students are more likely to be supported in their homework (by their parents and teachers) than working-class students, and that upper/middle-class students and parents will probably feel better able than working-class ones to adapt to the context of distance learning. For all these reasons, we anticipate that as a result of school closures, the COVID-19 pandemic will substantially increase the social class achievement gap. Because school closures are a recent occurrence, it is too early to measure with precision their effects on the widening of the achievement gap. However, some recent data are consistent with this idea.

Evidence for a widening gap during the pandemic

Comparing academic achievement in 2020 with previous years provides an early indication of the effects of school closures during the pandemic. In France, for example, first and second graders take national evaluations at the beginning of the school year. Initial comparisons of the results for 2020 with those from previous years revealed that the gap between schools classified as ‘priority schools’ (those in low-income urban areas) and schools in higher-income neighbourhoods—a gap observed every year—was particularly pronounced in 2020 in both French and mathematics 102 .

Similarly, in the Netherlands, national assessments take place twice a year. In 2020, they took place both before and after school closures. A recent analysis compared progress during this period in 2020 in mathematics/arithmetic, spelling and reading comprehension for 7–11-year-old students within the same period in the three previous years 103 . Results indicated a general learning loss in 2020. More importantly, for the 8% of working-class children, the losses were 40% greater than they were for upper/middle-class children.

Similar results were observed in Belgium among students attending the final year of primary school. Compared with students from previous cohorts, students affected by school closures experienced a substantial decrease in their mathematics and language scores, with children from more disadvantaged backgrounds experiencing greater learning losses 104 . Likewise, oral reading assessments in more than 100 school districts in the United States showed that the development of this skill among children in second and third grade significantly slowed between Spring and Autumn 2020, but this slowdown was more pronounced in schools from lower-achieving districts 105 .

It is likely that school closures have also amplified racial disparities in learning and achievement. For example, in the United States, after the first lockdown, students of colour lost the equivalent of 3–5 months of learning, whereas white students were about 1–3 months behind. Moreover, in the Autumn, when some students started to return to classrooms, African-American and Latinx students were more likely to continue distance learning, despite being less likely to have access to the digital tools, Internet access and live contact with teachers 106 .

In some African countries (for example, Ethiopia, Kenya, Liberia, Tanzania and Uganda), the COVID-19 crisis has resulted in learning loss ranging from 6 months to more 1 year 107 , and this learning loss appears to be greater for working-class children (that is, those attending no-fee schools) than for upper/middle-class children 108 .

These findings show that school closures have exacerbated achievement gaps linked to social class and ethnicity. However, more research is needed to address the question of whether school closures differentially affect the learning of students from working- and upper/middle-class families.

Future directions

First, to assess the specific and unique impact of school closures on student learning, longitudinal research should compare student achievement at different times of the year, before, during and after school closures, as has been done to document the summer learning loss 66 , 109 . In the coming months, alternating periods of school closure and opening may occur, thereby presenting opportunities to do such research. This would also make it possible to examine whether the gap diminishes a few weeks after children return to in-school learning or whether, conversely, it increases with time because the foundations have not been sufficiently acquired to facilitate further learning 110 .

Second, the mechanisms underlying the increase in social class disparities during school closures should be examined. As discussed above, school closures result in situations for which students are unevenly prepared and supported. It would be appropriate to seek to quantify the contribution of each of the factors that might be responsible for accentuating the social class achievement gap. In particular, distinguishing between factors that are relatively ‘controllable’ (for example, resources made available to pupils) and those that are more difficult to control (for example, the self-efficacy of parents in supporting the schoolwork of their children) is essential to inform public policy and teaching practices.

Third, existing studies are based on general comparisons and very few provide insights into the actual practices that took place in families during school closure and how these practices affected the achievement gap. For example, research has documented that parents from working-class backgrounds are likely to find it more difficult to help their children to complete homework and to provide constructive feedback 63 , 111 , something that could in turn have a negative impact on the continuity of learning of their children. In addition, it seems reasonable to assume that during lockdown, parents from upper/middle-class backgrounds encouraged their children to engage in practices that, even if not explicitly requested by teachers, would be beneficial to learning (for example, creative activities or reading). Identifying the practices that best predict the maintenance or decline of educational achievement during school closures would help identify levers for intervention.

Finally, it would be interesting to investigate teaching practices during school closures. The lockdown in the spring of 2020 was sudden and unexpected. Within a few days, teachers had to find a way to compensate for the school closure, which led to highly variable practices. Some teachers posted schoolwork on platforms, others sent it by email, some set work on a weekly basis while others set it day by day. Some teachers also set up live sessions in large or small groups, providing remote meetings for questions and support. There have also been variations in the type of feedback given to students, notably through the monitoring and correcting of work. Future studies should examine in more detail what practices schools and teachers used to compensate for the school closures and their effects on widening, maintaining or even reducing the gap, as has been done for certain specific literacy programmes 112 as well as specific instruction topics (for example, ecology and evolution 113 ).

Practical recommendations

We are aware of the debate about whether social science research on COVID-19 is suitable for making policy decisions 114 , and we draw attention to the fact that some of our recommendations (Table 1 ) are based on evidence from experiments or interventions carried out pre-COVID while others are more speculative. In any case, we emphasize that these suggestions should be viewed with caution and be tested in future research. Some of our recommendations could be implemented in the event of new school closures, others only when schools re-open. We also acknowledge that while these recommendations are intended for parents and teachers, their implementation largely depends on the adoption of structural policies. Importantly, given all the issues discussed above, we emphasize the importance of prioritizing, wherever possible, in-person learning over remote learning 115 and where this is not possible, of implementing strong policies to support distance learning, especially for disadvantaged families.

Where face-to face teaching is not possible and teachers are responsible for implementing distance learning, it will be important to make them aware of the factors that can exacerbate inequalities during lockdown and to provide them with guidance about practices that would reduce these inequalities. Thus, there is an urgent need for interventions aimed at making teachers aware of the impact of the social class of children and families on the following factors: (1) access to, familiarity with and use of digital devices; (2) familiarity with academic knowledge and skills; and (3) preparedness to work autonomously. Increasing awareness of the material, cultural and psychological barriers that working-class children and families face during lockdown should increase the quality and quantity of the support provided by teachers and thereby positively affect the achievements of working-class students.

In addition to increasing the awareness of teachers of these barriers, teachers should be encouraged to adjust the way they communicate with working-class families due to differences in self-construal compared with upper/middle-class families 77 . For example, questions about family (rather than personal) well-being would be congruent with interdependent self-construals. This should contribute to better communication and help keep a better track of the progress of students during distance learning.

It is also necessary to help teachers to engage in practices that have a chance of reducing inequalities 53 , 116 . Particularly important is that teachers and schools ensure that homework can be done by all children, for example, by setting up organizations that would help children whose parents are not in a position to monitor or assist with the homework of their children. Options include homework help groups and tutoring by teachers after class. When schools are open, the growing tendency to set homework through digital media should be resisted as far as possible given the evidence we have reviewed above. Moreover, previous research has underscored the importance of homework feedback provided by teachers, which is positively related to the amount of homework completed and predictive of academic performance 117 . Where homework is web-based, it has also been shown that feedback on web-based homework enhances the learning of students 118 . It therefore seems reasonable to predict that the social class achievement gap will increase more slowly (or even remain constant or be reversed) in schools that establish individualized monitoring of students, by means of regular calls and feedback on homework, compared with schools where the support provided to pupils is more generic.

Given that learning during lockdown has increasingly taken place in family settings, we believe that interventions involving the family are also likely to be effective 119 , 120 , 121 . Simply providing families with suitable material equipment may be insufficient. Families should be given training in the efficient use of digital technology and pedagogical support. This would increase the self-efficacy of parents and students, with positive consequences for achievement. Ideally, such training would be delivered in person to avoid problems arising from the digital divide. Where this is not possible, individualized online tutoring should be provided. For example, studies conducted during the lockdown in Botswana and Italy have shown that individual online tutoring directly targeting either parents or students in middle school has a positive impact on the achievement of students, particularly for working-class students 122 , 123 .

Interventions targeting families should also address the psychological barriers faced by working-class families and children. Some interventions have already been designed and been shown to be effective in reducing the social class achievement gap, particularly in mathematics and language 124 , 125 , 126 . For example, research showed that an intervention designed to train low-income parents in how to support the mathematical development of their pre-kindergarten children (including classes and access to a library of kits to use at home) increased the quality of support provided by the parents, with a corresponding impact on the development of mathematical knowledge of their children. Such interventions should be particularly beneficial in the context of school closure.

Beyond its impact on academic performance and inequalities, the COVID-19 crisis has shaken the economies of countries around the world, casting millions of families around the world into poverty 127 , 128 , 129 . As noted earlier, there has been a marked increase in economic inequalities, bringing with it all the psychological and social problems that such inequalities create 130 , 131 , especially for people who live in scarcity 132 . The increase in educational inequalities is just one facet of the many difficulties that working-class families will encounter in the coming years, but it is one that could seriously limit the chances of their children escaping from poverty by reducing their opportunities for upward mobility. In this context, it should be a priority to concentrate resources on the most deprived students. A large proportion of the poorest households do not own a computer and do not have personal access to the Internet, which has important consequences for distance learning. During school closures, it is therefore imperative to provide such families with adequate equipment and Internet service, as was done in some countries in spring 2020. Even if the provision of such equipment is not in itself sufficient, it is a necessary condition for ensuring pedagogical continuity during lockdown.

Finally, after prolonged periods of school closure, many students may not have acquired the skills needed to pursue their education. A possible consequence would be an increase in the number of students for whom teachers recommend class repetitions. Class repetitions are contentious. On the one hand, class repetition more frequently affects working-class children and is not efficient in terms of learning improvement 133 . On the other hand, accepting lower standards of academic achievement or even suspending the practice of repeating a class could lead to pupils pursuing their education without mastering the key abilities needed at higher grades. This could create difficulties in subsequent years and, in this sense, be counterproductive. We therefore believe that the most appropriate way to limit the damage of the pandemic would be to help children catch up rather than allowing them to continue without mastering the necessary skills. As is being done in some countries, systematic remedial courses (for example, summer learning programmes) should be organized and financially supported following periods of school closure, with priority given to pupils from working-class families. Such interventions have genuine potential in that research has shown that participation in remedial summer programmes is effective in reducing learning loss during the summer break 134 , 135 , 136 . For example, in one study 137 , 438 students from high-poverty schools were offered a multiyear summer school programme that included various pedagogical and enrichment activities (for example, science investigation and music) and were compared with a ‘no-treatment’ control group. Students who participated in the summer programme progressed more than students in the control group. A meta-analysis 138 of 41 summer learning programmes (that is, classroom- and home-based summer interventions) involving children from kindergarten to grade 8 showed that these programmes had significantly larger benefits for children from working-class families. Although such measures are costly, the cost is small compared to the price of failing to fulfil the academic potential of many students simply because they were not born into upper/middle-class families.

The unprecedented nature of the current pandemic means that we lack strong data on what the school closure period is likely to produce in terms of learning deficits and the reproduction of social inequalities. However, the research discussed in this article suggests that there are good reasons to predict that this period of school closures will accelerate the reproduction of social inequalities in educational achievement.

By making school learning less dependent on teachers and more dependent on families and digital tools and resources, school closures are likely to greatly amplify social class inequalities. At a time when many countries are experiencing second, third or fourth waves of the pandemic, resulting in fresh periods of local or general lockdowns, systematic efforts to test these predictions are urgently needed along with steps to reduce the impact of school closures on the social class achievement gap.

Bambra, C., Riordan, R., Ford, J. & Matthews, F. The COVID-19 pandemic and health inequalities. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 74 , 964–968 (2020).

Google Scholar  

Johnson, P, Joyce, R & Platt, L. The IFS Deaton Review of Inequalities: A New Year’s Message (Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2021).

Education: from disruption to recovery. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse (UNESCO, 2020).

Daszak, P. We are entering an era of pandemics—it will end only when we protect the rainforest. The Guardian (28 July 2020); https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/28/pandemic-era-rainforest-deforestation-exploitation-wildlife-disease

Dobson, A. P. et al. Ecology and economics for pandemic prevention. Science 369 , 379–381 (2020).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Harris, C., Straker, L. & Pollock, C. A socioeconomic related ‘digital divide’ exists in how, not if, young people use computers. PLoS ONE 12 , e0175011 (2017).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Zhang, M. Internet use that reproduces educational inequalities: evidence from big data. Comput. Educ. 86 , 212–223 (2015).

Article   Google Scholar  

Bourdieu, P. & Passeron, J. C. Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture (Sage, 1990).

Stephens, N. M., Fryberg, S. A., Markus, H. R., Johnson, C. S. & Covarrubias, R. Unseen disadvantage: how American universities’ focus on independence undermines the academic performance of first-generation college students. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 102 , 1178–1197 (2012).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Andrew, A. et al. Inequalities in children’s experiences of home learning during the COVID-19 lockdown in England. Fisc. Stud. 41 , 653–683 (2020).

Bol, T. Inequality in homeschooling during the Corona crisis in the Netherlands. First results from the LISS Panel. Preprint at SocArXiv https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/hf32q (2020).

Cullinane, C. & Montacute, R. COVID-19 and Social Mobility. Impact Brief #1: School Shutdown (The Sutton Trust, 2020).

Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 84 , 191–215 (1977).

Prior, D. D., Mazanov, J., Meacheam, D., Heaslip, G. & Hanson, J. Attitude, digital literacy and self efficacy: low-on effects for online learning behavior. Internet High. Educ. 29 , 91–97 (2016).

Robinson, L. et al. Digital inequalities 2.0: legacy inequalities in the information age. First Monday https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i7.10842 (2020).

Cruz-Jesus, F., Vicente, M. R., Bacao, F. & Oliveira, T. The education-related digital divide: an analysis for the EU-28. Comput. Hum. Behav. 56 , 72–82 (2016).

Rice, R. E. & Haythornthwaite, C. In The Handbook of New Media (eds Lievrouw, L. A. & Livingstone S. M.), 92–113 (Sage, 2006).

Yates, S., Kirby, J. & Lockley, E. Digital media use: differences and inequalities in relation to class and age. Sociol. Res. Online 20 , 71–91 (2015).

Legleye, S. & Rolland, A. Une personne sur six n’utilise pas Internet, plus d’un usager sur trois manques de compétences numériques de base [One in six people do not use the Internet, more than one in three users lack basic digital skills] (INSEE Première, 2019).

Green, F. Schoolwork in lockdown: new evidence on the epidemic of educational poverty (LLAKES Centre, 2020); https://www.llakes.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/RP-67-Francis-Green-Research-Paper-combined-file.pdf

Vogels, E. Digital divide persists even as americans with lower incomes make gains in tech adoption (Pew Research Center, 2021); https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/06/22/digital-divide-persists-even-as-americans-with-lower-incomes-make-gains-in-tech-adoption/

McBurnie, C., Adam, T. & Kaye, T. Is there learning continuity during the COVID-19 pandemic? A synthesis of the emerging evidence. J. Learn. Develop. http://dspace.col.org/handle/11599/3720 (2020).

Baillet, J., Croutte, P. & Prieur, V. Baromètre du numérique 2019 [Digital barometer 2019] (Sourcing Crédoc, 2019).

Giraud, F., Bertrand, J., Court, M. & Nicaise, S. In Enfances de Classes. De l’inégalité Parmi les Enfants (ed. Lahire, B.) 933–952 (Seuil, 2019).

Ahamed, S. & Siddiqui, Z. Disparity in access to quality education and the digital divide (Ideas for India, 2020); https://www.ideasforindia.in/topics/macroeconomics/disparity-in-access-to-quality-education-and-the-digital-divide.html

Soomro, K. A., Kale, U., Curtis, R., Akcaoglu, M. & Bernstein, M. Digital divide among higher education faculty. Int. J. Educ. Tech. High. Ed. 17 , 21 (2020).

Meng, Q. & Li, M. New economy and ICT development in China. Inf. Econ. Policy 14 , 275–295 (2002).

Chinn, M. D. & Fairlie, R. W. The determinants of the global digital divide: a cross-country analysis of computer and internet penetration. Oxf. Econ. Pap. 59 , 16–44 (2006).

Lembani, R., Gunter, A., Breines, M. & Dalu, M. T. B. The same course, different access: the digital divide between urban and rural distance education students in South Africa. J. Geogr. High. Educ. 44 , 70–84 (2020).

Asadullah, N., Bhattacharjee, A., Tasnim, M. & Mumtahena, F. COVID-19, schooling, and learning (BRAC Institute of Governance & Development, 2020); https://bigd.bracu.ac.bd/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/COVID-19-Schooling-and-Learning_June-25-2020.pdf

Asanov, I., Flores, F., McKenzie, D., Mensmann, M. & Schulte, M. Remote-learning, time-use, and mental health of Ecuadorian high-school students during the COVID-19 quarantine. World Dev. 138 , 105225 (2021).

Kihui, N. Kenya: 80% of students missing virtual learning amid school closures—study. AllAfrica (18 May 2020); https://allafrica.com/stories/202005180774.html

Debenedetti, L., Hirji, S., Chabi, M. O. & Swigart, T. Prioritizing evidence-based responses in Burkina Faso to mitigate the economic effects of COVID-19: lessons from RECOVR (Innovations for Poverty Action, 2020); https://www.poverty-action.org/blog/prioritizing-evidence-based-responses-burkina-faso-mitigate-economic-effects-covid-19-lessons

Bosumtwi-Sam, C. & Kabay, S. Using data and evidence to inform school reopening in Ghana (Innovations for Poverty Action, 2020); https://www.poverty-action.org/blog/using-data-and-evidence-inform-school-reopening-ghana

Azubuike, O. B., Adegboye, O. & Quadri, H. Who gets to learn in a pandemic? Exploring the digital divide in remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria. Int. J. Educ. Res. Open 2 , 100022 (2021).

Attewell, P. Comment: the first and second digital divides. Sociol. Educ. 74 , 252–259 (2001).

DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W. R. & Robinson, J. P. Social implications of the Internet. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 27 , 307–336 (2001).

Hargittai, E. Digital na(t)ives? Variation in Internet skills and uses among members of the ‘Net Generation’. Sociol. Inq. 80 , 92–113 (2010).

Iivari, N., Sharma, S. & Ventä-Olkkonen, L. Digital transformation of everyday life—how COVID-19 pandemic transformed the basic education of the young generation and why information management research should care? Int. J. Inform. Manag. 55 , 102183 (2020).

Wei, L. & Hindman, D. B. Does the digital divide matter more? Comparing the effects of new media and old media use on the education-based knowledge gap. Mass Commun. Soc. 14 , 216–235 (2011).

Octobre, S. & Berthomier, N. L’enfance des loisirs [The childhood of leisure]. Cult. Études 6 , 1–12 (2011).

Education at a glance 2015: OECD indicators (OECD, 2015); https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2015-en

North, S., Snyder, I. & Bulfin, S. Digital tastes: social class and young people’s technology use. Inform. Commun. Soc. 11 , 895–911 (2008).

Robinson, L. & Schulz, J. Net time negotiations within the family. Inform. Commun. Soc. 16 , 542–560 (2013).

Bonfadelli, H. The Internet and knowledge gaps: a theoretical and empirical investigation. Eur. J. Commun. 17 , 65–84 (2002).

Drabowicz, T. Social theory of Internet use: corroboration or rejection among the digital natives? Correspondence analysis of adolescents in two societies. Comput. Educ. 105 , 57–67 (2017).

Nikken, P. & Jansz, J. Developing scales to measure parental mediation of young children’s Internet use. Learn. Media Technol. 39 , 250–266 (2014).

Danic, I., Fontar, B., Grimault-Leprince, A., Le Mentec, M. & David, O. Les espaces de construction des inégalités éducatives [The areas of construction of educational inequalities] (Presses Univ. de Rennes, 2019).

Goudeau, S. Comment l'école reproduit-elle les inégalités? [How does school reproduce inequalities?] (Univ. Grenoble Alpes Editions/Presses Univ. de Grenoble, 2020).

Bernstein, B. Class, Codes, and Control (Routledge, 1975).

Gaddis, S. M. The influence of habitus in the relationship between cultural capital and academic achievement. Soc. Sci. Res. 42 , 1–13 (2013).

Lamont, M. & Lareau, A. Cultural capital: allusions, gaps and glissandos in recent theoretical developments. Sociol. Theory 6 , 153–168 (1988).

Stephens, N. M., Markus, H. R. & Phillips, L. T. Social class culture cycles: how three gateway contexts shape selves and fuel inequality. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 65 , 611–634 (2014).

Lahire, B. Enfances de classe. De l’inégalité parmi les enfants [Social class childhood. Inequality among children] (Le Seuil, 2019).

Lareau, A. Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life (Univ. of California Press, 2003).

Bourdieu, P. La distinction. Critique sociale du jugement [Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste] (Éditions de Minuit, 1979).

Bradley, R. H., Corwyn, R. F., McAdoo, H. P. & Garcia Coll, C. The home environments of children in the United States part I: variations by age, ethnicity, and poverty status. Child Dev. 72 , 1844–1867 (2001).

Blevins‐Knabe, B. & Musun‐Miller, L. Number use at home by children and their parents and its relationship to early mathematical performance. Early Dev. Parent. 5 , 35–45 (1996).

LeFevre, J. A. et al. Pathays to mathematics: longitudinal predictors of performance. Child Dev. 81 , 1753–1767 (2010).

Lareau, A. Home Advantage. Social Class and Parental Intervention in Elementary Education (Falmer Press, 1989).

Guryan, J., Hurst, E. & Kearney, M. Parental education and parental time with children. J. Econ. Perspect. 22 , 23–46 (2008).

Hill, C. R. & Stafford, F. P. Allocation of time to preschool children and educational opportunity. J. Hum. Resour. 9 , 323–341 (1974).

Calarco, J. M. A Field Guide to Grad School: Uncovering the Hidden Curriculum (Princeton Univ. Press, 2020).

Daw, J. Parental income and the fruits of labor: variability in homework efficacy in secondary school. Res. Soc. Strat. Mobil. 30 , 246–264 (2012).

Rønning, M. Who benefits from homework assignments? Econ. Educ. Rev. 30 , 55–64 (2011).

Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R. & Olson, L. S. Lasting consequences of the summer learning gap. Am. Sociol. Rev. 72 , 167–180 (2007).

Cooper, H., Nye, B., Charlton, K., Lindsay, J. & Greathouse, S. The effects of summer vacation on achievement test scores: a narrative and meta-analytic review. Rev. Educ. Res. 66 , 227–268 (1996).

Stewart, H., Watson, N. & Campbell, M. The cost of school holidays for children from low income families. Childhood 25 , 516–529 (2018).

Pensiero, N., Kelly, A. & Bokhove, C. Learning inequalities during the Covid-19 pandemic: how families cope with home-schooling (University of Southampton, 2020); https://doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/P0025

Stephens, N. M., Markus, H. R. & Townsend, S. S. Choice as an act of meaning: the case of social class. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 93 , 814–830 (2007).

Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K. & Keltner, D. Social class, sense of control, and social explanation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 97 , 992–1004 (2009).

Dittmann, A. G., Stephens, N. M. & Townsend, S. S. Achievement is not class-neutral: working together benefits pople from working-class contexts. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 119 , 517–539 (2020).

Zimmerman, B. J. Investigating self-regulation and motivation: historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. Am. Educ. Res. J. 45 , 166–183 (2008).

Backer-Grøndahl, A., Nærde, A., Ulleberg, P. & Janson, H. Measuring effortful control using the children’s behavior questionnaire–very short form: modeling matters. J. Pers. Assess. 98 , 100–109 (2016).

Johnson, S. E., Richeson, J. A. & Finkel, E. J. Middle class and marginal? Socioeconomic status, stigma, and self-regulation at an elite university. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 100 , 838–852 (2011).

Størksen, I., Ellingsen, I. T., Wanless, S. B. & McClelland, M. M. The influence of parental socioeconomic background and gender on self-regulation among 5-year-old children in Norway. Early Educ. Dev. 26 , 663–684 (2015).

Brady, L. et al. 7 ways for teachers to truly connect with parents. Education Week (31 December 2020); https://www.edweek.org/leadership/opinion-7-ways-for-teachers-to-truly-connect-with-parents/2020/12

Montacute, R. Social mobility and Covid-19: implications of the Covid-19 crisis for educational inequality (Sutton Trust, 2020); https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/35323/2/COVID-19-and-Social-Mobility-1.pdf

Dorn, E., Hancock, B., Sarakatsannis, J. & Viruleg, E. COVID-19 and student learning in the United States: the hurt could last a lifetime (McKinsey & Company, 2020); https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/covid-19-and-student-learning-in-the-united-states-the-hurt-could-last-a-lifetime

Parolin, Z. & Lee, E. K. Large socio-economic, geographic and demographic disparities exist in exposure to school closures. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5 , 522–528 (2021).

Saavedra, J. A silent and unequal education crisis. And the seeds for its solution (World Bank, 2021); https://blogs.worldbank.org/education/silent-and-unequal-education-crisis-and-seeds-its-solution

Murray, B., Domina, T., Renzulli, L. & Boylan, R. Civil society goes to school: parent–teacher associations and the equality of educational opportunity. Russell Sage Found. J. Soc. Sci. 5 , 41–63 (2019).

Calarco, J. M. Avoiding us versus them: how schools’ dependence on privileged ‘helicopter’ parents influences enforcement of rules. Am. Sociol. Rev. 85 , 223–246 (2020).

Rist, R. Student social class and teacher expectations: the self-fulfilling prophecy in ghetto education. Harv. Educ. Rev. 40 , 411–451 (1970).

Tobisch, A. & Dresel, M. Negatively or positively biased? Dependencies of teachers’ judgments and expectations based on students’ ethnic and social backgrounds. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 20 , 731–752 (2017).

Brantlinger, E. Dividing Classes: How the Middle-class Negotiates and Rationalizes School Advantage (Routledge, 2003).

Calarco, J. M. ‘I need help!’ Social class and children’s help-seeking in elementary school. Am. Sociol. Rev. 76 , 862–882 (2011).

Calarco, J. M. The inconsistent curriculum: cultural tool kits and student interpretations of ambiguous expectations. Soc. Psychol. Quart. 77 , 185–209 (2014).

Goudeau, S. & Cimpian, A. How do young children explain differences in the classroom? Implications for achievement, motivation, and educational equity. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 16 , 533–552 (2021).

Croizet, J. C., Goudeau, S., Marot, M. & Millet, M. How do educational contexts contribute to the social class achievement gap: documenting symbolic violence from a social psychological point of view. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 18 , 105–110 (2017).

Goudeau, S. & Croizet, J.-C. Hidden advantages and disadvantages of social class: how classroom settings reproduce social inequality by staging unfair comparison. Psychol. Sci. 28 , 162–170 (2017).

Kudrna, L., Furnham, A. & Swami, V. The influence of social class salience on self-assessed intelligence. Soc. Behav. Personal. 38 , 859–864 (2010).

Wiederkehr, V., Darnon, C., Chazal, S., Guimond, S. & Martinot, D. From social class to self-efficacy: internalization of low social status pupils’ school performance. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 18 , 769–784 (2015).

Jury, M., Smeding, A., Court, M. & Darnon, C. When first-generation students succeed at university: on the link between social class, academic performance, and performance-avoidance goals. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 41 , 25–36 (2015).

Jury, M., Quiamzade, A., Darnon, C. & Mugny, G. Higher and lower status individuals’ performance goals: the role of hierarchy stability. Motiv. Sci. 5 , 52–65 (2019).

Autin, F. & Croizet, J.-C. Improving working memory efficiency by reframing metacognitive interpretation of task difficulty. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 141 , 610–618 (2012).

Schmader, T., Johns, M. & Forbes, C. An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychol. Rev. 115 , 336–356 (2008).

Usher, E. L. & Pajares, F. Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning: a validation study. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 68 , 443–463 (2008).

Bruno, A., Jury, M., Toczek-Capelle, M.-C. & Darnon, C. Are performance-avoidance goals always deleterious for academic achievement in college? The moderating role of social class. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 22 , 539–555 (2019).

Holloway, S. D. et al. Parenting self-efficacy and parental involvement: mediators or moderators between socioeconomic status and children’s academic competence in Japan and Korea? Res. Hum. Dev. 13 , 258–272 (2016).

Tazouti, Y. & Jarlégan, A. The mediating effects of parental self-efficacy and parental involvement on the link between family socioeconomic status and children’s academic achievement. J. Fam. Stud. 25 , 250–266 (2019).

Andreu, S. et al. Évaluations 2020, repères CP, CE1: premiers résultats [2020 assessments, first and second grades benchmarks: first results] (Ministère de l’Éducation nationale, de la Jeunesse et des Sports, 2020); https://www.education.gouv.fr/evaluations-2020-reperes-cp-ce1-premiers-resultats-307122

Engzell, P., Frey, A. & Verhagen, M. D. Learning loss due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118 , e2022376118 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Maldonado, J. E. & De Witte, K. The effect of school closures on standardized student test outcomes (KU Leuven—Faculty of Economics and Business, 2020); https://limo.libis.be/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=LIRIAS3189074&context=L&vid=Lirias&search_scope=Lirias&tab=default_tab&lang=en_US

Domingue, B., Hough, H. J., Lang, D. & Yeatman, J. Changing patterns of growth in oral reading fluency during the COVID-19 pandemic (PACE, 2021); https://edpolicyinca.org/publications/changing-patterns-growth-oral-reading-fluency-during-covid-19-pandemic

Dorn, E., Hancock, B., Sarakatsannis, J. & Viruleg, E. COVID-19 and learning loss—disparities grow and students need help (McKinsey & Company, 2020); https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/covid-19-and-learning-loss-disparities-grow-and-students-need-help

Angrist, N. et al. Building back better to avert a learning catastrophe: estimating learning loss from COVID-19 school shutdowns in Africa and facilitating short-term and long-term learning recovery. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 84 , 102397 (2021).

Reddy, V., Soudien, C. & Winnaar, L. Disrupted learning during COVID-19: the impact of school closures on education outcomes in South Africa (The Conversation, 2020); https://theconversation.com/impact-of-school-closures-on-education-outcomes-in-south-africa-136889

Entwisle, D. R. & Alexander, K. L. Summer setback: race, poverty, school composition, and mathematics achievement in the first two years of school. Am. Sociol. Rev. 57 , 72–84 (1992).

Kieffer, M. J. Catching up or falling behind? Initial English proficiency, concentrated poverty, and the reading growth of language minority learners in the United States. J. Educ. Psychol. 100 , 851–868 (2008).

Calarco, J. M., Horn, I. & Chen, G. A. ‘You need to be more responsible’: how math homework operates as a status-reinforcing process in school. Preprint at SocArXiv https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/xf96q (2020).

Kaiper-Marquez, A. et al. On the fly: adapting quickly to emergency remote instruction in a family literacy program. Int. Rev. Educ. 66 , 1–23 (2020).

Barton, D. C. Impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic on field instruction and remote teaching alternatives: results from a survey of instructors. Ecol. Evol. 10 , 12499–12507 (2020).

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

IJzerman, H. et al. Use caution when applying behavioural science to policy. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4 , 1092–1094 (2020).

Taylor, J. & Mallery, J. In person and online learning go together (Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, 2020); https://siepr.stanford.edu/research/publications/person-and-online-learning-go-together

Dietrichson, J., Bøg, M., Filges, T. & Klint Jørgensen, A. M. Academic interventions for elementary and middle school students with low socioeconomic status: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 87 , 243–282 (2017).

Núñez, J. C. et al. Teachers’ feedback on homework, homework-related behaviors, and academic achievement. J. Educ. Res. 108 , 204–216 (2015).

Singh, R. et al. In Artificial Intelligence in Education (eds Biswas, G.et al.) 328–336 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011).

Harackiewicz, J. M., Rozek, C. S., Hulleman, C. S. & Hyde, J. S. Helping parents to motivate adolescents in mathematics and science: an experimental test of a utility-value intervention. Psychol. Sci. 23 , 899–906 (2012).

Jeynes, W. A meta-analysis of the efficacy of different types of parental involvement programs for urban students. Urban Educ. 47 , 706–742 (2012).

Mol, S. E., Bus, A. G., De Jong, M. T. & Smeets, D. J. Added value of dialogic parent–child book readings: a meta-analysis. Early Educ. Dev. 19 , 7–26 (2008).

Angrist, N., Bergman, P. & Matsheng, M. School’s out: experimental evidence on limiting learning loss using “low-tech” in a pandemic (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2021); https://www.nber.org/papers/w28205

Carlana, M. & La Ferrara, E. Apart but connected: online tutoring and student outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic (Institute of Labor Economics, 2021); http://hdl.handle.net/10419/232846

Pagan, S. & Sénéchal, M. Involving parents in a summer book reading program to promote reading comprehension, fluency, and vocabulary in grade 3 and grade 5 children. Can. J. Educ. 37 , 1–31 (2014).

Sénéchal, M. & LeFevre, J. A. Parental involvement in the development of children’s reading skill: a five‐year longitudinal study. Child Dev. 73 , 445–460 (2002).

Starkey, P. & Klein, A. Fostering parental support for children’s mathematical development: an intervention with Head Start families. Early Educ. Dev. 11 , 659–680 (2000).

Buheji, M. et al. The extent of Covid-19 pandemic socio-economic impact on global poverty: a global integrative multidisciplinary review. Am. J. Econ. 10 , 213–224 (2020).

The world economy on a tightrope (OECD, 2020); http://www.oecd.org/economic-outlook/june-2020/

Martin, A., Markhvida, M., Hallegatte, S. & Walsh, B. Socio-economic impacts of COVID-19 on household consumption and poverty. Econ. Disasters Clim. Change 4 , 453–479 (2020).

Jetten, J., Mols, F. & Selvanathan, H. P. How economic inequality fuels the rise and persistence of the Yellow Vest movement. Int. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 33 , 2 (2020).

Wilkinson, R. G. & Pickett, K. E. Income inequality and social dysfunction. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 35 , 493–511 (2009).

Sommet, N., Morselli, D. & Spini, D. Income inequality affects the psychological health of only the people facing scarcity. Psychol. Sci. 29 , 1911–1921 (2018).

Hattie, J. Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-analyses Relating to Achievement (Routledge, 2008).

Cooper, H., Charlton, K., Valentine, J. C., Muhlenbruck, L. & Borman, G. D. Making the most of summer school: a meta-analytic and narrative review. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child 65 , 1–127 (2000).

Heyns, B. Schooling and cognitive development: is there a season for learning? Child Dev. 58 , 1151–1160 (1987).

McCombs, J. S., Augustine, C. H. & Schwartz, H. L. Making Summer Count: How Summer Programs can Boost Children’s Learning (Rand Education, 2011).

Borman, G. D. & Dowling, N. M. Longitudinal achievement effects of multiyear summer school: evidence from the teach Baltimore randomized field trial. Educ. Eval. Policy 28 , 25–48 (2006).

Kim, J. S. & Quinn, D. M. The effects of summer reading on low-income children’s literacy achievement from kindergarten to grade 8: a meta-analysis of classroom and home interventions. Rev. Educ. Res. 83 , 386–431 (2013).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank G. Reis for editing the figure. The writing of this manuscript was supported by grant ANR-19-CE28-0007–PRESCHOOL from the French National Research Agency (S.G.).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Université de Poitiers, CNRS, CeRCA, Centre de Recherches sur la Cognition et l’Apprentissage, Poitiers, France

Sébastien Goudeau & Camille Sanrey

Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS, LAPSCO, Laboratoire de Psychologie Sociale et Cognitive, Clermont-Ferrand, France

Arnaud Stanczak & Céline Darnon

School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK

Antony Manstead

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sébastien Goudeau .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature Human Behaviour thanks Daniele Checchi and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Goudeau, S., Sanrey, C., Stanczak, A. et al. Why lockdown and distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to increase the social class achievement gap. Nat Hum Behav 5 , 1273–1281 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01212-7

Download citation

Received : 15 March 2021

Accepted : 06 September 2021

Published : 27 September 2021

Issue Date : October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01212-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Socioeconomic inequalities in psychosocial well-being among adolescents under the covid-19 pandemic: a cross-regional comparative analysis in hong kong, mainland china, and the netherlands.

• Gary Ka-Ki Chung
• Xiaoting Liu
• Roger Yat-Nork Chung

Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology (2024)

Digital gender gaps in Students’ knowledge, attitudes and skills: an integrative data analysis across 32 Countries

• Diego G. Campos
• Ronny Scherer

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Microlearning as a Concept to Optimize Integrated Services for Racially/Ethnically Diverse Families of Autistic Children

• Zhiwen Xiao
• Sandra Vanegas

Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities (2024)

The ethicality of the COVID-19 response in children and adolescents

• Fiona McNicholas

Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) (2024)

Health-related quality of life of young refugees in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic: comparisons to non-refugees and pre-pandemic times

• Johanna Braig
• Pia Schmees
• Heike Eschenbeck

Current Psychology (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Goats and Soda

• Infectious Disease
• Development
• Women & Girls
• Coronavirus FAQ

The Coronavirus Crisis

Personal essay: coronavirus lockdown is a 'living hell'.

A Resident Of Wuhan

Editor's note: The author of this essay asked for anonymity for fear of reprisals by authorities for speaking critically of the Chinese government.

The government lockdown orders in Wuhan, China, have emptied the city's streets. Stringer for NPR hide caption

The government lockdown orders in Wuhan, China, have emptied the city's streets.

As residents of Wuhan, China, my family and I are living in hell.

The city has been locked down for more than a month. Every night before falling asleep I have been confronted by an unreal feeling and many questions:

Read This Essay In Chinese

To read this essay in Chinese, click here.

I know that coronavirus is the reason for the lockdown — but did life in Wuhan have to become a living hell?

Why were we notified about the city lockdown at 2 a.m. on the second to last morning before the Lunar New Year?

Why have I not been given any instructions from a government officer about how to cope when an entire city is on lockdown?

I'm nearly 30 years old. My family members and I have devoted ourselves to our jobs to build a better life — and we have largely succeeded. There's only a little more to do before we reach the level of middle class.

But along the way, things did not go exactly as I'd hoped. I have been working hard in school since I was small. My dream was to become a journalist, and I passed the test to enter the best school for journalism in China.

After school, I learned that government supervision of the media meant that telling the truth was not an option. So I gave up my dream and turned to another career.

I kept telling myself that my hard work would reward me in my personal life. And to protect myself, I decided to shut up, to be silent about politics — even when I saw people treated unfairly by the government. I thought that if I followed that path, I would be secure, I would be one of the fortunate ones.

Now I realize that this is an illusion. A secure life is not an option with a political system that does not give us freedom to speak out and that does not communicate with us truthfully.

At the moment when the city was first locked down, I hoped with all my heart that China's political system, known for concentrating resources to get big jobs done, could save the Wuhanese. But infected patients were treated in the hospital in Wuhan as early as the beginning of December, and for unknown reasons, the government held off informing the public and taking effective action.

So they missed the best window of prevention due to this cover-up.

That knowledge has made me fall into desperation. The order to lock down the city appeared from nowhere on Jan. 23 at 2 a.m., without any sign or explanation to residents — even though everyone knew what was up.

People rushed to shop at 24-hour convenience stores at 3 a.m. to gather necessary food and other items. We tried every method to escape from Wuhan, but the cage was already locked.

On new year's eve, Jan. 24, I watched the glorious performances from a gala aired on CCTV, Chinese television. But our celebratory meal was sparse, pieced together from the few ingredients I'd been able to buy in that last-minute shopping trip.

Then on the second day of the new year, another order arrived out of the blue, notifying us that the Wuhanese shall not drive. But this order only survived for less than six hours — perhaps because the authorities realized that, with public transportation shut down, cars would be needed to drive medical staffers to work and back home. So community officers called upon residents of Wuhan to provide rides for many of these workers — and to get permits to do this driving. Under the pressure of massive criticism, the government had to revoke this order for residents to provide rides.

Other orders were issued that reflected the chaos. Residents were asked to donate rice and oil to feed the medical staffers at Wuhan's top hospital since there was not enough food to guarantee meals for them. But we are the taxpayers. Shouldn't the government be able to provide?

From former schoolmates who now work in the medical profession, I learned that medical workers were not given medical supplies and were exposed to a risk of death. Many people wonder: Why didn't they go on strike? It is because they were informed that if they went on strike, their licenses to practice medicine would be revoked and their family members' jobs would be affected.

Before this coronavirus, I always thought it was OK to sacrifice some level of democracy and freedom for better living conditions. But now I have changed my attitude. Without democracy and freedom, the truth of the outbreak in Wuhan would never be known.

What has happened in Wuhan is as if your house caught on fire and all your neighbors knew but forbade you from jumping out of the window. Only until the fire is out of control, and the entire town ablaze, do they slowly begin taking responsibility while highlighting their own heroic efforts.

Not everyone has the same privileges and rights. Because I knew how to get outside of the Great Firewall that blocks the Internet, I was able to obtain masks.

The younger generations, born after 1995 and in the 2000s, have good impressions about the Chinese system, putting the nation before all because they have been living in an era of prosperity and have yet to experience adversity.

The things that happened during this outbreak have greatly surprised those kids. For example, a young man scolded others on Weibo in the early days of the outbreak. He accused them of spreading rumors and argued that if we don't trust the government, there is nothing we can trust. Later, he said, when a member of his family was infected with the coronavirus but was unable to get treatment in the overcrowded hospital, he cursed and called for help.

When Li Wenliang, one of the doctors who first reported a mysterious SARS-like illness, died of the disease himself, a student commented on the Internet: "It was just the virus that killed him, so we should focus on the epidemics." But then the student's dormitory was appropriated for quarantine patients — and he was shocked and dismayed.

This is the lesson these young people are learning. When someone says we can accomplish something but we must pay a price, do not rush to applaud.

One day you may become the price that is paid.

There is a saying in Chinese that has taken on new meaning in this coronavirus era: "When the stick hits my own head, I finally understand the pain — and why some others once cried out of pain."

Perhaps it is true that only China can build a hospital in 10 days, only China can mobilize so many people to devote themselves to the anti-epidemic agenda, only China can lock down a city with millions of people at lightning speed.

But people are not thinking critically. They do not understand that if we had human rights, democracy and freedom, we would have learned about what happened in Wuhan one month earlier. And the first whistleblower would not have died for nothing.

• coronavirus

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

The good, the bad and the ugly of lockdowns during Covid-19

Contributed equally to this work with: Talita Greyling, Stephanie Rossouw, Tamanna Adhikari

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation School of Economics, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Software, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation School of Economics, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand

Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

• Talita Greyling, 
• Stephanie Rossouw, 
• Tamanna Adhikari

• Published: January 22, 2021
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546
• Peer Review
• Reader Comments

Amidst the rapid global spread of Covid-19, many governments enforced country-wide lockdowns, with likely severe well-being consequences. In this regard, South Africa is an extreme case suffering from low levels of well-being, but at the same time enforcing very strict lockdown regulations. In this study, we analyse the causal effect of a lockdown and consequently, the determinants of happiness during the aforementioned. A difference-in-difference approach is used to make causal inferences on the lockdown effect on happiness, and an OLS estimation investigates the determinants of happiness after lockdown. The results show that the lockdown had a significant and negative impact on happiness. In analysing the determinants of happiness after lockdown, we found that stay-at-home orders have positively impacted happiness during this period. On the other hand, other lockdown regulations such as a ban on alcohol sales, a fear of becoming unemployed and a greater reliance on social media have negative effects, culminating in a net loss in happiness. Interestingly, Covid-19, proxied by new deaths per day, had an inverted U-shape relationship with happiness. Seemingly people were, at the onset of Covid-19 positive and optimistic about the low fatality rates and the high recovery rates. However, as the pandemic progressed, they became more concerned, and this relationship changed and became negative, with peoples' happiness decreasing as the number of new deaths increased.

Citation: Greyling T, Rossouw S, Adhikari T (2021) The good, the bad and the ugly of lockdowns during Covid-19. PLoS ONE 16(1): e0245546. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546

Editor: Francesco Di Gennaro, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani-IRCCS, ITALY

Received: July 29, 2020; Accepted: December 30, 2020; Published: January 22, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Greyling et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: The following authors received salaries from their institutions, whom were also the funders of the research. 1. Prof T Greyling: University of Johannesburg via the University Research Fund. 2. Dr Stephanie Rossouw: Auckland University of Technology via the Faculty of Business, Economics and Law. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

1. Introduction

In an attempt to curb the spread of Covid-19 and minimise the loss of life, governments around the world have imposed their version of mandatory self-isolation through implementing lockdown regulations. Unfortunately, restricting people's mobility and depriving them of what matters most might intensify the negative effect on happiness levels.

In an extreme country case, this might be amplified. In this study, we treat an extreme country as a country with very strict lockdown regulations, with likely high infection rates, amidst low levels of well-being. We define well-being as those aspects of life that society collectively agrees are important for a person's quality of life, happiness and welfare. One of the dimensions of well-being, material (income) hinges on a bleak economic outlook.

To this end, our primary aim in this study is to use the Gross National Happiness Index (GNH), a real-time measure of well-being, derived from Big Data, to investigate if lockdown regulations in itself caused a decrease in happiness. Secondly, we determine which factors matter most (factors significantly influencing happiness) to happiness under these changed circumstances. We accomplish these aims by using two econometric techniques: difference-in-difference (DiD) and ordinary least squares (OLS).

Against this backdrop, the current study makes several contributions to the literature:

• Determining whether lockdown regulations cause a decline in happiness –in an extreme country case scenario.
• Investigating specifically the determinants of happiness during a lockdown, whereas other studies have focused on mental well-being and related matters (see section 2).
• Being one of the few studies (see also Rossouw, Greyling and Adhikari; Greyling, Rossouw and Adhikari [ 1 , 2 ]) that investigates the effect of lockdown on happiness making use of real-time Big Data . Other studies such as Hamermesh [ 3 ] and Brodeur et al. [ 4 ] also use Big Data, though limited to Google Trends (see section 2).

These results give policymakers the necessary information to take action in increasing the happiness of the nation and set the scene for increased economic, social and political well-being. It also allows them to reflect on happiness outcomes due to their policy actions. An additional benefit of the current study is that policymakers do not need to wait for extended periods to see the consequences of their policies, as we are making use of real-time data, with immediate information. Usually, policymakers can only evaluate their own decision making, with significant time-lags, prolonging the implementation of corrective actions.

Our results indicate lockdown itself causes a decrease in happiness. Furthermore, in an extreme country case (a country under stringent lockdown regulations coupled with low levels of well-being) what matters most to happiness under lockdown is the factors directly linked to the regulations that were implemented. These factors can be classified as (i) social capital issues; lack of access to alcohol (and tobacco), increased social media usage, and more time to spend at home, of which all are negatively related to happiness except the stay-at-home factor, and (ii) economic issues; concerns over jobs and the threat of retrenchments, which are negatively related to happiness. The finding on the stay-at-home order is interesting as even though lockdown itself caused a decline in happiness, it seems that people adjust and over time begin to appreciate the benefits of staying at home.

Noteworthy is that Covid-19, proxied by new deaths per day, had an inverted U-shape relationship to happiness. Seemingly people were, at the onset of Covid-19, positive and optimistic as the fatality rate was relatively low and recovery rates high. However, as the pandemic progressed, they became more concerned, and this relationship changed and became negative, with peoples' happiness decreasing as the number of new Covid-19 deaths increased.

The rest of the paper is structured as follows. The next section contains a brief background on South Africa and briefly discusses literature about happiness and studies conducted on the impacts of pandemics and consequently lockdown regulations. Section 3 describes the data, the selected variables and outlines the methodology used. The results follow in section 4, while the paper concludes in section 5.

2. Background and literature review

2.1 south africa.

In this study, we focus on South Africa because it presents us with a unique case to investigate the effect of a lockdown on happiness when levels of well-being are already low. Health and income, two dimensions of well-being, was significantly affected, although in opposite directions. Health was positively affected by the lockdown since it limited the spread of Covid-19. At the stage of writing the paper (3 June 2020), the number of new Covid-19 cases were nearly 120,000 (John Hopkins University [ 5 ]). On the other hand, the economic outlook of the country, and therefore peoples' incomes, was negatively affected. This opposite effect has led to significant debates on the value of the implementation of the lockdown.

Furthermore, South Africa implemented one of the most stringent lockdown regulations (comparable to the Philippines and Jordan), which exacerbated the costs to well-being and the economy while already experiencing a severe economic downturn. Therefore, South Africa is an example of an extreme country case which unfortunately amplifies the effects of the difficult choices made by policymakers. Therefore, we take advantage of this unique country case and determine how stringent lockdown regulations impact happiness during a one in 100-year event.

In South Africa, there are five levels of differing lockdown regulations, with alert level 5 being the most stringent and alert level 1 the most relaxed. The idea behind these levels is to curb the spread of Covid-19 and give time to South Africa's health system to prepare itself. Additionally, as they move down in levels, South Africans receive increasingly more of their previous liberties back. During level 5, which was announced 23 March 2020 and implemented on 27 March 2020, South Africans were only allowed to leave their homes to purchase or produce essential goods. All South Africans were instructed to work from home, there was no travel allowed, the sale of alcohol and tobacco were banned, people were not allowed to exercise outside their homes, and the police and defence force ensured compliance to the restrictions. South Africa moved to level 4 lockdown on 01 May 2020. With this move, they received back the ability to exercise outside from 6 am—9 am, purchase more than just essential goods, including food deliveries as long as it was within curfew.

Interestingly, the sale of alcohol and tobacco was still banned. On 01 June they moved to level 3, allowing restricted sales of alcohol (Mondays to Thursdays) and the re-opening of certain businesses. However, the services industry, especially beauty and tourism, remained closed. At the time of writing this paper, South Africa was still under level 3 lockdown.

Whereas everybody understands that the Covid-19 infections curve needs to be flattened, there are grave concerns that these stringent lockdown regulations will also flatline South Africa's well-being and economy. Before the Covid-19 lockdown, South Africa's average happiness levels were 6.32 compared to an average of 7.23 and 7.16 in Australia and New Zealand, respectively (Greyling et al. [ 2 ]). Furthermore, South Africa had a 29 per cent unemployment rate, and the gross domestic product (GDP) has been estimated to shrink by 7 per cent in 2020 (Bureau of Economic Analysis [ 6 ]). According to the South African Reserve Bank [ 7 ], an additional 3 to 7 million people can potentially become unemployed as a direct consequence of the pandemic, thereby increasing unemployment rates to approximately 50 per cent. The country's sovereign credit rating was downgraded to junk status in March 2020, which impacted on political stability, the level of the national debt and debt interest payments. Add to this already grim situation, the fact that consumption of South Africans has been declining in 2020, with a significant decrease seen after lockdown, then one can very easily see how the well-being and happiness levels in South Africa can plummet.

2.2 Happiness

Why should we care whether people's happiness is adversely impacted by not only a global pandemic but also by the response from the government? The studies of Helliwell, Layard, Stiglitz et al., Veenhoven, Diener and Seligman and others [ 8 – 12 ], have shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that if policymakers want to maximise the quality of life of their citizens, they need to consider subjective measures of well-being. Piekalkiewicz [ 13 ] states that happiness may act as a determinant of economic outcomes: it increases productivity, predicts one's future income and affects labour market performance. By measuring happiness, individuals themselves reveal their preference and assigned priority to various domains, which cannot be identified by a measure such as GDP. As was pointed out by Layard [ 9 ], while economists use exactly the right framework for thinking about public policy, the accounts we use of what makes people happy are wrong. In layman's terms, we say that utility increases with the opportunities for voluntary exchange. However, Layard [ 14 ] argues that this overlooks the significance of involuntary interactions between people. Policymakers should formulate policy to maximise happiness or well-being, as is the main aim of many constitutions. This can be achieved by directing economic, social, political and environmental policy to maximise well-being while acknowledging that people's norms, aspirations, feelings and emotions are important. Thereby underscoring that understanding and measuring happiness should be an integral part of the efforts to maximise the quality of life.

On the other hand, if people's happiness is negatively affected, such as it was in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic and the implementation of lockdown regulations, there are far-reaching consequences.

These consequences are as follows:

• Social capital: unhappier people display less altruistic behaviour in the long run (Dunn et al. [ 15 ]). They are also less active, less creative, poor problem solvers, less social, and display more anti-social behaviour (Lyubomirsky et al. [ 16 ]). If unhappier people display more anti-social behaviour, South Africa could see an increase in behaviour such as unrests, violent strikes and perhaps higher crime rates.
• Health care: unhappier people are less physically healthy and die sooner (Lyubomirsky et al. [ 16 ]). Additionally, unhappy people engage in riskier behaviour such as smoking and drinking, thereby placing unnecessary pressure on national health systems.
• Economic: unhappy workers are typically less productive, in particular in jobs that require sociability and problem solving (Bryson et al. [ 17 ]). If an economy can raise the rate of growth of productivity, by ensuring their workers are happier, then the trend growth of national output can pick up.

2.3 Literature on the determinants of happiness during a lockdown

Having established that policymakers should strive to maximise the happiness of their people, it is necessary to know what determines happiness. Previous studies have investigated, at a macro-level, what influences happiness and found that economic growth, unemployment and inflation play a significant role (Stevenson and Wolfers, Perović, Sacks et al. [ 18 – 20 ]). However, these studies were conducted during 'normal' periods and not under such conditions that are currently plaguing the world. The current study will have the opportunity to investigate this exact question, namely what determines happiness during a lockdown driven by a global health pandemic.

Naturally, the number of studies being conducted to examine the effect of Covid-19 is growing exponentially. This increasing interest in the effect of a global pandemic as well as the policies implemented by governments on peoples' well-being, come on the back of relatively few studies conducted during prior pandemics such as SARS and the H1N1. When SARS hit in 2002 and then again when H1N1 hit in 2009, scholars were only truly starting to understand that for governments to formulate policies to increase well-being, you needed to measure well-being. Of the current studies being conducted on the effect of Covid-19 or lockdown regulations on all affected domains, not many studies are in a position to use real-time Big Data, such as we do.

In layman's terms, Big Data is a phrase used to describe a massive volume of both structured (for example stock information) and unstructured data (for example tweets) generated through information and communication technologies such as the Internet (Rossouw and Greyling [ 1 ]). At the time of writing this paper, the following studies were closest aligned with our study and focused on:

• nationwide lockdown on institutional trust, attitudes to government, health and well-being, using survey data collected at two points in time (December 2019 and April 2020) (1003 respondents) (Sibley et al. [ 21 ]). Their preliminary results showed a small increase in people's sense of community and trust. However, they also found an increase in anxiety/depression post-lockdown and hinted at longer-term challenges to mental health.
• the happiness of married and single people while in government-imposed lockdown by running simulations to formulate predictions, using Google Trends data (Hamermesh [ 3 ]). Not surprisingly, married people were more satisfied with life than single people.
• the timing of decision-making by politicians to release lockdown based on a comparison of economic benefits with the social and psychological benefits versus the cost, increase in deaths if policymakers released lockdown too early (Layard et al. [ 22 ])
• the stages of GNH using a Markov switching model in New Zealand (Rossouw et al. [ 23 ]). They found that happiness was at a lower level and the unhappy state lasted longer than was expected. Furthermore, they found that the factors important for New Zealand's happiness post-Covid-19 were related to international travel, employment and mobility.
• exploring Covid-19 related determinants of life dissatisfaction and feelings of anxiety in a cross-country study using survey data collected between 23 March and 30 April (de Pedraza et al. [ 24 ]). They found that persons with poorer general health, without employment, living without a partner, not exercising daily and those actively seeking out loneliness report higher dissatisfaction and higher anxiety. Additionally, they found that the effect of Covid-19 on dissatisfaction and anxiety levels off with a higher number of cases.

2.4 Literature on the causal effect of a lockdown

To the knowledge of the authors, there are only two papers that investigated the causal effect between lockdowns and population well-being. Brodeur et al. [ 4 ] investigated the changes in well-being (and mental health) in the United States and Europe after a lockdown was implemented, using Google Trends data. They found an increase in searches for loneliness, worry and sadness, which indicated a negative effect on mental health. Greyling et al. [ 2 ] conducted a cross-country study investigating the effect of lockdown on happiness. They found that lockdown caused a negative effect on happiness, notwithstanding the different characteristics of the countries (South Africa, New Zealand and Australia), the duration and the type of lockdown regulations. When they compared the effect size of the lockdown regulations, they found that South Africa, with the most stringent lockdown regulations incurred the greatest happiness costs.

Brodeur et al. [ 4 ] study analysed data from one Big Data source, Google Trends and collected data for a short period between only 01 January 2019 and 10 April 2020 in countries that had introduced a full lockdown by the end of this period. Greyling et al. [ 2 ] study used both Google Trends and the GNH index but did not investigate the determinants of happiness after lockdown for an extreme country case.

In summary, taking all of the above into consideration, there is not one study which determines causality between lockdown and happiness and analyses the determinants of happiness in an extreme country case using real-time , Big Data . Therefore, our study is the first of its kind.

3. Data and methodology

To estimate the causal effects of a lockdown on happiness, we use a Difference-in-Difference (DiD) approach (see section 3.3.1). The technique compares happiness (dependent variable), before and after the treatment (the lockdown) to a counterfactual time period in the year before. For the control period, we select the same time period, with the same number of days in 2019, corresponding to the number of days in 2020, thus 152 days in each year (01 January 2020 to 03 June 2020, excluding 29 February 2020). Our results should thus be interpreted as the average impact of the lockdown on happiness, comparing pre and post-lockdown in 2020 to the same time period in 2019, which we assume had normal levels of Gross National Happiness (see a discussion on the GNH in section 3.2.1). In this manner, we also account for seasonal trends in happiness.

In the analyses, we make use of daily data for South Africa. As high-frequency data available at almost real-time, is scarce, we make use of novel Big Data methodologies to harvest data. Additionally, we use the Oxford Stringency dataset that was released in May 2020, which includes data related to lockdown regulations, such as time-series data on the stay-at-home index, Covid-19 cases and Covid-19 deaths (Hale et al., Roser et al. [ 25 , 26 ]).

3.2 Selection of variables

The selection of the variables included in our estimations is based on the reviewed literature, the contents of tweets related to the lockdown and data availability.

3.2.1 Gross National Happiness Index–the dependent variable.

To measure happiness (the dependent variable), we make use of the Gross National Happiness Index (GNH), which was launched in April 2019 (Greyling, Rossouw and Afstereo [ 27 ]). This project measures the happiness (mood) of a country's citizens during different economic, social and political events.

Since February 2020, the researchers extended the project that initially analysed the sentiment of tweets, to incorporate the analysis of the emotions underpinning tweets. The team did this to determine which emotions are most prominent on specific days or events.

To construct the GNH index, the researchers use Big Data methods and extract tweets from the voluntary information-sharing social media platform Twitter. Big Data, such as Twitter, provides real-time information for policymakers to assist them when facing short-term deadlines with imperfect information. Big Data also allows governments to 'listen' and capture those variables which their citizens deem to be important for their well-being, rather than relying on pre-defined economic utility theories. Big Data offers governments the opportunity to observe people's behaviour and not just their opinions. This approach of revealed preferences unveils a reflexive picture of society because it allows the main concerns of citizens (and the priority ranking of those concerns) to emerge spontaneously, and it complements as such the information captured by gross domestic product. Lastly, Big Data does not suffer from non-response bias (Callegaro and Yang [ 28 ]).

Greyling, Rossouw and Afstereo [ 27 ] apply sentiment analysis to a live Twitter-feed and label every tweet as having either a positive, neutral or negative sentiment. This sentiment classification is then applied to a sentiment-balance algorithm to derive a happiness score. The happiness scores range between 0 and 10, with five being neutral, thus neither happy nor unhappy.

All tweets per day are extracted, and a happiness score per hour is calculated. The index is available live on the GNH website (Greyling, Rossouw and Afstereo [ 27 ]). In South Africa, the average number of tweets extracted for 2020 is 68,524 per day. South Africa has approximately 11 million Twitter users, representing almost 18 per cent of the population (Omnicore [ 29 ]). Although the number of tweets is extensive and represents significant proportions of the populations of the countries, it is not representative. However, Twitter accommodates individuals, groups of individuals, organisations and media outlets, representing a kind of disaggregated sample, thus giving access to the moods of a vast blend of Twitter users, not found in survey data.

Furthermore, purely based on the vast numbers of the tweets, it seems that the GNH index gives a remarkably robust reflection of the evaluative mood of a nation. Also, we correlate the GNH index with 'depression' and 'anxiety', derived from the 'Global behaviors and perceptions at the onset of the Covid-19 Pandemic data ' survey, for the period from 01 March 2020 (OFS [ 30 ]). We find it negative and statistically significant related, therefore, it seems that the GNH index derived from Big Data gives similar trends to survey data. (We would have appreciated the opportunity to correlate the GNH to a happiness measure–but a happiness measure, as such, was not included in the survey).

Considering the GNH index over time, we found that the index accurately reflects a nation's emotions, for example, when South Africa won the Rugby World Cup on 02 November 2019, the happiness index accurately depicted the joy experienced by South Africans ( Fig 1 ). The hourly happiness score was 7.9 at 13:00, the highest score ever measured, at the exact time that the final whistle was blown to announce the victory of the Springboks over England.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

Source: Authors' calculations using GNH dataset (Greyling et al. [ 27 ]).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546.g001

Also, when the famous American basketball player, Kobe Bryant and his daughter Gigi, tragically passed away on 27 January 2020, the happiness index once again captured the negative mood of the nation, and the happiness score decreased to 5.8, significantly below the mean (see Fig 2 ). The result of the GNH mirrors the one determined by the Hedonometer, which recorded an average happiness score of 5.89 on the day of Bryant's death. The top three words that made this day sadder than the previous seven were 'crash', 'died' and 'rip'.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546.g002

3.2.2 The selection of covariates included in estimations.

We found ourselves in uncharted territory, as there are limited studies estimating happiness functions during a lockdown (see Brodeur et al., Greyling et al., Rossouw et al. [ 2 , 4 , 23 ]). As a result, we considered these studies and the tweets to determine the factors to consider, which might influence happiness during a lockdown , as well as the most tweeted subjects. It was evident from the tweets that the main topics of discussion related to economic concerns, the prohibition of the sale of alcohol and tobacco, the stay-at-home orders and the Covid-19 pandemic itself.

To estimate our difference-in-difference model, we restricted our covariates to the lockdown variable, a year effect, the difference-in-difference estimator and controlled for new Covid-19 deaths, job searches and searches for alcohol. We were restricted in the number of covariates due to the limited observations and potentially encountering the issue of over-identification of the models. Therefore, we selected those variables which were available for both 2019 and 2020, and which were also trending subjects during the lockdown period. We were not able to add a stay-at-home variable which captures the lack of mobility, as the counterfactual time period is then not comparable to 2020.

Lockdown, our treatment variable, divides the sample into two distinct time periods: before the announcement of the lockdown, 23 March 2020 and thereafter. We make use of the date of the announcement of the lockdown rather than the date of the implementation, as this showed the severest effect on happiness (see Brodeur et al. [ 4 ]).

The Covid-19 pandemic and consequent spread of the virus is the reason for the lockdown. As such, we include the number of new daily Covid-19 deaths as well as its square. This will allow us to control for the likelihood of a U-shaped relationship between the number of Covid-19 deaths and happiness. Furthermore, there is likely a lagged effect on happiness due to Covid-19 deaths being reported in the media only the following day. Therefore, we lag these variables by one day. We derive the data from the Oxford Stringency data set (Hale et al. and Roser et al. [ 25 , 26 ]).

To measure jobs (a proxy for future job uncertainty) and the sale of alcohol and tobacco, we use the methodology as set out by Nuti et al. and Brodeur et al. [ 4 , 31 ] and use daily searches on Google Trends (see also Simionescu and Zimmermann [ 7 ]). We considered searches for both the alcohol and tobacco topic; however, the variables follow the same trends during the lockdown period and are highly correlated (r = 0.83). We are, furthermore, restricted in the number of covariates to include in the model and decided to include only 'alcohol' in the estimations. We justify this decision since the ban of alcohol affects a larger proportion of the population. It is estimated that 41 per cent of males and 17.1 per cent of females consume on average 9.3 litres of alcohol per capita annually whereas only 17.6 per cent smoke (Peltzer et al. and Reddy et al. [ 32 , 33 ]). However, as a robustness check, we also run all estimations using the searches for tobacco.

It should be noted that when we use Google Trends data, it is expressed as an index between 0 and 100 with 0 being the "least" interest and 100 being the "most" interest shown in the topic for the year. However, the series are not comparable across years as the underlying data is sourced from different search requests for each of the two years. To address this, we use a scaling procedure outlined in Brodeur et al. [ 4 ]. First, we generate "weekly" interest weights for each day by expressing the average weekly score that a particular daily score fell on, as a proportion of the average yearly score. Then, we multiply the daily scores with these weights to obtain weighted search trends. Finally, we normalise these weighted search trends to render us a score between 0 and 100, which is comparable across years.

Other topics that are trending are related to the 'stay-at-home' orders. The Oxford Stringency dataset includes a time series variable on the stay-at-home orders. It differs on a day to day basis according to its stringency. It is an ordinal variable plus binary of geographic scope. It takes the value 0 if there are no stay-at-home orders and 1 if the government recommends not leaving your house. Value 2 represents people not leaving their homes with the exceptions of daily exercise, grocery shopping, and 'essential' trips. Not leaving your home with minimal exceptions (e.g. allowed to leave only once a week, or only one person can leave at a time, etc.) takes the value 3 (Hale et al. [ 25 ]).

Furthermore, we include the number of tweets per day, as it forms part of the Twitter data extracted daily for South Africa (Greyling et al. [ 27 ]), which is a proxy for connectivity. It also gauges the opportunity cost of not being able to have face to face interactions, which seems to be negatively related to happiness (Chae and Wilson et al. [ 34 , 35 ]). Interestingly the number of tweets increased markedly during the lockdown period, from an average of 60,708 to 80,000 tweets per day. Table 1 provides descriptive statistics for the variables included in the estimations.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546.t001

3.3 Methodology

3.3.1 difference-in-difference..

Where GNH it is the daily happiness for South Africa at time t . The treatment variable lockdown takes the value of 0 pre-announcement day (23 March) and one post-announcement of lockdown in both the year of the actual lockdown (2020) as well as the year before the lockdown (2019). Year is a dummy variable where 1 is the year 2020. We control for new deaths per million with a one-day lag as well as the quadratic effect of new deaths per million on GNH. Additionally, we control for the effect of job and alcohol searches. As a robustness test, we use the number of new Covid-19 cases instead of new Covid-19 deaths (see Table 4 in S1 Appendix ).

Our main coefficient of interest is the interaction between the lockdown and the year variable. If it is found to be significant, it provides evidence of a causal effect of the lockdown on the dependent variable, in the current year, notwithstanding the trend in 2019.

3.3.2 OLS regression.

Here, y t refers to the Gross National Happiness Index (GNH) for each day and X t is a vector of several relevant covariates to account for the changes in the happiness levels during the lockdown period. μ t is the error term.

Due to the various factors that affect happiness, some of our independent variables may be correlated with the error term, leading to endogeneity concerns. Depending on the direction of the correlation between the error term and the X-variable, the coefficient could be biased upwards or downwards. For instance, the coefficient on the indicator for jobs is likely biased upwards as it, in all likelihood, shows the effect of concerns about jobs as well as some other negative economic shock on happiness. In the absence of panel data or an appropriate instrument, it is difficult to ascertain causality to Eq ( 2 ). However, simply correlating the covariates and the error term we find all levels of correlation to be less than 0.3, although a very basic test, this still indicates that the likelihood that endogeneity might bias estimations is relatively small. A natural extension of the work, as better data becomes available with time, would be to address these concerns.

We cannot rule out the probability of autocorrelation and heterogeneity in our data, especially due to its time-series nature. We use robust standard errors to account for this. The choice of our controls, however, comes with a caveat. Seeing as we only have 81 daily observations using a larger battery of covariates would lead to problems arising due to overfitting of the model. This issue is considered in Green [ 36 ], who suggests a minimum of 50 observations for any regressions as well as an additional eight observations per additional term. As a robustness test, we included tobacco rather than alcohol products (see Table 5 in S1 Appendix ).

4. Results and analysis

4.1 difference-in-difference estimation.

Fig 3 tracks the dependent variable (GNH) over the time period before and after the date of the lockdown (23 March) in the year of the lockdown (2020) and the year preceding it. On the day of the announcement of the lockdown and for a few successive days, we see a sharp downwards departure from the 2019 trend, assumed to be normal.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546.g003

Table 2 provides the results for the difference-in-difference specification, which helps us to make causal inferences on the effect of the lockdown on the GNH. At the outset, we notice a negative and significant effect of the 'year' variable (p<0.001), showing that on average the GNH was lower in 2020 than in 2019.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546.t002

We control for trends in job searches (a proxy for job uncertainty) and alcohol searches (a proxy for increased interest in alcohol-related topics in the specification). Both variables show a negative association with GNH, implying if there are more searches for jobs or alcohol, reflecting a scarcity in these items, GNH decreases. The negative effect of alcohol is statistically significant at the 1% level (p<0.001). We also control for lagged new Covid-19 related deaths and lagged new Covid-19 related deaths squared, both are significant (p<0.001). Interesting is the finding of the significant inverted U-shaped relationship between new Covid-19 deaths and happiness ( Fig 4 ). In the earlier stages of the pandemic, with very few new Covid-19 deaths, it appears that people were positive and optimistic as the fatality rates were very low and the recovery rates very high. However, as time progressed, the higher fatality rates turned the relationship around so that the number of new Covid-19 cases were negatively related to happiness.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546.g004

To determine if the decrease in GNH was due to the lockdown (the treatment) specifically and not just due to the year trend, we must consider the estimated coefficient of the interaction variable 'lockdown and year'. We report a negative and statistically significant coefficient (p-value 0.064) on the interaction variable, indicating that 'lockdown' caused, on average a decrease in GNH of 0.101 points when compared to its mean values for average 2019 values, controlling for the general trend in the two years. Thus, we can conclude that the lockdown caused a decline in GNH in 2020 compared to 2019. The decline of 0.101 may seem small at first but given the low general levels of happiness in South Africa compared to other countries (Greyling et al. [ 27 ]) the reduction is substantial.

4.2 Regression analysis

To address the second research question, namely, to determine the factors that are related to happiness after the lockdown was implemented, we consider the results of Table 3 .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546.t003

Table 3 shows that job searches (p-value 0.09), searches for alcohol (p-value<0.001) and the number of tweets is negatively related to happiness. In contrast, the stay-at-home index is positively related to happiness (p-value<0.001). The squared relationship between new Covid-19 deaths and happiness is negative and statistically significant (p-value<0.001), indicating that this relationship changed over time as was highlighted in section 4.1. Suppose we consider the relatively low mortality rate (0.02 per cent of confirmed cases in the early stages) compared to countries such as the USA (3.9 per cent), the U.K. (15.4 per cent) and Spain (9.4 per cent). In that case, it could explain the initial positive relationship between the number of new Covid-19 deaths and happiness. Although as time passed and the death rate increased (currently, the mortality rate is at 1.5 per cent of confirmed cases), this relationship became negative. As a robustness test, we used the number of new Covid-19 cases and its square instead of the new Covid-19 deaths and found similar results (see Table 4 in S1 Appendix ).

As expected, job searches, a proxy for uncertainty about the future job market is negatively related to happiness (p-value<0.001). Analysing the tweets, we realised that this is a major concern, which is closely related to economic concerns. The economic performance of South Africa in the last year has been weak with high levels of unemployment (increase to 50 per cent), low growth rates (GDP is expected to contract with 7 per cent in 2020) and high debt to income ratios (government debt as a percentage of GDP– 80 per cent). In a recent survey conducted by Statistics South Africa on behavioural and health impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic (Statistics South Africa [ 37 ]), it was found that 95 per cent of the respondents were very concerned about the economy. In contrast, only 60 per cent was concerned about the Covid-19 pandemic itself. This supports our current findings in that economic factors matter more to South Africans happiness levels than Covid-19 itself.

Alcohol-related searches are also found to be negatively related to happiness (p-value<0.001). Considering the close correlation between alcohol and tobacco products, we can assume that what holds for alcohol products, also holds for tobacco products. As a robustness test, we excluded the alcohol variable and included searches for tobacco variable and found very similar results (see Table 5 in S1 Appendix ). South Africa is one of the very few countries globally that have banned alcohol and tobacco sales during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is argued that these products contribute to the negative effects of the virus. The banning of these products had severe implications on different levels of society. Individuals see this as a major infringement of their human rights, negatively affecting their happiness. Furthermore, research done by Sommer et al. [ 38 ] proved that because of the presence of hordenine in beer, it significantly contributes to mood-elevation. In South Africa, which is well-known for its high per capita beer and alcohol consumption (Statistics South Africa [ 39 ]), also related to 'socialising', the ban on these products had a severe negative effect on happiness. Even in level 3, when the ban on alcohol sales was lifted, but still restricted, we found this negative relationship.

The restricted sale of alcohol and tobacco has indirect consequences for South Africans happiness via the economic impact since these industries are two of the largest industries in South Africa. They employ people across the whole supply chain from production to retail. Due to the ban on these industries, people can potentially lose their jobs. Lastly, the government sector forgoes all taxes on these products. This is against the backdrop of the recent downgrade of South Africa's debt rating to junk status in an already very uncertain fiscal environment. If all of these factors are aggregated, we can understand that the cumulative effect of the banning and restriction of sales of these products severely decreases the happiness levels. In Table 5 in S1 Appendix , we use tobacco searches instead of alcohol to estimate the determinants of happiness, which gives us results that are qualitatively similar to Table 3 .

The number of tweets is negatively related to happiness (p-value<0.001). Previous research has shown that increases in the use of social media are negatively related to happiness (Rolland et al., Chae and Wilson et al. [ 34 , 40 , 41 ]). Noteworthy is that the number of tweets during the lockdown period increased significantly from an average of 60,708 per day before the lockdown to 80,000 per day after the lockdown indicating that more people used social media during the lockdown period.

Interesting is the result of the stay-at-home orders being positively related to happiness (p-value<0.001). On analysing the contents of the tweets, we find the following. South Africans are wary of contracting Covid-19, and therefore, they abide by the stay-at-home orders and social distancing regulations to minimise the risk. That means that the stay-at-home orders in itself increase happiness; it is only once the other lockdown regulations are added that a total decrease in happiness levels are experienced.

Additional benefits revealed from analysing the tweets show that being at home provides a more peaceful and calmer environment compared to the rushed experience outside their homes. Also, people in the suburbs seem to be more convivial, with strangers greeting one another as people went for short walks around their neighbourhoods. In general, people have more time to spend with their loved ones. People earning salaries incur major savings, as there is less opportunity to spend money. People also save on commuting to and from workplaces and other destinations. One of the unexpected benefits of the stay-at-home orders is the much lower crime rates experienced in the country. Homes are constantly occupied, limiting the risk of residential robberies (-3.8 per cent). Other types of crimes such as murder (-72 per cent), rape (-87.2 per cent) and carjacking (-80.9 per cent) are much lower as well (Adapted from the speech of Police Minister Cele 2020 [ 42 ]).

In summary, what changed when the lockdown regulations to curb the spread of Covid-19 were implemented? It caused a significant decrease in happiness, and factors related to the lockdown regulations became relevant determinants of happiness.

5. Conclusions

In this paper, we used the Gross National Happiness Index (GNH), a real-time measure of well-being, derived from Big Data, to investigate whether lockdown regulations caused a decrease in happiness. Additionally, we determined which factors matter to happiness under these changed circumstances. We accomplished these aims by using two models: difference-in-difference and ordinary least squares.

We added to the current literature by determining causality between lockdown and happiness and analysing the determinants of happiness after a lockdown in an extreme country case using real-time , Big Data . Subsequently, this was the first study of its kind.

To determine if the decrease in GNH was due to the lockdown, specifically, we considered the estimated coefficient of the interaction variable 'lockdown and year'. We found a negative and statistically significant coefficient on the interaction variable, indicating that the lockdown caused a decline in GNH in 2020 compared to 2019.

As regards to the factors that are related to happiness after the lockdown was implemented, we found searches for alcohol (tobacco), the number of tweets and uncertainty about the future job market to be negatively related to happiness. In contrast, stay-at-home orders are positively related to happiness. Interesting is the negative and statistically significant squared relationship between new Covid-19 deaths and happiness, indicating that this relationship initially was positive but became negative over time.

Considering the results mentioned above, it ultimately means that if policymakers want to increase happiness levels and increase the probability to achieve the happiness levels of 2019, they must consider those factors that matter most to peoples' happiness. These factors include allowing creatures of habits some of their lost comforts by reinstating the sale of alcohol and tobacco. In saying that, we do advocate for responsible alcohol use by all South Africans and note that the significant effect of the ban on the sale of alcohol could be confounded by the restriction on social gatherings as well.

These results are important for countries in similar well-being situations, thus low levels of happiness, a diverse state of the economy and an increasing number of Covid-19 cases to evaluate what the effect of a strict lockdown is.

Additionally, policymakers should assure citizens that there is a credible plan to get the economy, which is currently in dire straits, back on track. Such an economic plan should stimulate growth, create job opportunities and increase employment rates, supply the necessary infrastructure and deal with curbing vast budget deficits and debt burdens. Hopefully, such policies will fuel the dying embers of a dying economy and increase well-being levels.

Lastly, it would be remiss of us not to note the limitations of the study. First, we were restricted in the number of covariates we could add to our difference-in-difference model due to the limited observations and therefore potentially overidentifying the models. Second, regarding the inverted U-shaped relationship between new Covid-19 deaths and happiness, we acknowledge that there might be confounding factors at play, initially seen as ‘positives' of the lockdown, but later turned into negatives. However, using alternative sets of covariates in the regression analyses, the inverted U-shape between new Covid-19 deaths and happiness remained. Therefore we trust that the revealed relationship is robust.

Supporting information

S1 appendix. robustness checks..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546.s001

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245546.s002

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank our colleagues Professor Emeritus John Knight from Oxford University and Dr Kelsey O'Connor from STATEC Luxembourg, for their generosity in providing feedback on the study.

• 1. Rossouw S. & Greyling T. (2020). Big Data and Happiness. Invited chapter for the Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics. Edited by Zimmermann Klaus F.
• 2. Greyling T, Rossouw S, Adhikari T. A tale of three countries: How did Covid-19 lockdown impact happiness? GLO Discussion Paper; 2020.
• 3. Hamermesh DS. Lockdowns, loneliness and life satisfaction. National Bureau of Economic Research; 2020 Apr 16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-020-09495-x pmid:32837455
• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 5. John Hopkins University. Coronavirus Resource Centre. (2020). Available at https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html Accessed 08 May 2020.
• 6. Bureau of Economic Research (2020). Available from https://www.ber.ac.za/BER%20Documents/Economic-Prospects/?doctypeid=1059 Accessed 08 June 2020
• 7. Simionescu M, Zimmermann KF. Big data and unemployment analysis. GLO Discussion Paper; 2017.
• 8. Helliwell JF. The Economics of Happiness. The National Bureau of Economic Research. 2015. Reporter 2:14–17.
• 10. Stevenson B, Wolfers J. Economic growth and subjective well-being: Reassessing the Easterlin paradox. National Bureau of Economic Research; 2008 Aug 29.
• PubMed/NCBI
• 14. Layard R. Happiness: Lessons from a new science. Penguin UK; 2011 Apr 7.
• 18. Statistics South Africa. Behavioural and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa. 2020. Available at http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-00-80-02/Report-00-80-022020.pdf Accessed 08 June 2020
• 20. Sacks DW, Stevenson B, Wolfers J. Subjective Well-Being, Income, Economic Development, and Growth. In Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics 2011: Development Challenges in a Post-crisis World 2013 Oct 11 (p. 283). World Bank Publications.
• 22. Layard R, Clark AE, De Neve JE, Krekel C, Fancourt D, Hey N, et al. When to Release the Lockdown? A Wellbeing Framework for Analysing Costs and Benefits. IZA Discussion Papers; 2020.
• 23. Rossouw S, Greyling T, Adhikari T, Morrison PS. Markov switching models for happiness during a pandemic: The New-Zealand experience. GLO Discussion Paper; 2020.
• 24. de Pedraza P, Guzi M, Tijdens K. Life Dissatisfaction and Anxiety in COVID-19 pandemic. GLO Discussion Paper; 2020.
• 25. Hale T, Petherick A, Phillips T, Webster S. Variation in government responses to COVID-19. Blavatnik School of Government Working Paper. 2020 May 27;31
• 26. Roser, M., Ritchie, H., Ortiz-Ospina, E. & Hasell, J. Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) 2020. Available at https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus Accessed on 18 June 2020.
• 27. Greyling T, Rossouw S, Afstereo. Gross National Happiness Index. The University of Johannesburg and Afstereo [producers]. 2019. Available at http://gnh.today . Accessed 08 May 2020.
• 29. Omnicore. Omnicore Agency. Available at https://www.omnicoreagency.com/ Accessed on 26 February 2020.
• 30. OFS. Global Behaviors and Perceptions in the COVID-19 Pandemic. 2020. Available at https://osf.io/g7fn9/ Accessed on 08 May 2020.
• 37. Statistics South Africa. Beer is more popular than vegetables. 2017. http://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=10269 Accessed 04 May 2020.
• 38. South African Reserve Bank (2020). Available from https://www.resbank.co.za/Research/Statistics/Pages/Statistics-Home.aspx 08 June 2020
• 42. Crime levels before South Africa's lockdown–and what they look like now. Business Tech. 2020 April 23. Available from https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/391877/crime-levels-before-south-africas-lockdown-and-what-they-look-like-now/

Life During Lockdown Essay for Students – 100, 500, 1000+ Words, & 10 Lines

Life During Lockdown Essay for Students: Explore the challenges, experiences, and lessons learned during the pandemic with “Life During Lockdown Essay for Students.” Understand the impact on education, mental health, and daily life, as students navigate through this unprecedented period.

Reflect on resilience, adaptability, and the importance of community support. Discover insights into remote learning, coping mechanisms, and maintaining social connections in the face of isolation. This Life During Lockdown Essay for Students delves into the unique aspects of students’ lives during lockdown, offering a comprehensive perspective on this transformative period.

Table of Contents

Life During Lockdown Essay in English for Students in 10 Lines

Explore the transformative journey of students during lockdown in “Life During Lockdown Essay for Students.” This Life During Lockdown Essay for Students encapsulates the challenges, adaptations, and resilience displayed by students, providing a comprehensive Life During Lockdown Essay for Students in view of their unique experiences in just 10 lines.

• Shift to Online Learning: With schools and colleges closed, education shifted to virtual platforms like Zoom and Google Meet.
• Work from Home: Many adults adapted to remote work setups, blurring the lines between personal and professional spaces.
• Increased Family Time: Lockdowns brought families together, fostering stronger bonds and shared activities.
• Rediscovery of Hobbies: People explored new hobbies or revisited old ones, finding solace in activities like painting, reading, or gardening.
• Digital Fatigue: Excessive screen time for work, classes, and socializing led to digital fatigue and burnout.
• Heightened Awareness of Health: The pandemic underscored the importance of physical and mental health, leading to increased focus on well-being.
• Challenges of Isolation: Social distancing measures caused feelings of isolation, emphasizing the need for human connection.
• Economic Uncertainty: Many faced financial challenges due to job losses or economic downturns during the pandemic.
• Reflection and Self-Discovery: The quieter pace of life allowed individuals to reflect on their goals and priorities, prompting self-discovery.
• Community Support: Acts of kindness and community support became prominent, with neighbors helping each other during challenging times.

Also See – Beti Bachao Beti Padhao Essay – 100, 500, 1000 Words & 10 Lines

Life During Lockdown Essay for Students in 100 Words

Amidst the lockdown, students experienced a unique blend of challenges and opportunities. From adapting to virtual learning to discovering new hobbies, this Life During Lockdown Essay for Students delves into the multifaceted aspects of their lives during this unprecedented time.

The life of students during the lockdown was a paradigm shift, transforming traditional classrooms into virtual spaces. Adjusting to online learning, students navigated a digital landscape for education and social interaction. The challenges were met with innovation, as virtual classrooms became the new norm. Beyond academics, the lockdown encouraged self-reflection and personal growth.

Students adapted, honing their resilience and creativity. Despite the uncertainties, the experience unveiled new opportunities for learning, collaboration, and adapting to the evolving educational landscape. The lockdown period will be remembered as a time of transformation, where students not only faced challenges but also discovered their capacity to overcome and thrive in an ever-changing world.

Life During Lockdown in English Essay for Students in 500 Words

This Life During Lockdown Essay for Students explores the transformative journey of students during the lockdown, covering aspects such as online education, mental health, and personal growth. Life During Lockdown Essay for Students delves into the challenges faced and the resilience displayed, offering a comprehensive perspective on the student experience during this extraordinary period.

Life During Lockdown: Navigating Challenges and Discovering Resilience

The onset of the global COVID-19 pandemic triggered an unprecedented disruption to normal life, profoundly impacting students and their educational journeys. As classrooms shifted to virtual spaces, students faced a myriad of challenges, yet amidst the chaos emerged stories of resilience and personal growth.

The abrupt transition to online education was a significant hurdle for many students. Technological limitations, internet connectivity issues, and adapting to new learning platforms became recurrent obstacles. However, amidst these challenges, students displayed commendable adaptability. They quickly learned to navigate virtual tools, collaborate effectively in a digital environment, and manage their time efficiently.

The toll on mental health was palpable. Isolation, uncertainty about the future, and the pressure to adapt to new educational norms contributed to heightened stress levels among students. Yet, this period of upheaval also revealed the strength of the human spirit. Many students sought mental health support, and communities rallied together to foster emotional well-being.

The lockdown also provided a unique opportunity for personal reflection and growth. With the constraints of daily routines lifted, students delved into hobbies and passions, rediscovering interests that had been neglected in the hustle of pre-pandemic life. This newfound free time became a catalyst for personal development beyond academic pursuits.

Family dynamics underwent a significant transformation. With extended periods spent at home, students found themselves in the midst of increased family bonding. Shared experiences, conversations, and collaborative activities became integral to this period, fostering stronger familial ties and creating enduring memories.

As students navigated these challenges, they reflected on their priorities. The lockdown became a time of introspection, prompting individuals to reconsider their career goals, academic pursuits, and personal aspirations. Many emerged from this period with a more intentional approach to life, understanding the importance of balance and well-being.

The lessons learned during this period are invaluable, shaping not only the trajectory of education but also the personal development and priorities of students around the globe. As the world moves beyond the pandemic, these experiences will continue to influence how students approach education and life’s challenges in the future.

Life During Lockdown Essay for Students in 1000+ Words

This comprehensive Life During Lockdown Essay for Students delves into the multifaceted experiences of students during the global lockdown, exploring the challenges faced, the lessons learned, and the transformative journey towards personal and academic growth.

Introduction

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2019 led to unprecedented global challenges, prompting governments worldwide to implement lockdowns to curb the spread of the virus.

This essay delves into the multifaceted aspects of life during lockdown, exploring the challenges faced by individuals and communities, the shift to remote work and online education, the impact on mental health, and the resilience demonstrated in adapting to the “new normal.”

Challenges Faced During Lockdown

Social Isolation

One of the immediate and palpable challenges of lockdown was social isolation. The restrictions on movement and gatherings meant that people were cut off from their social circles, friends, and extended families. The absence of face-to-face interactions led to feelings of loneliness and a longing for human connection.

Economic Uncertainty

Lockdowns had a severe impact on the global economy, leading to job losses, furloughs, and economic uncertainty for millions. Small businesses faced closures, and various industries experienced significant setbacks. The sudden economic downturn left individuals and families grappling with financial stress and uncertainty about the future.

Education Disruption

Schools and universities worldwide had to adapt swiftly to the new reality of remote learning. The sudden shift to online education posed challenges for both students and educators. Limited access to resources, varying levels of technological proficiency, and the absence of the traditional classroom environment made the learning experience challenging for many.

Work-from-Home Challenges

Remote work became the norm for many professionals, introducing a new set of challenges. Balancing work responsibilities with household chores, the lack of a clear boundary between work and personal life, and the technological adjustments required for effective collaboration presented hurdles for individuals navigating this new work paradigm.

Adapting to Remote Work and Online Education

Remote Work Dynamics

While the sudden transition to remote work posed initial challenges, it also highlighted the adaptability and resilience of individuals and organizations. Video conferencing tools, collaborative platforms, and flexible work hours became integral to maintaining productivity and communication.

Online Education Innovations

Educational institutions embraced technology to ensure continuity in learning. Virtual classrooms, online assessments, and interactive learning platforms became essential components of the educational landscape. The pandemic accelerated the adoption of digital tools in education, prompting innovation in pedagogical approaches.

Digital Connectivity

The importance of digital connectivity became more apparent than ever. High-speed internet, online communication tools, and digital platforms became lifelines for individuals working and studying remotely. The digital divide, however, underscored the need for equitable access to technology.

Impact on Mental Health

Isolation and Anxiety

The isolation imposed by lockdowns took a toll on mental health. Anxiety, depression, and feelings of helplessness became prevalent as individuals grappled with uncertainties about the future, health concerns, and the disruption of routine.

Work-Life Balance Challenges

Remote work, while offering flexibility, also blurred the boundaries between professional and personal life. Many individuals found it challenging to establish a work-life balance, leading to burnout and increased stress levels.

Educational Stress

Students faced unique challenges, including the pressure of adapting to online learning, concerns about academic performance, and the absence of the social support traditionally provided by the school environment.

Resilience and Adaptability

Community Support

Communities around the world demonstrated resilience by coming together to support one another. Mutual aid groups, online forums, and community initiatives emerged to provide assistance, share resources, and foster a sense of solidarity.

Innovation and Creativity

The pandemic spurred innovation in various fields. From virtual events and conferences to innovative approaches in education, individuals and organizations showcased creativity in adapting to the constraints imposed by lockdown.

Digital Transformation Acceleration

Businesses and institutions accelerated their digital transformation efforts. E-commerce, telehealth, and virtual services saw increased adoption, reflecting the adaptability of industries in responding to the challenges posed by the pandemic.

Life during lockdown presented a myriad of challenges, from social isolation to economic uncertainties and disruptions in education and work. However, amidst these challenges, individuals and communities showcased remarkable resilience and adaptability. The embrace of remote work and online education, coupled with the acceleration of digital transformation, highlighted the capacity for innovation and creativity in the face of adversity.

As societies gradually emerge from the throes of the pandemic, the lessons learned during lockdown underscore the importance of building resilient systems, prioritizing mental health, and fostering a sense of community. The shared experience of navigating life during lockdown serves as a testament to the collective strength of humanity and the potential for positive transformation in the face of global challenges.

the Life During Lockdown Essay for Students serves as a poignant testament to the resilience and adaptability that define the human spirit. As students navigated the uncharted waters of remote learning, disrupted routines, and the emotional toll of isolation, they discovered hidden strengths within themselves. The challenges posed by the pandemic became catalysts for growth, fostering adaptability and fortitude.

The diverse narratives shared by students underscore the universality of the human experience during these trying times. From moments of frustration to unexpected joys and self-realization, the Life During Lockdown Essay for Students encapsulates the spectrum of emotions and lessons learned.

As the world gradually emerges from the shadows of the pandemic, these insights into life during lockdown become invaluable markers of endurance and perseverance.

This Life During Lockdown Essay for Students not only chronicles the challenges faced by students but also emphasizes the profound lessons embedded in adversity. Life During Lockdown Essay for Students stands as a testament to the resilience cultivated amid uncertainty, providing a hopeful outlook for the future.

Related Essays

Essay on Modern Indian Woman – 100, 500, 1000 Words, 10 Lines

Essay on Future of English in India – 10 Lines, 500 & 1000 Words

Essay on Bhai Dooj – 10 Lines, 100, 500, 1000 Words

Essay About Ooty – 10 Lines, 500 & 1000 Words

Draupadi Murmu Essay – 10 Lines, 100, 500, 1000 Words

Computer Essay – Short Essay, 10 Lines, 500 & 1000 Words

Leave a comment cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Language: English | French

South Africa: Challenges and successes of the COVID-19 lockdown

Afrique du sud : défis et succès du confinement liés au covid-19, nancy stiegler.

a Statistic and Population Studies Department, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Robert-Sobukwe road, Bellville, 7535, South Africa

Jean-Pierre Bouchard

b Institut Psycho-Judiciaire et de Psychopathologie (IPJP)/Institute of Forensic Psychology and Psychopathology, Cadillac hospital centre, 10, avenue Joseph-Caussil, 33410 Cadillac, France

c Unit for Difficult Patients, Cadillac hospital centre, 10, avenue Joseph-Caussil, 33410 Cadillac, France

At the beginning of March 2020, South Africa (59 million inhabitants) was hit by the pandemic of COVID-19 and soon became the most affected country in Africa by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. From one single case on March 5th, the number of cases increased rapidly, forcing the South-African Government to swiftly react and place the country under strict lockdown for six weeks. The strategy of the South African Government bore fruits with a contained spread of the virus. If the number of positive cases at the end of the lockdown reached 5647, the number of fatal casualties was limited to 103 deaths. The lockdown was overall well respected, even if serious problems of food supply soon occurred in informal settlements, leading to riots and confrontation with security forces. Indeed, populations were obedient, but not being able to practice sport or outdoors activities appeared heavy. The constant fear of the poorest not to have enough money to pay rent and buy food (even if the Government organised food parcels’ distributions), and to find less and less work was echoed by the fear of losing jobs among those more privileged. Despite the risk of an economic crisis, the South African Government has continued on the reasonable path of containing the pandemic with ending the lockdown at a slow pace, in five phases.

Résumé

Début mars 2020, l’Afrique du Sud (59 millions d’habitants) est touchée par la pandémie de COVID-19 pour vite devenir le pays d’Afrique le plus contaminé par le virus SARS-CoV-2. D’un cas positif le 5 mars, le nombre de cas a augmenté rapidement, forçant le gouvernement sud-africain à réagir rapidement en plaçant le pays en confinement strict pendant six semaines. La stratégie du gouvernement sud-africain a porté ses fruits en limitant la propagation du virus. Si le nombre de cas positifs confirmés à la fin du confinement, le 30 avril, a atteint 5 647, le nombre de morts connus dû au virus s’est limité à 103. Le confinement fut en général bien respecté, même s’il a été entaché de sérieux problèmes de ravitaillement en nourriture dans les bidonvilles, donnant lieu à des émeutes et des échauffourées avec les forces de l’ordre. Les populations ont été obéissantes, même s’il fut difficile de ne pas pouvoir sortir et pratiquer un sport ou des activités de plein air. La peur constante des plus démunis de ne pas avoir assez d’argent pour payer le loyer ou acheter de la nourriture (même si le gouvernement a organisé des distributions de colis de ravitaillement) et de ne pouvoir travailler a trouvé écho chez les plus avantagés qui redoutaient de perdre leur emploi. La plus grande crainte était pour tous de tomber malade ou qu’un membre de la famille soit infecté. Grâce à l’interdiction des boissons alcoolisées, la violence domestique semblait avoir diminué, surtout dans les zones les plus pauvres. Les personnes, qui étaient confinées avec des membres de leur famille, étaient systématiquement plus optimistes que celles qui étaient confinées seules. Les confinées en famille avaient des journées remplies d’activités interpersonnelles (une fois qu’elles avaient fini de travailler/étudier à distance), alors que les personnes seules étaient plus impliquées dans des activités génératrices d’anxiété comme lire, regarder les nouvelles tout au long de la journée et réfléchir à la situation. Malgré le risque d’une crise économique, le gouvernement sud-africain a décidé de continuer sur la voie raisonnable du contrôle de la pandémie en déconfinant de façon très lente la population, avec un plan en cinq phases.

1. South Africa hit by the COVID-19 pandemic

South Africa has not been spared by the COVID-19 pandemic. In a context of global public-health disaster, it is interesting to see how the most affected country in Africa dealt with the crisis.

South African population is currently estimated at 59 million [17] . This population is rather young, with a median age of 27.6 years old [16] , hiding important disparities between provinces. The Eastern Cape, the poorest province in the country, is also the youngest one with a median age of 21 years old, whereas, in the more developed provinces of Gauteng and Western Cape, the median age is at 29 and 28 years old, respectively.

In the same vein, and because of its segregationist history, South Africa is still the most unequal country in the world with a Gini-coefficient of 0.63 [20] . This translates, for instance, in 14% of South Africans living in informal settlements [17] , without proper housing, limited access to sanitation and water and an overall unemployment rate of 29% [17] .

2. The lockdown

It is in this context that South Africa entered the fight against COVID-19 in March 2020, with the first declared positive case on March 5th in KwaZulu Natal. This person, considered as “patient” zero, came back to South Africa on 1 March from Milan, Italy. Faced by a rapid increase of cases in the following days, the South African Government swiftly reacted and imposed on 23 March a strict lockdown on the population for three weeks starting on 26 March. At that stage, the number of official positive cases had risen to 554, without any deaths.

The lockdown, further extended to 30 April, was the most restrictive on the African continent, and one of the most restrictive in the world. Shops, restaurants and non-essential businesses were closed, the population was only authorised to leave home for essential grocery shopping and medical reasons; no social, outdoors activities, sports or dog-walking were authorised, and a total ban on alcohol and cigarettes was imposed.

The lockdown was at the image of the country: diverse and contrasting. Among the middle class, the lockdown was particularly well respected [19] . People, in general, stayed at home, managed to work remotely with access to the Internet and families were often happy together.

The situation was otherwise in poorest areas and informal settlements [12] . Promiscuity was a problem together with lack of proper sanitation [8] , which made everybody fear for a human catastrophe if the virus was to spread in these communities. In actual facts, the main issue resided in the lack of food and financial resources, which lead to “hunger riots” [7] , shop looting [6] and confrontation with police [1] .

Distribution of food parcels [15] for the poorest communities was organised, but it seems that for many, it was not enough, even though several associations and individuals helped in providing food and helping with distribution [14] .

Two trends in domestic violence were noted: sharp decline in domestic abuse due to alcohol, whereas domestic violence against women increased by the third week of lockdown [10] . Overall, violent crimes decreased [22] , to even see gangs working together to feed communities [21] .

Contrarily to what sometimes happened in Europe, it seems that South Africa did not suffer from ostracism of medical professionals because of the fear that those medical staff could carry the virus [2] , [4] . The respect of South Africans for nurses and medical doctors together with the limited number of positive cases did not open the door to inappropriate behaviours [18] . However, medical staff did not go through these first two months of pandemic without casualties: more than 500 health workers were tested positive. As per 6 May, twenty-six medical doctors had been hospitalised and two health workers, a doctor and a nurse had died from the coronavirus [11] . As a result, nurses refused to continue working in some clinics close to Cape Town when some colleagues of them were tested positive [9] .

3. A quick assessment: how did people react to the lockdown?

Overall, the response from South Africa to the dread of the pandemic seemed quite organised, and the response of the population was calm and composed. Considering this situation, we tried to collect some information running a small quick assessment to better understand the feeling of the selected individuals regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown.

Of course, such a quick assessment did not mean to replace a large-scale socio-economic and demographic survey, but at that stage, we aimed, at least, at reflecting on personal feelings.

This quick assessment took place on 24 April, questions were sent via emails and text messages to more than forty people from different backgrounds and residing in different areas of the country. Respondents were from the top middle-class, middle class and poorer backgrounds. Living arrangements also covered different settings with some respondents being confined with families while others were alone, in formal or informal housing. Age-wise, we reached people from twenty to seventy-five years old.

We were interested to know the conditions of the lockdown, and the state of mind of people confined, at that time, for little more than a month. Thirty-two people responded on the same day to the set of six questions: “According to your own experience: Was the lockdown well respected?; What were the biggest issues/challenges with the lockdown?; Was there a lot of “ misconducts” reported to the police?; Was there any intimidation for nurses/assistant nurses/doctors/people working at hospital, for instance asking them to move house or to stay totally indoors, etc?; Was there an increase in domestic violence?; Please share anything that you consider important to note on a human/psychological point of view” .

Overall, responses were very homogenous based on the situation of the respondents.

Respondents from the middle class living in formal housing answered that the lockdown was strictly respected in their areas. Many of them had not gone out during the last four weeks, even not for grocery shopping that they’d rather ordered online to be delivered to their doors. Staying indoors was considered a real issue by all respondents from the middle class, who were all missing sport and outdoors activities.

In informal settlements, respondents from poorer backgrounds stated that the lockdown was not always respected as people needed to find food. Those same respondents further stated that the biggest fear was not to be able to return to work, or find work, to earn a leaving to feed their families. Such a worry was shared by all respondents to a certain extent. Those with stable jobs were also concerned about the economic situation and the possibility to lose their jobs, but they also systematically stated fearing for the situation of the less privileged whom they knew and who were fighting for food. The biggest fear remained for all to fall sick or that a family member became infected.

None of the people interviewed, even in informal settlements, stated problems with reporting cases of misconduct to police: the consistent answer was that the lockdown was generally well respected, so there was no need of reporting to police.

Concerning domestic violence, respondents generally agreed that thanks to the ban of alcoholic beverages, domestic violence seemed to have decreased, and this especially in poorer areas.

Finally, we observed that those who were confined with family members were systemically more optimistic than those confined alone. Those staying with families explained that their days were filled with family activities (once they had finished working/studying remotely), whereas those alone were getting bored and were more involved with anxiety inducing activities such as reading and watching the news throughout the day, and thinking about the situation.

4. Ending lockdown

On 24 April, President Ramaphosa unveiled a deconfinement plan in phases or “alert levels”. This plan, organised in five stages, made provision for gradual reopening of the economy and social life as per 1 May. Stage four allowed reopening of a limited number of economic sectors with high economic or social value, authorised again trading of cigarettes and alcohol at certain times, but maintained confinement of the general population. Jogging and short walks were allowed (on the morning of 1 May, cities’ boardwalks were packed with joggers and walkers), but a curfew was implemented between 20 h and 5am. Subsequent phases were to see restrictions lifted as the alert levels decrease. This clear system was organised in a way that the alert levels would move up or down depending on the level of the pandemic.

5. South Africa on the way to winning the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic?

With challenges and many successes, South Africa has managed to flatten the curve of COVID-19 pandemic [5] , as displayed below. At the end of the lockdown “phase 5”, on 30 April, the country bewailed 5647 confirmed positive cases and 103 officially declared deaths ( Fig. 1 ).

COVID-19 confirmed cases in South Africa. 5 March to 7 May 2020.

To continue containing the crisis, the Government chose to “deconfine” at a slow pace, respecting a five-phase plan. South Africa also received support from Cuban medical doctors that arrived in the country on 26 April [3] . South African authorities planned for transformation of stadiums into hospitals [13] in case of outbreak. Economically wise, the Government projected to inject 26 billion USD into the economy, especially to help small and medium businesses, which suffered from the halt in trading.

The country seemed to have successfully controlled and planned the different phases of the pandemic. As per 7 May 2020, the next step was to enter winter season and its uncertainties and to deal with relaxed restrictions, hoping that the curve of the pandemic remained stable and soon decreased.

Disclosure of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Friday essay: voices from the bush – how lockdown affects remote Indigenous communities differently

Professor of Archaeology, College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, Flinders University

Matthew Flinders Fellow, Professor of Australian and Indigenous Studies, Flinders University

Lecturer, Archaeology, Flinders University

Senior Lecturer, Flinders University

Professor of Nursing, Charles Sturt University

Research lecturer, Charles Darwin University

Associate Professor, College of Humanities Arts and Social Social Sciences, Flinders University

Contributor

Assistant researcher, Flinders University

Disclosure statement

Claire Smith receives funding from the Australian Research Council and received funding from Flinders University for this research.

Amanda Kearney receives funding from the Australian Research Council and received funding from Flinders University for this research.

Christopher Wilson receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Centre for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage

Julian Grant receives funding through approved disbursements from the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Rapid Applied Research Translation Program.

Anna M. Kotarba-Morley, Jasmine Willika, Kellie Pollard, and Udoy Saikia do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Charles Sturt University , Charles Darwin University , and Flinders University provide funding as members of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

What does self-isolation mean when you live in one of Australia’s most remote Aboriginal communities? What does social distancing mean when the average household holds 12-15 people? How do you think through viral vulnerability when people in your community already die too young and too frequently?

These are just a few of the questions that might be asked of Aboriginal people living in remote parts of Australia as the COVID-19 pandemic swirls around them and other Aboriginal communities across the nation.

We work with the communities of Barunga, Beswick, Manyallaluk and Borroloola in the Northern Territory. We have worked with the same communities for up to 30 years. We have recorded many changes through time and come to learn something about life in remote communities from Aboriginal people. We have learnt from elders, mid and younger generations .

Our new research comes from regular phone conversations with community members about the impact of COVID-19. These phone calls bridge the remote and urban divide, as we discuss what is known about the virus and how long before things get back to normal. By sharing the experiences of Aboriginal families who live in remote NT communities, more voices will find a place in the national conversation.

Safe in the bush

Aboriginal people have talked about feeling safe out bush, about following the rules of lockdown. Locals like Garrwa/Waanyi woman and Borroloola resident Gloria Friday praise their communities for “abiding by the rules, not running around, keeping an eye out and being really careful”. They are fully aware of the threat COVID-19 poses to their old people and those who are sick.

At a time when travel to and from these communities is prohibited, contact with the outside world is important. Barunga Elder and Junggayi (custodian) Narritj, says:

Phone call. You on that side, us on this side. We need that, too. We want to know what is happening in other places. We want to know the truth about that virus. (April 30 2020)

For people living in Borroloola, the spread of information has been rapid. As Gloria Friday explains:

Everyone with TV knows what’s going on. And I listen to news all the time, I’ve got a little radio and I listen to the news about the virus and what’s going on in the world.

Read more: Urban Aboriginal people face unique challenges in the fight against coronavirus

Vulnerable communities, new babies

Humans are vulnerable to disease for many reasons including age, gender, society, environment and ancestry. We know the COVID-19 risks are magnified for Aboriginal people in remote communities.

This is due to higher rates of other health issues, limited access to health care, greater reliance on outreach services and movement between communities.

The COVID-19 situation has brought specific health challenges to Aboriginal women in remote areas. For years it has been common for women to leave their communities to give birth in regional or major hospitals. This can bring sadness and a sense of dislocation from family, country and ceremony .

Because of COVID-19 lockdowns, women and their newborns are away longer from family and culture. They have to be quarantined before returning to country. An alternative approach is to restrict the mother’s movements when she is away from home. Bangirn, a young woman from Barunga who recently gave birth in Darwin, says:

I couldn’t go anywhere when in Darwin because I have recently had a baby. I wasn’t allowed to go out shopping to buy baby clothes or things for the baby. The doctors rushed me into Katherine hospital but I wasn’t allowed to go and buy baby things. My sister had to give me her daughter’s baby old clothes over the fence. Doctors gave me a paper saying that I didn’t go anywhere while in Darwin and Katherine. The paper shows that me and my partner could go back in the community. I couldn’t do food shopping while leaving Katherine or baby clothes. Barunga store hasn’t got anything for the baby. (May 5 2020) It’s hard. Right now she’s got no warm clothes and this weather is cold. We’re keeping her warm with a big blanket. We’re safe but it’s hard, really hard. (May 11 2020)

We hope to understand these experiences and how they shape families, culture and connections into the future. This can help us to plan for any future pandemics and its impact on Indigenous communities.

Recognition of vulnerability for remote Aboriginal communities prompted fast action by Australian governments , research and information networks and Aboriginal organisations . In addition to regional lockdowns there was a multi-million dollar information campaign .

This included YouTube videos in many different Aboriginal languages by the NT government and a video series in 18 languages by the Northern Land Council.

The COVID-19 crisis adds to existing pressures on remote communities. Families already live with regular loss of life, frequent funerals and an overhanging grief that contributes to intergenerational trauma . Yet among these hardships communities also display incredible resilience. While COVID-19 poses a threat, this needs to be understood in relation to the hardships and the strengths of remote community life.

Read more: Coronavirus will devastate Aboriginal communities if we don't act now

Responses to being ‘locked up’

Little attention has been paid to the lived experience of social distancing across cultures. We need to understand how different peoples think about social distancing and isolation. For Graham and Gloria Friday, the best strategy for social distancing is “going out bush”, rather than staying in your house … because country is home.

If you out bush, you might find that bush medicine to fight it. Also out bush, you don’t have to worry about food in the shops, you can live off your land, fish, dugong, turtle, goanna, you can live off that. (April 9 2020)

Similarly in Barunga, one community member says their first response to being “locked up” was to go out bush and sit down on country. Anne Marie Lee, chair of the board of the Sunrise Health Service Aboriginal Corporation says:

More people are going out camping and fishing. People spend maybe a week out there. It’s a really good thing, eating that bush tucker again. People are looking more healthy. (May 11 2020)

Going bush has had the added effect of strengthening families. As people hunt and fish, they are away from the worries of town. They are well fed and access to alcohol is limited. Young people learn traditional survival skills. The health and well-being effects of being out bush are part of long-standing and culturally defined preventative health-care strategies.

Some aspects of Aboriginal people’s experiences of lockdown are familiar to all Australians: the importance of socialising with extended family for mental and emotional well-being. Also, people seem to be more conscious of their health. Some community medical clinics report an influx of people getting flu vaccinations.

Yet another factor that shapes the COVID-19 experience for Aboriginal people in remote areas is the historical experience of being “locked up” on missions and in prison.

The NT has the highest imprisonment rate of any state or territory. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders comprise 84% (1,477 prisoners) of the adult prisoner population . In 2018, the national average was 28%. Families in Borroloola have called for people to be returned home during the pandemic to ensure they are safe and away from the threat of virus infection in prison. The investment in family and making sure everyone is safe has been a driving focus for many in these communities.

Some good things, too

Perhaps unexpectedly, there have been some positives from the COVID-19 crisis.

One of the first actions was for states and territories to nominate designated biosecurity areas. Travel to these areas was restricted to essential workers. Returning community members have to go into quarantine. This shutdown was sudden but it made some community members feel reassured. Beswick Traditional Owner, Esther Bulumbara says:

Suddenly everything stopped. It was a great shock to the Northern Territory. We thought only that overseas mob would get that. But police said everything had to close. Government mob, shire. It was lucky it was quick. If they didn’t know about it, it would have gone through the Northern Territory. (April 24 2020)

The lockdown bolstered trust in government and Aboriginal organisations. Graham Friday is among those “talking with all those big mob government officials” as community in Borroloola are consulted about when and how things might open up again.

People feel safe because their exposure to COVID-19 has been controlled. Reflecting on the situation in Borroloola, Gloria Friday says:

It’s amazing cause the virus never hit the community yet or nothing, and it was good because everyone was abiding by the rules. And because they limited the grog sale to six can, six can a day, everything was quiet and there’s been no problems in the town, everyone’s just been go out fishing and hunting. It’s been good. (May 1 2020).

In some cases, COVID-19 has deepened relationships between Aboriginal people and the wider community. There has been unanticipated support. In the Katherine East region, large quantities of clothing were donated by Rockmans . Boxes of food were donated by Coles . Outback Stores issued food vouchers. Community members were surprised and pleased, reports Esther Bulumbara. She says:

Fiona from AIG donated all the boxes of clothes to Barunga and Beswick and Manyallaluk. It made people feel good. All the ladies they all came and got some clothes. Long sleeved shirts, woolly jumpers and coats. All new. And we got that Mob’s Choice in Bagala Store at Barunga now. Low prices, like at Woolies. (May 14 2020)

Rachael Kendino of Manyallaluk adds:

Every house at Manyallaluk got two boxes of food and a $50 voucher from Beswick store […] I like what the Roper Gulf Shire are doing. They pick up [people] every Thursday for shopping from Manyallaluk to Barunga store. Before we had to get taxi to go to Katherine to buy food […] Going in and return is $300 each way. She told me about online shopping , too. (May 8 2020)

People are appreciative of the efforts made by local police to keep them safe and connected. The mail is taken 50 kilometres to the Central Arnhem Highway turn-off. It is handed over to police and taken to Maranboy police station , 10 kilometres from Barunga. A community representative comes to the police station to collect it. The letters are wiped down. Jessala McCale of Barunga reports:

Police officers must make sure that letters, mails are clean before handing it over the person who handles the mail. (May 5 2020)

Jawoyn Elder Jocelyn McCartney says:

The policeman are camping out there at the Barunga turnoff. Turn and turn. All day and all night. To make sure people don’t come out of community. People not allowed to come into our community because they might have that virus. (May 12 2020)

Getting the right information

Elsewhere in the world it has been noted “living without broadband has gone from a mild inconvenience to a near impossibility”. For remote communities, the problem can be how to get information on a global pandemic without internet.

Crisis communication must be tailored to different needs and in many forms. While Indigenous youth are savvy with social media, many older people watch television or listen to the radio to get information. Our community contacts spoke about President Trump and laboratories in Wuhan. Like all of us, Aboriginal people judge leaders and feel sadness for those who have died. As one community member made clear:

He’s a real mongrel that Trump, he just sits there while those bodies all pile up. (May 1 2020)

Aboriginal people in remote communities are well aware of what is happening across the world. The sense this problem is big and concerns all of us is not lost on them. Another community member from Borroloola reveals:

I’ve got family all round – Doomadgee, Normanton, Mt Isa, Townsville, Borroloola – and we really worry for all of them. We all worry about each other and ring each other all the time. All of them, everybody is quarantined all over the world, from Burketown, Mt Isa, Mornington Island, Italy, even America … the lot. (May 1 2020)

White man’s disease

Remote communities are not all the same. While many challenges are shared, each community has its own history and culture which shapes the present. Our preliminary research suggests COVID-19 messages are understood slightly differently across communities.

In some communities, reports from Italy and Spain seem very distant and of little relevance. In others, Aboriginal people of all ages watch television and trawl social media, sad for the “poor Italians” and “bodies piling up in the United States”.

Some talk about COVID-19 as a “white man’s disease”. Others, such as Graham Friday and members of his family (Gloria Friday and Adrianne Friday), see it as “everybody’s problem and everybody’s responsibility”.

One shared factor has been the pressure of acute food shortages in community stores . In the early days, some people responded by breaking quarantine restrictions to access local towns via back roads and dirt tracks. This placed their community at increased risk. The community and police responded in tandem. A Barunga community member says:

A couple of young boys tried to go into town. The policeman came and warned them. They going to get a fine. I told that boy ‘You got to stop that. No more. I can’t pay that fine for you’. (April 24 2020)

Police also set out clear social distancing expectation in Borroloola, as Gloria Friday explains:

Well the police only went and said they didn’t want to see no gambling, like ten people only in one place. But in the community they’re bored, they got nothing to do. Policeman went and told them once, and I think everybody listened. (May 1 2020).

A bullet dodged

At this time, Aboriginal people in the NT seem to have dodged a bullet . This is because swift and culturally appropriate action was taken by governments , Aboriginal organisations and communities themselves. The Northern Land Council and the Central Land Council , in particular, provided outstanding coordinated leadership in the fight against COVID-19.

There is a lesson for Australia’s efforts to Close the Gap : trusted Aboriginal leadership is essential to successful outcomes for Aboriginal communities.

COVID-19 is the first global pandemic caused by a coronavirus . It may not be the last. This crisis presents a unique opportunity to learn what success looks like in Aboriginal remote community health.

The United Nations has called for all member states to include the specific needs and priorities of Indigenous peoples in COVID-19 response planning. Population-based approaches are logical scientific steps to prevent the spread of a virus. However, they need to be compatible with the everyday cultural lifeways of remote Aboriginal communities.

The COVID-19 pandemic is a watershed moment. Old and enduring problems can be reassessed. The current crisis can be mined for fresh, action-oriented perspectives of Aboriginal people’s needs in preventative health care. This time of calamitous infection and threat of illness is not foreign to remote Aboriginal communities and culture bearers. Many have lived through previous flu epidemics and live with the scourge of chronic conditions.

While COVID-19 is presented as a health and an economic problem, it is also a social and a cultural challenge. Our research calls for attention to understanding Aboriginal people’s knowledge of the pandemic and their vulnerability and strengths at this time. Remote communities are full of intellectuals and people coming to terms with a challenge we all face. Yet they are making sense of this global crisis in their own local and culturally nuanced ways.

While we have focused on remote communities, all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are at risk.

Community wisdom and cultural strengths are powerful starting points for effective and empowering health promotion. We need to identify local innovations and community solutions for dealing with COVID-19, and harness their drivers and logic. We need to develop culturally-driven, community-specific tools and strategies that can help protect Aboriginal communities from pandemics and provide lasting benefits.

• Public health
• Indigenous health
• Coronavirus
• Aboriginal health
• Remote communities
• Friday essay
• Intergenerational trauma
• Health messages

Compliance Lead

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, Earth System Science (School of Science)

Essay on Lockdown

‘Lockdown’ refers to the suspension of the usual privileges of citizens, regarding their movement and socializing. It is imposed by a competent authority to prevent any untoward incident. In India, a lockdown was imposed for many months by the government to contain the spread of novel coronavirus disease. Find here some well-described essays to know in detail about the lockdown.

Short and Long Essay on Lockdown in English

Following short and long essays on Lockdown in different word limits are given here that is useful for students of classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and class 12 in English in 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 500 words. Also find short Lockdown essay 10 lines.

Lockdown Essay 10 Lines (100 – 150 Words)

1) Lockdown refers to the prevention of citizens from moving and socializing as usual.

2) Lockdown is imposed by the government in case of any emergency.

3) India has undergone a lockdown to control the widespread of the Corona virus.

4) The government of India imposed the first lockdown on 25 March 2020, Wednesday.

5) India observed continuous 150 days complete shutdown in the lockdown.

6) Except for the emergency services, everything was closed and restricted.

7) The lockdown was continued for a few months in four parts.

8) The lockdown helped in controlling the widespread coronavirus and massive deaths.

9) Lives and works of many people were affected by the lockdown.

10) Lockdown was not fruitful for the economy as India suffered negative GDP (Gross Domestic Product).

Essay 1 (250 Words)

Introduction

Lockdown is an emergency protocol implemented by the government of India with an objective to contain the spread of a novel coronavirus epidemic. The government implemented a 21 days countrywide lockdown at the beginning which was continued for many months in 4 parts in the entire nation and further the state governments implemented it as per their states need. India was under lockdown for more than 150 days continuously.

Lockdown – The Only Remedy against Novel Coronavirus

Novel coronavirus disease is highly contagious and it spreads fast from person to person. No other disease before has been known to spread such a fast rate as the novel coronavirus. There is no option other than to treat the affected symptomatically; however, the final recovery depends largely on an individual’s stamina and immunity. From the perspective of this scenario, the lockdown seems to be the only practical and effective solution to prevent the spread of the disease.

Although we cannot imagine such scenario for more time our government courage to take such a bold step. It was implemented to keep safe from this deadly virus. Lockdown badly effected our economy and today it is in its fracture mode.

Success of Lockdown

Although we felt safe when the government took such a major but some experts remark lockdown as an unplanned action and it has directly affected the entire nation. Apart from India many other countries also adopted lockdown but they are strong enough to cope up with the economic damage caused due to lockdown.

It would not be wrong to say that the lockdown reduced the flow of this virus, but at the same time cases started to increase rapidly after it was unlocked in India. India became the second-highest infected country. So, in this term, we cannot say that lockdown was truly successful.

Even today schools, colleges, parks, public spaces, cinemas in India are closed. The lockdown can be still seen but the cases are decreasing comparatively. The vaccine has been developed and soon people will get rid of this deadly virus till than keep wearing your mask, wash your hand frequently, use sanitizer and follow social distancing.

Essay 2 (400 Words)

‘Lockdown’ as the name implies is a complete lockdown imposed on the usual movement of the general population of a place. A lockdown can be localized or applied over a wide area, depending on the purpose.

Lockdown in India

• First lockdown : It was 25th March 2020 when it was implemented for the first time, till the 14th of April. When the entire nation was completely shut except for some necessary grocery shops and health facilities.
• Second Lockdown : The second lockdown was announced from 15th April to 4th May with the same set of rules and regulations.
• Third Lockdown : It was implemented from the 4th of May to the 17th of May but in this phase of lockdown some special trains were run to help the daily wages workers. Some people stuck abroad were also bought back. This operation was named ‘Operation Samudrsetu’.
• Fourth Lockdown : It was implemented up to 31st of May and further different states extended as per the condition of their state. Districts were divided into three zones as per the COVID cases in the area. Red zone for most infected areas, Orange for few cases in the area whereas Green for areas with no infection.

Impacts of Lockdown

• On Novel Coronavirus Disease

This is the most significant and most desirable impact of the lockdown. The novel coronavirus is highly contagious, spreading fast from person to person. Lockdown makes social distancing effective; prohibiting human to human contact at the highest level possible. This social distancing helps a lot in containing the spread of the disease.

But at the same time, we cannot imagine continuing lockdown for a long time, because it has directly affected us in many ways.

• On The Economy

A countrywide lockdown isn’t good for the economy and is a setback for the economic growth and development of the nation. With transport suspended, railways and road transport agencies suffer losses to the tunes of crores. Small businesses and daily wage laborers are the most affected. Our GDP is going in negative decimals which is -9.6% this year and it is really a matter of fear because it will directly cause inflation.

• On Pollution Level

This is a significant positive impact of the lockdown. With all types of transport being suspended and also the people being forbidden from roaming unnecessarily, the air quality index improves drastically. The change was felt within a day or two of the lockdown.

• On Emergency Services

Lockdown was good for the emergency services and the personnel in a way that didn’t put additional stress on them. With no traffic and rush like usual days, their job becomes extremely easy and convenient.

Lockdown was very necessary for containing the coronavirus epidemic and preventing it from spreading to the community level. Despite its negative impacts; lockdown was very important. Even today although we have developed the vaccine there are many public places still closed. It is quite good in many ways.

Essay 3 (500 – 600 Words)

Lockdown is an emergency protocol imposed by the government that prohibits people from leaving their homes and venturing into public areas. In the wake of the global coronavirus pandemic spread, several governments across the globe have imposed lockdown in their respective jurisdiction, to prevent the disease from spreading further. The government of India also imposed a countrywide lockdown from midnight of 25th March and followed up to 4 months in every state and further different states followed as per the COVID cases in their states.

Why Is The Lockdown Necessary?

Ever since the coronavirus disease was first reported in China in November 2019 it affected millions of people globally. The disease is highly contagious and spreads at an unprecedented rate as never witnessed before.

The motive of a lockdown is to implement social distancing, preventing people from socializing and unnecessary gathering, so that to prevent the spread of disease from one person to another.

Effects of Lockdown

Lockdown wasn’t easy and was quite harsh experience for daily wage laborers, small businesses, and marginalized sections. These people were devoid of their livelihood and with less saving, find the lockdown financially crippling. That been said; lockdown is still necessary to save lives.

People with permanent employment, usually have the opportunity of working from home and are least affected by the lockdown. Suspension of all modes of transport for the common public caused inconvenience during this period.

Local administration relaxed the lockdown for a couple of hours every day to let people buy the necessary groceries and do other works. However, despite the relaxation people were not allowed to gather in large numbers, roam unnecessarily, and Necessary government offices and emergency services like municipalities, hospitals, police, etc. worked as usual.

Solidarity in Lockdown

Though the lockdown in India is harsh on marginalized sections of the society; people from different walks of life and several organizations have come forward for help. As soon as the lockdown was imposed, many prominent film producers, actors, and business houses have paid thousands of crore of rupees as donation to the Prime Minister Relief Fund. This money was used to be spending on food and providing monetary help to the poor during the lockdown.

Government officers distributed food packages, making sure that no person is left without food in the lockdown phase.

People of India have also displayed a great amount of respect for their emergency services personnel and medical professionals by clapping and celebrating within the premises of their own houses.

Apart from this lockdown today India is second in the list of most affected countries in the world. Lockdown saved us from community spread in India. The vaccine has been developed and soon it will be on the market. Still, some public places, schools, theatres are still closed and it is necessary until and unless all of us get the vaccine.

Lockdown is necessary to prevent the spread of coronavirus disease. It is imperative that we should be strict with the guidelines of lockdown for our own health and safety. The lockdown has been resumed but still, there are some public places under lockdown. Follow the guidelines and cooperate to stay safe and also keep others safe in this epidemic.

FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions on Lockdown

Ans . Lockdown is the policy that restricts the movement of people and states them to stay in one place.

Ans . The national emergency lockdown in India was implemented for the first time on the 25th of March, 2020.

Ans . The movement of people was restricted in the Covid-19 lockdown to curb the spread of Covid-19 infection.

Ans . Rajasthan was the first state in India to implement lockdown during Covid-19 phase 1.

Ans . Red zones are the areas that are highly infected.

Ans . The first lockdown was implemented by China in Wuhan on 23rd January 2020.

Related Posts

Essay on digital india, cashless india essay, essay on child is father of the man, essay on causes, effects and prevention of corona virus, essay on dr. sarvepalli radhakrishnan, durga puja essay, essay on summer vacation, essay on my plans for summer vacation, essay on holiday, leave a comment cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

CBSE Digital Education

#No.1 Educational Portal for Students & Teachers

Essay on Lockdown in English for Students and Children

This long essay on lockdown in English is suitable for students of classes 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, 11, 12, and also for competitive exam aspirants. All important information related to how to write an amazing essay about Lockdown.

Long Essay on Lockdown in English 800 Words

Lockdown essay in English – Lockdown is a term that exploded collectively around the world in the year 2020. With the widespread attack of an invisible virus, known as the Novel Coronavirus , the entire world was devastated by the Pandemic of this virus. It occurs during a wide variety of emergencies and it disrupts normal life.

Many words became popular after the arrival of Coronavirus, the term “lockdown” being one of them. A lockdown is a period of time when people have to stay home and are only allowed to travel in an emergency. During this period everything is closed except for some essential services like hospitals, grocery stores, medical stores, etc.

Introduction

Coronavirus has been considered the most contagious virus ever in the history of mankind. Its effects have become catastrophic within a short time. To prevent the spread of this Coronavirus in the country, our government has taken some drastic steps.

One of the most important measures implemented is a lockdown, where all businesses have been closed, all people have been confined to their homes and almost all professional, personal, and economic activities have come to a standstill.

The lockdown was announced and enforced on the 25 th of March, 2020. It has been extended, in phases, to continue till mid-June. The government has issued advisories to all citizens to practice social distancing and stay at home. The purpose of the lockdown is to prevent community transmission of this deadly virus so that the chain of transmission can be broken.

Each and every person faced many difficulties during this period but for the daily wagers, it was much more difficult. Work from home, online education , and online business were some of the options during this period, and the Indian government also helped the people a lot.

Online Education During Lockdown

For the first time, schools in India have moved to online classes. It is a struggle for the teacher as well as the students. School students, children, and their parents felt the impact to close schools and educational institutions.

The lockdown situation prompted people to learn and use digital technology and as a result, increased digital literacy.

The teaching material is easily shared among the students and the doubt questions are solved on Telegram, WhatsApp, E-mail, and various social media. Students need to learn digital skills for their own sake and improve the quality of education as well as changes in syllabus, textbooks, teacher training, and examination systems, but at the very least, the quality of online education must also improve needed.

Advantages of Lockdown

Due to the lockdown, on the one hand, while people have been forced to remain imprisoned in the house, on the other hand, many big benefits are also being seen. Some important benefits of essay on lockdown:-

• The rapidly spreading Coronavirus has been controlled by applying Lockdown.
• Due to the lockdown, the movement of vehicles has been reduced very much, factories have been closed, and the air of the cities has started to clear due to the rein in such activities.
• The impact of the lockdown is also being seen on global warming. In early April, scientists showed a hole of 1,000,000 square kilometers in the ozone layer above the North Pole. According to NASA, it has started filling these holes now.
• Earth’s vibration has been reduced by 30 to 50 percent due to less traffic, machines, and noise pollution.
• Due to Coronavirus, there has been a change in the cleanliness habits of the people. People are being more vigilant. Due to the lockdown, more time is also available for cleaning the house.
• People are learning to live with limited resources and insist on being self-sufficient (or Aatmnirbhar ) in the future so that they can produce themselves.
• During this lockdown period, we have got a lot of time for self-development and self-awareness.
• Most people in Lockdown are cooking at home and eating the same. Health will also be good due to good food.

Disadvantage of Lockdown

Some important disadvantages of the essay on Lockdown:-

• Many migrant laborers got trapped in different cities and they could not return to their homes due to which they had to face many difficulties.
• Many industries like agriculture, education, and entertainment are suffering. It has negatively impacted the world economy.
• Unemployment has increased rapidly due to the lockdown. Because of this many people have lost their jobs.
• All schools and colleges were closed due to the lockdown, due to which the students were not able to study well.

Lockdown 2021

The lockdown was imposed due to Coronavirus in March 2020 last year. The same situation is being seen again. Again in April 2021, Coronavirus is spreading rapidly due to which lockdown is being imposed in all the states one by one.

In view of this spreading Coronavirus, the CBSE board canceled the class 10 examination and postponed the class 12 examination.

Lockdown is something that affects people from all backgrounds and especially the daily wagers. Some of the main problems during a lockdown are employment, poverty, and starvation.

Overall, we should keep in mind that lockdowns are only imposed for our welfare, so it is always our duty to follow the rules of lockdown.

Related Article –

• Essay on New Education Policy 2020
• Essay on Article 370
• Essay on Farm Bill 2020
• Essay on Narendra Modi
• Essay on Swachh Bharat Abhiyan
• Essay on Independence Day 2021

I hope you like this post “ Essay on Lockdown in English “. If you want to give any suggestions then comment below. Share this essay with your friends.

My Name is Mukesh Kumar. I am a Teacher, Blogger, Educational Content Writer, and Founder of CBSE Digital Education.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Additional menu

Intellectual Gyani

10 Things I Learned During Lockdown Essay for Student

posted on January 17, 2022

In This paper we’ll discuss, skills and hobbies I learned in lockdown as a student, though this list could easily be much longer, we’ve boiled it down to the list of best 10 things I learned during lockdown . hope it will help you to write best essay on Things I Learned During lockdown .

The 2020 lockdown took a big turn on us. And not just affect, lockdown changed many people views on so many things and I am one of them . I used to study and read in books that a pandemic is spread every 100 years and the world goes down to lockdown due to the epidemic, like when Bird Flu and Influenza spread in Spain. The same happens to our world in 2019, when COVID-19 finds its way to us.

The world shut down, shops, cinemas, educational institutes, gyms, restaurants, I mean, everything just locked down due to COVID. We got stuck at home and that’s when the COVID started taking a toll on me.

I was devastated as to why I can’t go out and hang out with my friend. Like Every other person I was asking the same question, “When will things go back to normal?” But one day, some facts stuck me in the face, “Why not trying something new?”, “I am free, let’s try reading that novel I never got the time to read”, “Let’s improve my English spoken Skills” and so much more.

And from there I took the road to self-improvement. As a college student, I was always busy with work and homework of college and didn’t have time for myself and extracurricular activities. But then the lockdown started helping me in discovering myself and my newfound hobbies. It helped me stay healthy both physically and mentally.

Lockdown was very boring to me at first but eventually, I took a liking to it. I started doing things that I always wanted to do but didn’t because of my tight schedule of college life . Like I took a liking to read books both fictional and non-fiction. This new hobby of mine helped me in so many ways as it helped me with my subjects of college, it also helped me improve my spoken English. Reading books taught me about so many world histories, religion, trust, and problems of real life.

Page Contents

10 Things I learned During Lockdown

1. learned technology during lockdown.

Yes, it is right. The main thing I get used to and learned a lot was technology. Most of our classes were going online during COVID-19 Lockdown, it helped to learn new things about online classes platforms like Zoom , Google Meet , etc.

I learned how to use specific apps and it helped me a lot in my researching skills . The one thing I learned about some app or website, due to free time, I started spending my time searching for other things related to that app or website.

Also, I have become a pro in using Laptop and Computer because otherwise, I have nothing to do with it. I was English Major and never have anything to do with PCs.

| Read: about advantages and disadvantages of technology in education

2. I learned the Importance Of Family During Pandemic

I was very happy that I had got a lot of time to spend with my family. And this lockdown helped me in understanding the need as well as the importance of family . I learned how a family is so crucial part of our lives. I was watching blogs and interviews of those living alone and how they are getting anxious with time and sometimes panic too. Watching them I realized, how fulfilling my house is and how blessed I am to have a family .

3. Learned Managing and Organizing

The best thing I learned during lockdown is managing and organizing.

I used to be a messy person before lockdown. Like my things were always here and there scattered around the whole house. The COVID-19 lockdown gives me time to realize this mistake. I started organizing my things.

I allot each section of my cupboard for different things. I started taking care of my house and used to keep it all clean and prep.

I learn to manage in limited and fewer resources. As COVID-19 left many in financial instability, my family was also one of them. But we stick together and survives this bad time. I started changing my habits which were charging extra money to me and developed my interests in other things. Like instead of buying new novels or books to read, I started reading online and borrowed books from friends.

4. Cooking & Baking

I never got the time to cook before lockdown. But I always have an interest in baking. This lockdown helped me spend more time in Kitchen helping my mom . I learned baking and now I know how to make cookies, cakes, cupcakes, and other baking stuff.  I started taking interest in cooking and try making different types of dishes like Chinese, Italian, etc.

5 Participated in Online Classes effectively

Another thing that I have learned is how much the feeling of going to class in the real world compares to going to class in the online world is so different yet normal for me. For the first few days, it felt a bit weird during my second week during lockdown, I felt nerves coming into the idea of online learning . We all were fine with going into class in the real world, but the virtual world was a whole new experience for me because I am always the shy one . Thankfully I have managed to embrace the idea and managed to get on without any issues.

6. Improved English Speaking Skills During Lockdown

As an Asian native, my English-speaking skills were not that good. Like before lockdown, I could understand that what people are talking about, but I didn’t have enough confidence in me to speak in English too. During the Covid-19 lockdown, I highly worked on this habit. I started hearing podcasts and English shows as well as news.

I started speaking in English in online classes and even to my siblings. I worked hard in developing this skill. And now after lockdown, I am a pro in English speaking. I can fluently talk in English now and also, now I am also participating in English speeches and debates.

7. You can learn from anything or anyone

I had always hated the notion that only people with more experience or age are capable of teaching. Some of the most interesting things and skills that I have learned were from YouTube and people much younger than me, or people with little formal education. There are opportunities to learn from anyone , whether or not they have had a formal education.

8. I Learned Blogging 

This is the best thing I learned during the lockdown . I always have an interest in blog and article writing. But again, I was not free enough to give this full time. In a lockdown, I take free online courses and started blogging . And now I am also earning from this skill set.

|Read: about the Advantages and Disadvantages of Blogging for Students

9. Appreciate the people in your life

This goes without saying that the people in your life are not here forever . Whether by voluntary or involuntary action, everyone will leave. But we have to make the most of our time with the ones that we love the most .

Conclusion:

I am so happy that I didn’t waste my time lurking around the house and laying down on couches. I developed several skills set which, I know, will help me in my practical life now. COVID-19 brings disasters and bad times for all of us, I was also worried about the wellbeing of my family and studies. But at least, I didn’t lose my faith that a good time will come soon and started spending my time learning new things in that worst time.

And the best thing I learned during this lockdown was Blogging and English-Speaking skills . Because now, utilizing these skills, I am generating side money for myself. I will wrap up everything by saying that, in this lockdown, we got time for our loved ones, we got time to focus on ourselves, and, especially, we got time to develop into a better version of ourselves.

So above is the  top 10 things I learned in lockdown as student . I guess you’ve finished reading it.

Discover More Related Posts:

About Intellectual Gyani

IntellectualGyani .com is a blog that aims to bring you an unbiased source of the advantages and disadvantages of various debatable topics used in daily life, so that you will understand better and form a decisive opinion about the subject. We generally talk about Education, Language and Technology .

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Visit “IntellectualGyani.com” again to Learn & to Grow.

Our mission is to promote civility, critical thinking, awareness, and education by presenting t he pros and cons of arguments to debatable topics in an easy to read manner.

Please Start here!