Search for: All records

Disasters often create inequitable consequences along racial and socioeconomic lines, but a pandemic is distinctive in that communities must navigate the ongoing hazards of infection exposure. We examine this for accessing essential needs, specifically groceries. We propose three strategies for mitigating risk when accessing groceries: visit grocery stores less often; prioritize generalist grocery stores; seek out stores whose clientele have lower infection rates. The study uses a unique combination of data to examine racial and socioeconomic inequities in the ability to employ these strategies in the census block groups of greater Boston, MA in April 2020, including cellphone-generated GPS records to observe store visits, a resident survey, localized infection rates, and demographic and infrastructural characteristics. We also present an original quantification of the amount of infection risk exposure when visiting grocery stores using visits, volume of visitors at each store, and infection rates of those visitors’ communities. Each of the three strategies for mitigating exposure were employed in Boston, though differentially by community. Communities with more Black and Latinx residents and lower income made relatively more grocery store visits. This was best explained by differential use of grocery delivery services. Exposure and exposure per visit were higher in communities with more Black and Latinx residents and higher infection rates even when accounting for strategies that diminish exposure. The findings highlight two forms of inequities: using wealth to transfer risk to others through grocery deliveries; and behavioral segregation by race that makes it difficult for marginalized communities to avoid hazards.

Green spaces are beneficial for physical and mental health, especially during and after disasters. The COVID-19 pandemic, however, created a trade-off: parks could be therapeutic but also could expose people to infection. This paradox posed inequities as marginalized populations often have less access to parks and were hit harder by the pandemic. We combined cellphone-generated mobility data with demographic indicators, a neighborhood survey, and local infection rates to examine how residents of Boston, MA, navigated this trade-off in April–August 2020. We hypothesized that they adopted strategies for mitigating infection exposure—including fewer park visits and prioritizing parks that might have lower infection risk, including larger parks with more opportunity for social distancing and parks near home with fewer unfamiliar faces—but that marginalized populations would have less opportunity to do so. We also introduce a novel measure of exposure per visit based on the volume of other visitors, infection rates, and park size. Bostonians made fewer park visits relative to 2019 and prioritized larger parks and parks closer to home. These strategies varied by community. Experiences of the pandemic were influential, as communities that perceived greater risk or had more infections made more park visits, likely because they were a relatively safe activity. Communities with more infections tended to avoid nearby parks. Inequities were also apparent. Communities with more Black residents and infections had greater infection exposure per visit even when controlling for the types of parks visited, highlighting difficulties in escaping the challenges of the pandemic.