Search results

The index case of COVID-19 in Nigeria was reported on 27 February 2020. Subsequently, the exponential increase in cases has brought about the partial and total lockdown of cities, the closure of all schools and the shutdown of government offices in order to curtail the spread of COVID-19. COVID-19 and its subsequent drastic curtailment policies have implications on vulnerable groups, especially, informal workers who constitute about 70% of the active working population in Nigeria. This reflective discourse critically engages the plight of informal workers in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria.

The research was guided by the epistemology of pandemic interpretationism. It engages contextual reflections of the plight of economically vulnerable informal workers in Nigeria. Data were collected from secondary sources while rapid case studies were conducted with ten informal workers in Lagos and Ibadan. Afterwards, data were contextually analysed.

Economically vulnerable informal workers in Nigeria have contextually interpreted COVID-19 as an elite disease, imported into Nigeria by the wealthy. In addition, the mass population views COVID-19 containment measures such as lockdowns, movement restrictions and stay-at-home orders as elitist policies, which are aimed at protecting the wealthy and frustrating the poor and economically vulnerable who live on the fringes of poverty. Many informal workers have slipped below the poverty line while struggling to supply livelihood needs, as they were unable to earn daily income and cannot access palliatives. Consequently, they are of the opinion that “Hunger Virus is deadlier than Corona Virus”.

This paper is a contextual reflection on the plight of economically vulnerable informal workers during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown and movement restrictions in Nigeria. It presents pandemic interpretationism as an epistemological guide and reflectively examines the poverty impact of COVID-19 on the Nigerian informal sector via contextual analyses of secondary data and rapid case studies. The paper uncovers various COVID-19 livelihood experiences and the responses of the informal workers; furthermore, it provides policy recommendations.

This paper offers a contribution to the authors’ understanding of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on living conditions of Italian households. A large part of the research, analysis, comments focused on the relation between the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and income of the Italian households does not capture the extent of the current changes. The focus on the highly differentiated impacts of the pandemic on three core dimensions of social integration (the sphere of work, that of welfare and that of the family) could help the authors to grasp the current transformations.

The research draws on Castel's distinction between three “zones” of post-Fordist employment societies with the aim to identify the processes and the conditions that carry individuals from one “zones” to the other. Theoretical considerations are supported by the findings of several qualitative and quantitative research carried out during the pandemic mainly by government agencies and international organizations as OECD and WHO. The analysis of healthcare expenditure, labour market and economic conditions of households is based on data of system of health accounts – SHA and from consumer studies undertaken by the Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT). The data on the financial situation and expectations of households during the crisis used in the article were drawn from special surveys carried out by the Bank of Italy.

What the authors observe in Italian society is not a collapse of the three pillars of social and system integration of contemporary societies: work, family and welfare. The COVID-19 pandemic has reversed two social and institutional trends, that in last two decades had damaged these spheres of life and that seemed relentless. First, what has been reversed are: the progressive privatization of welfare and the enhancement of the politics of retrenchment; second, values and styles of life, radical processes of individualization, that undermined mutual relations of support and care, and households' ability to cope with old and new risks. At the same time, the pandemic is radicalizing the long-lasting tendency towards job insecurity, a high incidence of low-paid workers and a high proportion of undeclared work. The highly differentiated impacts of the pandemic on these three spheres of life are creating a wider plurality of living conditions and risks.

The findings suggest that what the authors need is to reopen the debate on welfare priorities, programmes and areas of intervention, on public-private relationship that have been established in many sectors of welfare in the last decades in many European countries. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance welfare programmes capable of recognising the autonomous capacities of the family and informal relations to produce well-being, to cope with the crisis and to produce supportive relationships.

The pandemic highlighted that a progressive reduction of expenditure and politics of retrenchment produced welfare not able to face the needs of a large part of households. The pandemic highlighted that the changes that have taken place in the sphere of work, welfare and of the family in the last years have produced less and less governable effects.

This chapter explores theory and local context of socially constructed pandemic fears during COVID-19; how material and non-material fear objects are construed, interpreted and understood by communities, and how fears disrupt social norms and influence pandemic behavioural responses. We aimed to understand the lived experiences of pandemic-induced fears in socioculturally diverse communities in eastern Indonesia in the context of onto-epistemological disjunctures between biomedically derived public health interventions, local world views and causal-remedial explanations for the crisis. Ethnographic research conducted among several communities in East Nusa Tenggara province in Indonesia provided the data and analyses presented in this chapter, delineating the extent to which fear played a decisive role in both internal, felt experience and social relations. Results illustrate how fear emotions are constructed and acted upon during times of crisis, arising from misinformation, rumour, socioreligious influence, long-standing tradition and community understandings of modernity, power and biomedicine. The chapter outlines several sociological theories on fear and emotion and interrogates a post-pandemic future.

In this chapter we apply a range of insights drawn from social science studies of hope amidst contexts of illness, and studies of hope emerging from the sociology of emotions, in critically considering social processes of hoping amidst the Covid-19 pandemic. While much of the health sciences literature on hope emphasises positive outcomes in terms of coping and motivation, we also draw upon various perspectives which denote a dark side of hoping, whereby inequalities and injustices are tolerated, or where feeling rules insidiously coordinate collective hopes in ways which serve various political-economic interests. Reflecting this ambivalence across different literatures, our examples and analyses suggest that hoping as a social process is itself inherently conflicted, dissonant and rife with tensions. As we explore the contradictions of hoping amidst a pandemic, the tensions between expectations and desire, tragedy and optimism, aspiring to act and fatalistic acceptance make apparent that emotions of hope can be neither neatly delineated nor disentangled from a ‘messy’ web of related feelings and framings. We extend our emphasis of these blurry, dissonant and messy aspects of hoping through work on ‘tragic optimism’, following Frankl, wherein wider lifeworlds or imaginaries pertaining to deeply embodied and implicit notions of self and a good life are central to maintaining hope amidst heightened vulnerability and uncertainty. We close by laying out a post-formal approach to hope, which methodologically and conceptually focusses on contradictions and dissonance in narratives of hope, whereby living hopefully always involves living awkwardly with these tensions.

With the COVID-19 pandemic introducing social distancing measures around the world, how we conceptualise and experience intimacy has significantly and suddenly shifted. Intimate moments such as funerals, weddings and the nurturing of everyday relationships have unfolded over video calls, and digitally mediated contact has been granted, for many, greater importance. At the same time, who we can be close to, and the conditions of this closeness have come under intense scrutiny as we become aware of how bodily proximity and bodily performances such as breathing are implicated in the spread of the virus. With this awareness comes a renewed intimacy with seemingly mundane bodily gestures and performances such as breath – and with the ways in which we are always entangled with those around us. In this chapter, we examine intimacy in a post-COVID future through the themes of proximity, breath and mediation. While intimacy is often conceptualised as occurring only between human subjects, we contribute to a more expansive understanding of intimacy that can account for the closeness and familiarity we feel with non-human objects. We argue that our social worlds are layered with familiar objects that facilitate our everyday encounters – a facemask or Zoom interface – and we argue that conceptualising intimacy must account for these entanglements.

Using Kristeva's theory of abjection, this article analyzes the psychosocial reality of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, advancing the understanding of exclusion and stigmatization as forms of social abjection.

The article applies abjection to understand how severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is both a medical emergency but also a cultural challenge. The analysis is structured in three dimensions: (1) the transgressive potential of the virus, (2) forms of cultural coping with its threat and (3) the moral order of abjection.

The virus is an existential challenge to cultural boundaries and subjectivity. Strategies to prevent its further spread (e.g. handwashing, “social distancing” and closing national borders) are thus culturally significant. The virus triggers the processes of abjection, (re-)establishing challenged boundaries and exclusionary social hierarchies. Collateral consequences of protective measures vary across regions and social groups, creating and exacerbating social inequalities.

Practices of abjecting the virus go far beyond handwashing, masking, etc. The virus, an invisible enemy to be expunged, is also a hybrid of threatening pathogen and human body; it is not the virus but people who experience exclusion, discrimination and disrespect. Thus, cultural sociology must address the moral economy of abjection.

As Kristeva insists, the abject threatens both the subject and the symbolic order. Overcoming social abjection means recognizing and strengthening individual and community agency and requires understanding vulnerability as an anthropological condition, enacting caring relationships and acting in solidarity.

This article demonstrates that abjection is a suitable theoretical tool for analyzing the social dynamics of the COVID-19 crisis.

Anger responding to government-imposed COVID-19 pandemic mandates is examined in relation to 2021 international reports of street protests in cities, with a focus on Perth, Western Australia. Angry protestors displayed a variety of signs and symbols, united under banners demanding freedom. A multi-disciplinary analysis attends to distrust in public health mandates in the global context of an insecure biosphere. Mandates can signify symbolic death, and anger an ‘immune’ response to lifeworld constraints. Anger among nurses and vaccine-hesitant protestors signifies ethical rejection of super-imposed mandates, and fear of alleged vaccine harms. Official pandemic communications are held to be ill-timed, lacking information meaningful to diverse citizens' needs, and offset by poorly contextualised data and unreliable pre-packaged interpretations communicated via digital technologies. A novel hypothesis proposes semiotic misrecognition of the global nature of communications from intersecting ecosocial crises may underlie protestors' anger. Modelling of a management system to validate broad contextual knowledges may restore meaningful balance and public solidarity, to creatively respond to future human crises.

Since the outbreak of COVID-19 in early 2020, the travel sector has faced an intense challenge, making tourism one of the most affected sectors at the time of writing. Based on the results of a survey administered to a sample of 700 Italian tourists, this paper aims to acquire an empirical understanding of key challenges for the travel and tourism sector in the coming months and the possible responses of tourist cities.

To study tourism after the pandemic, OUT (University of Naples Tourism Research Center) has created an online survey to answer the following questions: What will tourism be like after the pandemic? What will the main changes in travel behaviors be? What role will new information technologies play in future tourism? Are there territorial differences based on the spread of the virus?

The pandemic has inevitably affected everyone’s tourist choices, regardless of how much their specific area of residence has been impacted by the virus. Consequently, it will significantly influence travelers’ experiences. The Italian tourists who were survey respondents are aware that physical distancing rules will probably remain in effect for an extended time and, therefore, they cannot imagine future tourism not conditioned by these measures. This does not mean that Italians will give up tourism in the short-medium term, however. Indeed, the research data highlight the resilient character of tourism in that it is transformed but does not cease to exist.

By studying the future through a sociological approach, it is possible to identify how the COVID-19 emergency will impact tourism and how both the form and social meaning of mobility will be conditioned. On the basis of the data, the analysis will be directed from the present to the post-pandemic horizon, hypothesizing possible scenarios for the future of tourism and providing some possible policy indications.