Travel Behaviour of Vulnerable Social Groups: Pre, during, and Post COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract

Since the emergence of COVID-19, travel restrictions due to the pandemic have influenced several activities, in particular the mobility patterns of individuals. Our main goal is to draw the attention of scholars and policy makers to a specific segment of the population, namely (1) older people, (2) persons with disabilities (PwDs), (3) females, and (4) low-income population that are more vulnerable for travel behaviour change due to crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic. This article systematically reviews the studies that have explored the implications of COVID-19 for the mobility and activities of individuals pre-, during, and post-pandemic using the PRISMA method. It is found that there are a few studies regarding the travel and mobility needs and challenges of older people and PwDs, and there is no direct study concerning female and low-income individuals while such crisis exist. Questions such as “What are the adverse impacts of restrictions on their travel behaviour?”, “How can they travel safely to work, shopping, and medical centres?”, “Which transportation modes can be more effective for them?”, and “What are the government and policy makers’ role in providing accessible and affordable mobility services in the presence of such crisis?” are without relevant answers in the literature.

Full text

Citation: Dadashzadeh, N.; Larimian,
T.; Levifve, U.; Marsetiˇc, R. Travel
Behaviour of Vulnerable Social
Groups: Pre, during, and Post
COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph191610065
Academic Editors: Arturo
Calvo-Mora and Cayetano
Medina-Molina
Received: 10 July 2022
Accepted: 12 August 2022
Published: 15 August 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
International Journal of
Environmental Research
and Public Health
Article
Travel Behaviour of Vulnerable Social Groups: Pre, during,
and Post COVID-19 Pandemic
Nima Dadashzadeh 1, * , Taimaz Larimian 2, Ulysse Levifve 3and Rok Marsetiˇc 4,*
1Intelligent Transport Cluster, Faculty of Technology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth PO1 3HF, UK
2School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering, Loughborough University,
Loughborough LE11 3TU, UK
3Civil Engineering Faculty, Technical University of Compiègne, 60200 Compiègne, France
4Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
*Correspondence: nima.dadashzadeh@port.ac.uk (N.D.); rok.marsetic@fgg.uni-lj.si (R.M.)
Abstract:
Since the emergence of COVID-19, travel restrictions due to the pandemic have influenced
several activities, in particular the mobility patterns of individuals. Our main goal is to draw the
attention of scholars and policy makers to a specific segment of the population, namely (1) older
people, (2) persons with disabilities (PwDs), (3) females, and (4) low-income population that are
more vulnerable for travel behaviour change due to crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic. This
article systematically reviews the studies that have explored the implications of COVID-19 for the
mobility and activities of individuals pre-, during, and post-pandemic using the PRISMA method.
It is found that there are a few studies regarding the travel and mobility needs and challenges of
older people and PwDs, and there is no direct study concerning female and low-income individuals
while such crisis exist. Questions such as “What are the adverse impacts of restrictions on their
travel behaviour?”, “How can they travel safely to work, shopping, and medical centres?”, “Which
transportation modes can be more effective for them?”, and “What are the government and policy
makers’ role in providing accessible and affordable mobility services in the presence of such crisis?”
are without relevant answers in the literature.
Keywords: COVID-19; pandemic; travel behaviour; mobility; transport; vulnerable social groups
1. Introduction and Background
On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially announced
COVID-19 as a pandemic situation and called for essential protective measures to strengthen
preventive hygiene such as wearing a mask in public places, elimination of physical con-
tact, elimination of gatherings and large events, elimination of unnecessary travel, and
implementation of quarantine/lockdown [
1
]. In addition to the first version of COVID-19,
new variants have appeared around the world such as Delta and Omicron [
2
]. Since 2020,
various restrictive measures and policies were applied among different countries, all having
significant implications for people’s mobility. For instance, overall mobility in Spain fell by
more than 75% when the COVID-19 outbreak was introduced [
3
]. In Poland, a significant
decrease in total travel time during the outbreak was observed regardless of travelers’
age and gender [
4
]. Following the state restrictions, multiple private companies provided
their employees the option of home-based work, reshaping daily commuting patterns,
although different clusters of workers can have different attitudes towards working from
home [
5
]. Concerns about possible virus infection also influenced mode choices, partic-
ularly in favour of private modes [
6
]. Specifically, active mobility increased significantly
during the outbreak combining compliance to the restriction measures and lower risk of
infection with the opportunity for outdoor exercise [
7
–
12
]. Public transport use dropped by
almost 80–90% in major cities in China, Iran, U.S., Italy, Spain, and France [
13
,
14
], mainly
because of people’s perception of the increased risk of infection in public transport, but
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610065 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 2 of 18
also due to operation cuts during the pandemic [
15
–
17
]. Shared mobility systems were also
perceived as a high-exposure mode to the virus resulting in lower levels of usage, although
bike- and scooter-sharing companies were influenced to a lesser extent than ride-hailing or
carpooling services [
18
]. The COVID-19 pandemic has created new or further attenuated
mobility and activity restrictions that vulnerable social groups (VSGs) such as older people,
people with mental and physical disabilities, low-income population, and females were
already experiencing before the outbreak. For example, older people limited their activity
in much higher rates than other age groups in terms of time and distance spent outside,
while their mobility capital was severely restricted due to limited access to a car (or being
chauffeured) and the avoidance of PT as a high-exposure mode to the virus [
7
,
15
,
19
,
20
].
People with visual and mobility impairments faced significant difficulties in visualizing
and keeping social distances, respectively, being exposed to higher health risks, while para-
transit services operation cuts contributed to further isolation of these social groups [
21
,
22
].
People on low-income appeared less flexible in reducing their amount of travel through
home-based working, while they continued using public transport during the pandemic at
higher rates than people with higher incomes [
10
,
15
,
23
]. Moreover, females tended to take
over increased housework and caring activities (e.g., of children and older people) during the
pandemic, negatively affecting their ability to keep-up with their job activities [
6
,
24
–
26
]. The
implications of COVID-19 for the mobility and activities of VSGs have attracted less attention
in the scholarly literature compared to the respective changes of other social groups [
6
,
7
,
11
,
16
].
However, VSGs tend to be exposed to higher health risks, due to pre-existing medical and
social conditions that influence their mobility and activity patterns.
To this end, this paper systematically reviews the studies that have explored the implica-
tions of COVID-19 for the mobility and activities of VSGs pre-, during, and post-pandemic
when travel restrictions are lifted. The review focuses on the outcomes rather than on the
methods of the studies and highlights broader resilience issues of urban and transportations
systems with respect to supporting VSGs in times of crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2describes the methods and data of
the studies included in our literature review. Section 3presents first the results regarding
the geographic distribution of the studies and then the outcomes of our analysis of the
studies focusing on the implications of COVID-19 for the mobility and activities of older
people (Section 3.1), people with disabilities (Section 3.2), women (Section 3.3), and people
on low income (Section 3.4). In Section 4, we present our conclusions per VSGs and discuss
the associated policy implications.
2. Materials and Methods
We applied the PRISMA protocol (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews
and meta-analyses) [
27
] to select the studies for our literature review. The PRISMA protocol
is performed in four stages involving identification, screening, eligibility assessment, and,
finally, inclusion of studies in the analysis (see Figure 1).
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 17
Figure 1. The four stages of the PRISMA protocol and the number of papers identified per stage.
2.1. Search Strategy
In the first stage (identification), we used the following keywords and Booleans
(“AND”) to identify the relevant studies. We searched for Web of Science, Scopus, and
Google Scholar listed peer-reviewed articles, conference papers, and book chapters pub-
lished from January 2020 to the writing time of the article (December 2021). The types of
articles included original research, review articles, short reports, and case studies.
• COVID-19 AND older people;
• COVID-19 AND people with disabilities;
• COVID-19 AND gender, female, women;
• COVID-19 AND low-income people.
Our initial search returned a total of 1012 papers distributed to 199 papers on older
people, 300 papers on people with disabilities, 370 papers on gendered-based mobility,
and 143 papers on people on low income (see Figure 1).
2.2. Selection Strategy
During the screening stage (stage 2), selection was made with the title of the articles.
We removed all the articles that have an out-of-scope title. The eligibility-check stage
(stage 3) required an extensive reading of each abstract and checking whether or not the
article directly or indirectly discusses the effects of COVID-19 on the mobility of vulnera-
ble user groups. After the screening and eligibility check, we selected a total of 50 papers
for in-depth review and inclusion in our analysis (11 papers on older people, 5 papers on
people with disabilities, 3 papers on gendered-mobility, 15 papers on people on low in-
come, and 16 studies that refer to more than one vulnerable social group). More detailed
information regarding the studies included for the full review is presented in Table A1
(Appendix A).
3. Results
This section discusses COVID-19 studies’ findings concerning our target user groups,
namely older people, persons with disabilities, females, and low-income people.
3.1. Older Adluts
Older people’s activity shifted during the outbreaks. Studies reported a decrease of
older people’s overall mobility: less time spent outside, less distance travelled, and trips
made in a smaller perimeter around their home [7,15,19] (Table 1). Although this change
Figure 1. The four stages of the PRISMA protocol and the number of papers identified per stage.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 3 of 18
2.1. Search Strategy
In the first stage (identification), we used the following keywords and Booleans
(“AND”) to identify the relevant studies. We searched for Web of Science, Scopus, and
Google Scholar listed peer-reviewed articles, conference papers, and book chapters pub-
lished from January 2020 to the writing time of the article (December 2021). The types of
articles included original research, review articles, short reports, and case studies.
•COVID-19 AND older people;
•COVID-19 AND people with disabilities;
•COVID-19 AND gender, female, women;
•COVID-19 AND low-income people.
Our initial search returned a total of 1012 papers distributed to 199 papers on older
people, 300 papers on people with disabilities, 370 papers on gendered-based mobility, and
143 papers on people on low income (see Figure 1).
2.2. Selection Strategy
During the screening stage (stage 2), selection was made with the title of the articles.
We removed all the articles that have an out-of-scope title. The eligibility-check stage
(stage 3) required an extensive reading of each abstract and checking whether or not the
article directly or indirectly discusses the effects of COVID-19 on the mobility of vulnerable
user groups. After the screening and eligibility check, we selected a total of 50 papers
for in-depth review and inclusion in our analysis (11 papers on older people, 5 papers
on people with disabilities, 3 papers on gendered-mobility, 15 papers on people on low
income, and 16 studies that refer to more than one vulnerable social group). More detailed
information regarding the studies included for the full review is presented in Table A1
(Appendix A).
3. Results
This section discusses COVID-19 studies’ findings concerning our target user groups,
namely older people, persons with disabilities, females, and low-income people.
3.1. Older Adluts
Older people’s activity shifted during the outbreaks. Studies reported a decrease of
older people’s overall mobility: less time spent outside, less distance travelled, and trips
made in a smaller perimeter around their home [
7
,
15
,
19
] (Table 1). Although this change
was common for all age groups when mobility restrictions were introduced, studies note
particular reactivity of the older people compared to other age groups, such as a drop
in activity of older people that happened earlier and a stronger drop in activity than the
others [
28
]. Due to their higher vulnerability to the virus, older people were more co
being infected by the virus and had more tendency to avoid crowed places, including PT.
Moreover, trying to avoid attendance in places with other people, the modal share of older
people showed a decrease in shared mobility as well [
20
]. Car and special transportation use
by older people (such as community transport or paratransit) also decreased [15,29], with
the latter being affected by mobility restrictions and having decreased service (reduction
in number of vehicles) or deactivated service. Moreover, some older adults, being less
likely to have a driver’s license, did not have someone else to drive them, thus reducing
their overall mobility during the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic influenced the travel
purpose of older people as well. They stopped travelling for leisure [
30
], and the main
motives of their trip were going to groceries stores (common for all ages), pharmacies and
newspaper stands [31].

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 4 of 18
Table 1.
Reviewed studies related to COVID-19 impacts on the mobility and activities of older people.
Study Country Mode Main Findings
Beck & Hensher, 2020 [
15
]
Australia Car
Older households made significantly less trips than younger
households before and during the pandemic. Before the
pandemic, older people were less concerned about the
hygiene on public transit, but during the pandemic became
as concerned as the other age groups. Older people were
more likely to decrease the use of a car during the pandemic.
Daoust, 2020
[20]
Worldwide
(27 countries) -
Older people were more likely to avoid crowded places (e.g.,
public transport, gatherings), but were less compliant to wear
a mask (degree of compliance for 20 year-old person is 0.6,
whereas degree of compliance for 80 year-old person is only
0.3) and were not significantly more likely to self-isolate than
other age groups despite their vulnerability to the virus.
de Haas et al., 2020 [7] Netherlands PT, car, bicycle and walk
The majority of older people (χ2= 95.2 (1, N= 24920),
p= 0.001) were much less active than before COVID-19
compared to other age groups for activities such as grocery
shopping, shopping, exercising, and physical meetings.
Sample size: 2500 respondents from the Netherlands
Mobility Panel (MPN)
Heiler et al., 2020 [26] Austria -
Older people were less compliant to mobility restriction than
the other age groups despite their vulnerability to COVID-19.
Kabiri et al.,
2020 [28]US -
Older people were quick in accepting the stay-at-home
measure, changing their behavior and practicing social
distancing compared to other generations.
Oliver et al., 2020 [31] Spain - Older people were more likely to stay at home (14.9%)
compared to younger generations (7.6%).
Pant & Subedi, 2020 [32] US -
COVID precaution measures such as the stay-at-home
measure increased the social isolation for all age groups, in
particular older people. As a result, they could not meet their
relatives and friends.
Pullano et al., 2020 [30] France -
Older people almost stopped taking trips longer than 100 km
and were likely to avoid leisure activities and family trips.
Ragland et al., 2020 [29] US
PT, car, ridesharing,
special transportation
service
In California between 2018 and 2020, for the age group
55 years and older, PT use decreased by 28.3%, special
transportation services use increased by 2.9%, and
ridesharing (only +65 years old) increased by slightly more
than 10%. A small percentage of older people (3.7%) had a
person to drive them to work before COVID-19 and this
practice was no longer used in 2020. Older people changed
home-to-work transport mode; a shift was mainly toward
private cars (87.1% to 93.7%).
Yamada et al., 2020 [19] Japan Walk
In Japan due to COVID restrictions from 1 January to 25 May
2020, daily time spent in common areas and walking distance
in care retirement communities decreased from 94 min/day
to less than 80 min/day and 1300 m/day to approximately
900 m/day, respectively.
Stavrinos et al., 2020 [33] US Car
Post-COVID, both vehicle miles driven and driving days per
week decreased by 35% and 37%, respectively. However,
older adolescents, employed adolescents, and ethnic
minorities were less likely to decrease their driving during
the COVID-19 restriction period.
Leppä et al., 2021 [34] Finland Walk
During social distancing, older respondents with no walking
difficulties were able to partly compensate for their decreased
social life activities and interactions by increasing their
physical activities (5.5 min/day, SD 25.1). They also faced
less steep decline in their life-space mobility compared to
those older respondents with walking difficulties.
Rantanen et al., 2021 [35] Finland Walk
During the COVID-19 outbreak, older people’s active aging
scores (age and sex adjusted within subject B −24.1, SE 0.88,
p< 0.001; η2 for time 0.508), as well as their life-space
mobility score (B −10.8, SE 0.75, p< 0.001; η2 0.193,
correspondingly), faced a steep decrease compared to the
data from two years prior to the pandemic.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 5 of 18
Table 1. Cont.
Study Country Mode Main Findings
Eisenmann et al., 2021
[36]Germany Car ownership
Younger people had higher tendency to miss having a car of
their own compared to older respondents. These respondents
were mainly women between the age of 18 and 44 who used
public transport as their main means of transport during the
lockdown restrictions and perceived inconvenience with the
use of public transport.
Chan et al., 2021 [37]Worldwide (31
countries) -
The age of respondents was found to be influential in their
compliance to reduce their mobility and stay at home. Both
older and younger respondents (compared to middle-aged
[30–60 years old]) were more likely to stay at home during
lockdown restrictions.
Rahimi et
al., 2021 [38]US shared mobility
Concerning age, older respondents perceived a higher risk
than younger respondents regarding using shared mobility
services.
Pawar et al., 2021 [16] India -
Age was found to be a critical factor affecting the travel
frequency of work-based trips, where younger commuters
were found to be more likely to shift to no travel during the
transition to lockdown restrictions. The analysis indicated
that for each year increase in the age of travelers, their
probability of no travel during the travel restriction would
decrease by 2 percent.
Fu and
Zhai, 2021 [39]US -
Due to their dependence on the assistance of others, older
respondents (aged 65 and older) generally had less
compliance with social distancing and stay-at-home
behaviors.
Lee et al., 2021 [40] South Korea -
The average non-home trips and activities for the older
people was higher compared to non-older people, whereas
the average non-home activity time per person for the older
people was about 2 h and 10 min shorter. Furthermore, on
average, the older people had slightly higher number of trips
compared to non-older people (4.90 trips/person and
4.74 trips/person, respectively). People aged over 80 spent
the longest time at home (average of 16.74 h) compared to
people in their 30s that stayed at home for the shortest
amount of time (average of 13.24 h).
3.2. People with Disabilities
The literature already explicated the difficulties of PwDs to access transportation
systems whether it was before or during COVID-19 and revealed that the degree of dis-
ability of the person is directly linked to their time spent at home [
41
]. The pandemic
outbreak made travel much more difficult for PwDs (Table 2). According to Beukenhorst
et al. [
41
], daily time spent at home for people living with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
(ALS) (Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a rare neurological disease that primarily
affects the nerve cells (neurons) responsible for controlling voluntary muscle movement
(source: https://www.ninds.nih.gov/amyotrophic-lateral-sclerosis-als-fact-sheet, accessed
on 10 October 2021)) increased to almost 24 h, and the daily distance travelled dropped.
Out in the street and in public spaces, it has also been reported that PwDs are experiencing
difficulties to follow the required distances with other persons (e.g., people with visual
impairment having troubles to visualize the distances and people with mobility impairment
having trouble keeping distances) inducing higher exposure to the virus for PwDs when
travelling [
22
]. The pandemic aggravated difficulties of PwDs to access PT and other shared
mobility modes. Paratransit services known also as community transportation (in UK), a
demand-responsive transportation (DRT) system that many PwDs depend on, dropped
during the pandemic, causing incapability to travel for many disabled people [
25
]. In PT,
PwDs reported getting less accessing assistance [
21
]. The difficulties to access transporta-
tion during the pandemic had a direct impact on their well-being, involving less access to
medication, health care, and essential services [
22
]. PwDs were more likely to travel for

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 6 of 18
medical reasons and to provide help to other vulnerable persons than other groups during
the pandemic [41,42].
Table 2.
Reviewed studies related to COVID-19 impacts on the mobility and activities of disabled
persons.
Study Country Mode Disability Type Main Findings
Ainslie, 2020
[41]UK -
Mental impairments,
hearing impairments,
mobility impairments.
PwDs were more likely to leave their home for medical
purposes and to provide help to a vulnerable person than
the rest of the population (19% against 7%). However, they
were less likely to leave their home for leisure, to commute,
to take the children to school, to grocery shop, to exercise, or
to meet up with people.
In the data collected in May 2020, 73.4% of PwDs left their
home against 92.5% of non-disabled persons to do their
regular activities.
Among PwDs, 80% of persons with mental impairments left
their home against 54.7% for persons with hearing
impairments and 65.9% of persons with mobility
impairments.
Beukenhorst
et al., 2020 [42]US -
Amyotrophic lateral
sclerosis,
a kind of mobility
impairment
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the median time spent at
home for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) people
increased from 19.4 h to almost 23.7 h, and the median daily
distance travelled dropped from 42 km to 3.7 km. For
general population in the US, daily time spent home
increased from 10 to 14 h.
Chen et al., 2020
[25]US Paratransit -
Many PwDs rely on paratransit, such as a minibus (or van)
equipped with wheelchair lifts or ramps to facilitate access.
Paratransit use dropped during the beginning of the
pandemic by around 80% but recovered to 50% of the
normal service in late July 2020.
A total of 47% of 2000 PwDs who participated in the survey
rely on personal care, in which 27% of them (216 persons)
stopped receiving those services during the outbreak.
Cochran, 2020
[21]US PT and ride hailing
(Uber, etc.)
Visual impairments: blind
or low visibility, hearing
impairments; other
disabilities
The pandemic aggravated the difficulties of PwDs to access
PT and created more reluctance to use them.
PwDs experienced less assistance in accessing PT and
completing daily living activities than prior to the
COVID-19 pandemic.
PwDs were worried about being infected from people
(drivers/passengers) or surfaces (transportation
facilities/vehicles), e.g., blind persons should touch surfaces
for navigation while using PT or ride haling services.
Blind persons could neither get accurate and timely
information about transport service, such as whether or not
it was operating, nor up to date information about spread of
COVID-19 in their region. Then, it was difficult for them to
evaluate the risk of travelling by PT or ride hailing services.
Eskyt˙
e et al.,
2020 [22]UK Walk All forms of
impairments
- Stay-at-home measure:
A substantial number of PwDs were no longer receiving
healthcare visits at home and assistance with shopping.
- Physical distancing and use of face mask:
People with hearing impairments could not communicate
with fellow pedestrians due to fellow pedestrians using
non-transparent face masks.
The 2-m physical distancing while walking was difficult to
follow for persons with visual/mobility/cognitive
impairments or neurodiversity in non-disability-inclusive
sidewalks.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 7 of 18
Table 2. Cont.
Study Country Mode Disability Type Main Findings
RIDC, 2020a,
2020b UK PT -
Travel by PT was dropped significantly for most PWDs
(64% of respondents) due to safety concern, a lack of trust
with the information provided by the government, and a
heightened feeling of vulnerability to COVID-19. In
addition, 50% of respondents were no receiving health,
personal care, as well as shopping assistant during the
pandemic.
Schur et al.,
2020 [43]US - -
Tele-working due to the COVID-19 pandemic positively
influenced the employment opportunities for people with
disabilities, but there is still a wage gap between
non-disabled and disabled people. Increased availability of
home-based work in the future can create more
employment opportunities for people with disabilities.
Leppä et al.,
2021 [34]Finland Walk -
Life-space mobility for older respondents with impaired
walking decreased significantly, putting them at risk of
being housebound (p= 0.001). Furthermore, respondents
with impaired walking had a smaller decrease in autonomy
of participating in outdoor activities (p= 0.017) and slighter
increase in their physical activity (p< 0.001) compared to
those with intact walking ability.
Rahimi et al.,
2021 [38]U.S. shared mobility -
Respondents’ health background, such as their pre-existing
health conditions and disability status, significantly
influenced their risk perception associated with the usage of
public transport.
Fu and Zhai,
2021 [39]U.S. - -
At the beginning of lockdown restrictions, people with
disability were mainly staying at home due to their special
needs and reliance on assistance of others. However,
throughout the lockdown period and with the growth of the
pandemic situation, disabled people generally decreased
their social distancing and stay-at-home behaviors as they
needed to take care of themselves or were dependent on
support from other community members.
3.3. Gender Gap
There is a mixed picture regarding the impacts of the pandemic on the mobility and
activities of different genders. Some studies reported a higher rate of overall mobility and
longer trips for men compared to women [
6
,
12
,
44
], while other studies reported a higher
drop in men’s overall mobility [
26
] (Table 3). Several studies identified an increase of car
use and walking by women [
10
,
11
] and a decrease in PT, while there is also evidence of
no significant change of mode choice during the pandemic between men and women [
6
].
Regarding trip motives, women reduced leisure travel (being more compliant with mobility
restriction measures), grocery shopping, and work activities at a higher rate than men [
23
,
44
].
Moreover, studies reveal a higher vulnerability and an increased exposure of women to the
virus related to (a) the higher tendency of women to use PT than men, exposing them to
the infection risk [
4
]; (b) the type of jobs they hold (e.g., in Belgium, home care assistants
are held by women up to 97%); (c) the unequal home-duties repartition that induce higher
mobility for women than men in addition to their higher reliance on PT [
24
]; and (d) the
higher needs of medical care for women such as prenatal care.
Table 3.
Reviewed studies related to COVID-19 impacts on the mobility and activities of different genders.
Study Country Mode Main Findings
Abdullah et al., 2020
[6]Worldwide -
Pre-COVID pandemic, mode choice for primary trips purposes were similar
for females and males. Males used private transport modes at a higher rate
and undertook more and longer trips during COVID-19 (+3.9% and +1%)
compared to females (−9% and −2%), whereas females were not likely to
change their mode choice.
Females might be more concerned about being infected during the pandemic.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 8 of 18
Table 3. Cont.
Study Country Mode Main Findings
Assoum ou et al.,
2020 [24]Belgium PT
Considering jobs (caregiving, primary and pre-primary education, housework,
and domestic work) held by females among the working-age (20–59 years old)
population in Belgium, females were more vulnerable to be infected during
lockdown as they had frontline jobs and their main transport mode was PT.
The female/male COVID cases index confirmed this vulnerability.
Bhaduri et al., 2020
[44]India -
Females’ work and discretionary activities decreased more than males during
the COVID-19 pandemic (a decrease of 17% of work activities compared to 9%
for males and decrease of 34% of females’ discretionary activities against 28%
for males).
The shift to home-based work was slightly higher for females (+19%) than
males (+16%). Females
have less tendency to use a car to commute (because of less driver’s license
ownership compared to males) but had more tendency to work from home
and to use other means of transport.
Beck & Hensher, 2020
[15]Australia Car and PT
Females’ concern about levels of hygiene on PT was similar before and after
COVID-19.
Females’ activities such as shopping, visiting relatives and friends, and
healthcare appointments have been interrupted due to COVID-19.
Chen et al., 2020 [25] US -
During the pandemic, pregnant females were less willing to travel outside
their home for prenatal care (usually not amenable to telemedicine). Females
had disproportionately more childcare obligation and were more impacted
than males by school closures.
Matson et al., 2021 [
5
]
US -
The attitude toward tele-working is different between females depending on
the presence of children in the household. Working mothers stated there are
unwanted distractions while tele-working.
Dandap at et al., 2020
[23]India - Males had less tendency to work from home than females.
Heiler et al., 2020 [
26
]
Austria -
Mobility behaviour of the male worker population changed more significantly
than females, possibly explained by the obligation of home office work.
Molloy, 2020 [12] Switzerland -
During lockdown, males travelled longer distances. Average daily distances
travelled had a more consequent drop for females (from 38 km prior
COVID-19 to 12.5 km at the beginning of the
lockdown, recovered at 37 km in late August 2020) than for males (46 km,
18 km, and 46 km, respectively).
Shakibaei et al., 2020
[10]Turkey Rail transit and
Car
Females were used to rail transit more than males pre-, during, and
post-lockdown. However, females’ travel behaviour changed during the
outbreak. This shows rail transit was more reliable and secure for females
compared to road transportation.
An increase in females’ car use to commute (home to work trips) was
observed, but still they used a car less than males, and grocery shopped less
than males.
Thombre & Agarwal,
2020 [11]India -
In India pre-lockdown, PT and walking were the most preferred modes
among females.
After the outbreak, the share of PT decreased (27% to 22%), the share of
walking travels slightly increased (27% to 29%), and the share of motorized
vehicle significantly increased (18% to 25% in the five biggest megacities).
After the lockdown, non-motorized transports (NMT) and intermediate
public transport (IPT) decreased (24% to 15%). The findings highlight the
importance of PT, NMT, and IPT modes to ensure gender equity.
Eisenma nn et al.,
2021 [36]Germany Bicycle/car
ownership/PT
Bicycle usage decreased more sharply for males (minus 10 percentage points)
than for females (minus 5 percentage points).
Public transport usage dropped more significantly amongst males (from 22%
to 10%) than amongst females (from 24% to 15%).
The regression model indicates that females were more likely than males to
miss having a car of their own.
Chan et al., 2021 [37] Worldwide -
Concerning gender, women (compared to men) were more compliant and
cooperative to stay at home previously (b
1
4
0.037, SE
1
4
0.015) and continue to
stay at home in the future (OR 1
40.79, SE
1
4
0.044). They were also more likely to reduce their mobility during lockdown
restrictions.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 9 of 18
Table 3. Cont.
Study Country Mode Main Findings
Rahimi et al., 2021
[38]US shared mobility
Gender of respondents had a significant role on their perceived risk of using
shared mobility services during the pandemic. Females perceived higher risks
of using shared mobility modes.
Lee et al., 2021 [40]South
Korea -
In terms of activity behaviors by gender, women, regardless of their age
group, had longer duration of home activity time than men. For instance, the
average home activity time for both non-older and older women (14.51 h and
16.76 h, respectively) is longer than those of non-older and older men (12.68 h
and 14.83 h, respectively).
The average home activity times were 12.68 h for non-older men, 14.51 h for
non-older women,
14.83 h for older men, and 16.76 h for older women.
On average, men tend to participate in more non-home activities per day
compared to women. On average, women have shorter non-home activities
(9.41 h) compared to men (11.20 h).
Politis et al., 2021 [
45
]
Greece -
In terms of both travel duration and trip frequencies, men tended to make
longer and more trips during lockdown restrictions compared to their women
counterparts. Men had a hazard ratio of 0.90, which indicated that the
duration of travel for male travelers was somewhat longer compared to
female travelers.
In general, trips made by walking and cycling were likely to be shorter than
the trips made by cars (hazard ratios of 1.49 and 1.94, respectively). Moreover,
trips made by public transport were more likely to have a significantly longer
duration compared to cars (hazard ratio of 0.56).
3.4. Low-Income People
Before the pandemic, mobility of low-income population (LIP) was described in the US
by a lower number of trips per day, a higher share of PT, lower rate of car ownership, higher
share of walking for shopping, and a higher commuting carpool rate compared to higher
income groups [
25
]; however, carless LIP used ride hailing for essential trips more than
carless high-income population (HIP) [
46
]. Evidence suggests that during the pandemic,
the number of trips and the distance travelled by LIP has decreased less than those of the
higher income groups, indicating that LIP were less flexible to reduce their mobility when
mobility restrictions were introduced [
25
,
47
], mostly due to their unsuitable jobs for home-
based work [
17
,
44
,
48
]. Evidence also suggests that even though LIP were concerned about
the risk of infection, they tend to use PT more during lockdown [
23
,
49
] and motorized two-
wheelers in the case of India [
11
]. The demand for using ride hailing (Uber, Lyft, etc.) before
and during the pandemic has not changed for LIP [
50
]. The interest in buying a car after the
pandemic was higher for LIP compared to higher income groups in China but did not differ
across income groups in Europe and the U.S. [
21
]. Moreover, according to Chen et al. [
25
],
LIP have slightly higher health care needs compared to the other income groups, and they
are facing more transportation barriers to meet those needs, as they have a lower rate of car
ownership and as PT service was affected by the mobility restriction measure. Therefore,
COVID-19 emphasized the existing transportation accessibility inequity in addition to
having amplified it between income groups. In response, some studies carried out on this
topic show the importance of the active transportation in low-income countries and their
positives outcomes, counting health, social, and climates benefits [
51
]. Table 4presents the
key findings of the reviewed studies on the pandemic and mobility of low-income people.
Table 4.
Reviewed studies related to COVID-19 impacts on the mobility and activities of low-income
peoples.
Study Country Mode Main Findings
Bert et al., 2020 [52]Worldwide
(China, EU, US) Privat e car,
In post-lockdown, MIP (middle-income population) were slightly more
willing to buy a car compared to LIP in the U.S., while in the EU, all income
groups had similar likelihood to buy a new car post-lockdown. In China, LIP
were less likely to buy a new car post-lockdown compared to MIP and HIP.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 10 of 18
Table 4. Cont.
Study Country Mode Main Findings
Beck & Hensher, 2020
[15]Australia Car and PT
Pre-COVID, LIP made significantly less trips per week compared to other
income groups, while post COVID, there was no difference between income
groups in terms of the number of trips.
As most of the LIP were less likely to own a car, they have shown significantly
lower average car use reduction compared to HIP.
LIP were less likely to do work from home compared to MIP and HIP.
As expected, LIP were less likely to show reduction in some activities such as
going to restaurants, cafés, pubs or bars, gyms or exercise, watching
professional sport, playing organised
sports, or work functions.
Bhaduri et al., 2020 [44] India -
In terms of working habits during the pandemic, LIP reduced working much
more than HIP (−29% compared to −1%), possibly due to their lower
tendency to telecommute and their lower rate of car ownership. HIP were
more likely to shift to work from home than LIP (+20%
and +11%, respectively).
Dandapat
et al., 2020 [23]India PT
Mostly being from low-income groups, captive riders to PT are more likely to
use PT during the
pandemic despite their concern about the risk of infection.
Hernando et al., 2020
[48]Spain -
Means of the daily radius of gyration collected using mobile phone data has
been used as a measure to evaluate the mobility inequality across the Spanish
population:
•LIP: pre-lockdown (former lockdown): 8.1 km, 3.3 km in lockdown,
6.9 km after lockdown (new normal).
•HIP: pre-lockdown (former lockdown): 6.9 km, 0.9 km during
lockdown, 4.7 km after lockdown (new normal).
In former normal (pre-lockdown), the mean radius of gyration for LIP and
HIP were 8.1 and 6.9 km which shows 17% mobility inequality. As most of
LIP jobs are not suitable for teleworking,
inequality sharply increased from 17% to 47% due to teleworking in new
normal (post- lockdown).
Koehl, 2020 [51] UK -
Increasing the share of active transportation (cycling and walking), as also
suggested by the
WHO during the COVID-19 pandemic, can decrease the pressure on the
often-overloaded PT systems which is the most used transport modes in LIP
and MIP countries.
Ramit et al., 2020 [49] India All modes
Only a 23% shift was expected for the intra-city urban rail used in Mumbai
and Chennai post-lockdown as LIP (income < 25,000 INR) who do not own a
vehicle were the highest portion among PT users.
Regardless the income, only 24% of respondents were more likely to buy a
new vehicle post lockdown. Among them, LIP and MIP (25,000 < income <
50,000 INR) were most likely to by a two-wheeler.
Ruiz-euler et al., 2020
[47]US -
Lockdown policies increased the mobility gap (differences in mobility across
income levels) and inequality in urban centres of American cities. LIP were
unable to reduce mobility (distance
travelled) as much as high-income groups during the outbreak.
Thombre & Agarwal,
2020 [11]India All modes
Before the lockdown, the preferred modes of LIP for primary activities in
megacities were PT, walking, and motorized two-wheeler, respectively.
In post-lockdown, PT and walking trips sharply decreased among LIP, and
they made a shift to motorized transports for LIP, possibly explained by a
higher preference to safety than
affordability.
Tirachini et al., 2020
[53]Chile - Low-income workers were less (1 out of 4 workers) able to work from home.
Lou et al., 2020 [54] Worldwide -
The “stay-at-home” measure has less effect on LIP’s mobility than higher
income groups’ mobility. Work and non-work-related trips were less reduced
for LIP as more essential jobs were held by LIP as they could not afford online
shopping or do tele-working. This difference in
mobility is less significant in sparsely populated regions.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 11 of 18
Table 4. Cont.
Study Country Mode Main Findings
Pawar et al., 2021 [55] India -
Higher income groups were less likely (approximately 14–25% reduction in
chances of having reduced travel) to switch to no travel compared to LIP.
All income groups were likely to significantly reduce their non-work-based
trips, but higher income groups were more likely to travel regularly for
non-work-related purpose than LIP.
Iio et al., 2021 [56] US -
Before COVID restrictions, the distance travelled by income groups were
similar. During the pandemic (in April 2020), the median monthly distance
travelled by high-income groups had a large decrease compared to LIP.
The radius of gyration and the number of locations visited dropped in a larger
proportion for higher income groups than that for LIP.
Matson et al., 2021a [5] US -
LIP are less likely to work from home and benefit from the ensuing travel time
savings; therefore, a long-term shift toward tele-working may increase the
current mobility inequities.
Matson et al., 2021b [
50
]
US Ride-hailing The use of ride hailing services for LIP does not change pre- and during the
COVID outbreak but the change for HIP and MIP was obvious.
DfT, 2021 [57] UK - LIP travelled less than high-and middle-income respondents, while
high-income groups had similar travel pattern such as before the pandemic.
Rahimi et al., 2021 [38] US shared
mobility
People’s income was found to play a critical role on their risk-perception
behavior associated with shared mobility services. According to the result,
those respondents from extremely low-income background (with less than
$20 K income per year) perceived higher risks of exposure to
COVID-19 associated with the use of public transport modes.
Pawar et al., 2021 [55] India -
In terms of the effect of travelers’ income on their work-and non-work-related
travel frequency, travelers from higher-income brackets (3 to 6 lakh rupees or
6 to 12 lakh rupees) were significantly less likely to opt to no travel during the
transition to lockdown period compared to lower income travelers (up to
3 lakh rupees).
The findings revealed that the chances of switching to ‘no travel’ decreased by
61% and 45% for travelers with income of 6–12 lakhs and 3–6 lakhs,
respectively, compared to those with income less than 3 lakh rupees (1 lakh =
0.1 million).
4. Conclusions and Policy Recommandations
It is a fact that equity issues such as the needs and challenges of vulnerable social
groups have not been considered by most of the countries in the analysis, planning, and im-
plementation of transportation and mobility services [
58
]. This can affect travel behaviour
of VSGs compared to other user groups. Thus, countries should make mobility more
resilient and accessible for everyone. In addition, the mobility of VSGs has also supposed to
be influenced by mobility restriction measures applied during crisis such as the COVID-19
pandemic. Therefore, this study presents a systematic literature review on the pandemic
impacts on mobility of VSGs. We had an extensive search among existing studies regarding
the pandemic impacts on people’s mobility and tried to extract the most relevant findings
considering VSGs. Considering the aim of our study, existing findings, research gaps, and
directions are as follows:
Older people
: With an increase of the aging population, older people are facing
mobility issues and shifts from private cars to other shared modes. Being the most at-
risk group of users for COVID-19, older people change their mobility habits (compared
to before the pandemic) to avoid crowed places, PT, and shared-mobility modes. Many
articles explore the change in mobility activity (i.e., time outside, distance travelled), but
only one assesses some changes of older people’s mode preferences. It is known that older
adults’ mobility patterns differ from those of younger age groups. The literature is well
documented on the impacts of a pandemic on their activity, but very few explored the
mode preference changes. Thus, one should evaluate their preferences and challenges for
each transportation mode before, during, and after the pandemic.
Persons with disabilities
: PwDs always faced strong difficulties accessing transporta-
tion systems because of the low inclusiveness of urban transports. Paratransit service and

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 12 of 18
other ride-sharing modes are the main component of PwDs’ mobility as they rely on the
assistance of other people. Only little information has been discussed by existing studies
on how PwDs meet their needs during COVID-19 to commute. Moreover, the study areas
are limited to the U.K. and U.S. To have a better understanding of PwDs’ mobility patterns
in such crisis, it would be interesting to have evidence on their methods to meet their
mobility needs and some evidence on their travel and mobility patterns in all continents.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, PwDs experienced many difficulties to travel because of
the diminution of PT and paratransit service and to ensure social distancing with others.
Their travel activities have decreased drastically during the pandemic. On the other hand,
transportation accessibility as a barrier has a direct impact on PwDs’ job accessibility [
59
].
COVID-19 mobility restriction revealed that the fermented availability of home-based work
(tele-working) could be an opportunity for PwD to access new jobs. Therefore, one should
assess how PwDs respond to their needs during such crises and how they reached their
destination (workplaces, medical centres, shopping, etc.).
Gender gap:
As a well-stablished fact, the travel and mobility pattern of women and
men are different [
60
]. Men have a higher share of private transportation and women have
more reliance on PT. During the outbreak, there was less decrease in women’s mobility
activity in some countries due to their essential jobs and remarkable decrease in other
countries due to a lower driver’s license ownership rate and PT deactivation. Another
challenge that these group of users deal with during the pandemic is their medical needs
such as prenatal care, incompatible with telemedicine. There is a lack of data on the change
of travel behaviour for each mode. Furthermore, men’s behaviour does not vary much
depending on the country, whereas women’s behaviour, even during the pandemic, is very
different by country (e.g., Belgium and India). Therefore, one should study the impacts of
such crisis on gender gap in mobility before, during, and after the pandemic and explore
the response of different genders in different counties.
Low-income population
: LIP have a higher share of PT use, walking for shopping,
carpooling to commute because of the affordability of these modes, and a lower rate of
car ownership. During the COVID-19 pandemic and due to the (deactivation) limited PT
services, LIP experienced difficulties for transport as many of the jobs held by LIP are
not suitable with home-based work. This paper recognized that travel patterns of low-
income households are different than the other income-groups, and that the deprivation
of PT during COVID-19 particularly affected their mobility habits. There is also a lack
of information on the outcomes of pop-up active transportation facilities (e.g., bicycle,
walking, etc.) on LIP’s travel behaviour. Those transportation modes have proven to be
valuable to meet many LIP’s mobility needs. Consequently, one should analyze their needs
and challenges due to mobility restrictions and explore how they meet their mobility needs
during such crisis.
Policy implications:
•Active Transport:
There is a link between safe bike lane or bike lanes with good
connectivity to amenities with the increase of cycling activities [
61
]. In order to satisfy
the need in active transportation during and post-pandemic (when mobility restrictions
are lifted), implementing new cycling lanes and widening the pedestrian roads will
improve the mobility of VSGs who are interested in active transport, in particular older
people and persons with disabilities that encountered problems in keeping (1.5–2 m)
social distances. Local authorities and policymakers should prepare contingency
plans and guidelines for future emergencies where other modes of transport lose
their capacity and efficiency. In such situations, people from different age-groups
and with different physical abilities should be able to have access to alternative active
transport options. Neighborhoods and urban built environments should become more
people-friendly with more compact, diverse, and mixed land uses to encourage people
to switch to active modes of transport.
•Public Transport:
It is undoubtedly true that PT was the most negatively affected
as there is a higher concern of the infection risk. There are two different PT systems

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 13 of 18
around the world: owned and operated by private companies and owned and operated
by local authorities/municipalities. During such crisis, bus and rail operators due
to the collapse in revenue from ticket sales faced significant financial difficulties.
Government or local authorities should provide these companies with public funds to
ensure accessible and affordable PT services for VSGs. Apparently, more research is
required about efficient business models, particularly if based on PPPs and subsidies
for mobility services. This study emphasizes the importance of shifting governments
and policymakers’ mindset towards a pandemic-focused governance. This includes
adopting a more resilient mindset that is prepared for future emergencies that require
governments and transport providers to shift public transport users to other modes
of transport (e.g., ride sharing and bike sharing services). Another policy implication
would be the ability of public transport providers to shift from fixed-hour services
to more flexible services to be able to accommodate the needs of users in case of
emergency.
•Shared mobility:
Results of this study indicated that one of the main reasons for
customers’ intention to avoid shared mobility during the pandemic was related to
perceived health threat. There has also been a change in key factors in customers’
transportation choices, shifting from traditional cost and convenience to health and
safety related factors. As a result, ‘reducing the risk of infection’ is now the primary
factor in people’s choice of transportation mode. Therefore, shared mobility modes
can benefit VSGs with more accessible transportation services than private cars and
in some cases PT by providing precautionary measures during the pandemic such
as distributing disinfectants to help drivers to keep cars clean, installing protective
plastic sheets, reducing their fares during the pandemic, and disinfecting all high
contact surfaces on bikes and scooters in respective depots. All these will increase the
running cost for these companies that should be covered by the government through
incentives and tax exemptions. The effectiveness of such measures in changing VSGs’
attitudes (scared to be infected) towards shared mobility modes can be a potential
research topic.
Overall, it can be concluded that the COVID-19 pandemic has an unequal impact on
different social and demographic groups in terms of mobility, in particular in different
countries. The pandemic has proven a lack of inclusivity in transportation, particularly
for the elderly and disabled commuters. This provides opportunity to ensure policies are
in place to support the equity and inclusivity of transport infrastructure. For instance,
subsidizing transportation, dedicating seats and spaces in public transport systems, and
enhancing public awareness of the specific needs and rights of these vulnerable groups are
important steps to achieve more inclusive transportation. Furthermore, since we are still
struggling with the health-related concerns associated with the pandemic, policymakers
and governments should still encourage safety measures (e.g., face covering and basic
hygiene) for public transport users to reduce the spread of the virus.
In addition, in order to minimize future disruptions to the supply and demand dynam-
ics, policymakers should invest more on travel demand management (TDM) plans. This
would enable governments and transport providers to alleviate congestion and increase
existing infrastructure capacity.
Most of the relevant studies have been in developed countries, while limited studies
have been done regarding VSGs in South and Central America, Middle East, and Africa,
in particular in low- and middle-income countries. However, it should be mentioned that
we only reviewed articles that were written in English which may be a factor to the lack
of information about Latin America or other parts of the world where English is not the
main language. Hence, one should study the impact of COVID-19 on mobility of VSGs in
Latin American, African, and Middle Eastern countries and include research published in
languages other than English. A post-COVID-19 study could notably explore the impacts
of tele-working and economic crisis on the drop-in demand for commuting transport by
VSGs. The shift to fully or partly tele-working by companies and organizations, its benefits

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 14 of 18
for VSGs in particular for persons with disabilities, and women can be other topics that
requires further study.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, N.D., U.L., T.L., and R.M.; methodology, N.D., T.L., and
R.M.; validation, N.D. and T.L.; formal analysis, N.D., U.L., T.L., and R.M.; data curation, N.D., U.L.,
and T.L.; writing—original draft preparation, N.D. and U.L.; writing—review and editing, N.D., U.L.,
T.L., and R.M.; visualization, U.L.; supervision, N.D. and R.M. All authors have read and agreed to
the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments:
The authors are deeply thankful for Dimitris Milakis, team leader at German
Aerospace Center (DLR) Institute of Transport Research, for his valuable and constructive comments
and suggestions.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix A
Table A1 lists the details (i.e., thematic focus, authors, year, country, social group
examined) of the selected papers for our analysis. We did not filter the journal names in
our search process (PRISMA method), so that our search includes all journals which have
studies on COVID-19 and VSGs.
Table A1. The profile of the studies selected for the literature review.
# Thematic Focus Authors Study
Area Year People on
Low Income Females Older
People
People with
Disabilities
1
Public transit; carpooling;
ride-hailing and taxi; car- haling;
micro mobility sharing; bike;
walk; private car
Bert et al.
Worldwide
2020 - - -
2 Commuting behaviour Tirachini et al. Chile 2020 - - -
3 Distance Ruiz-Euler et al. US 2020 - - -
4 Travel satisfaction Khaddar & Fatmi Canada 2020 - - -
5Transportation policies in low-
and middle-income countries Koehl
Worldwide
2020 - - -
6Vehicle ownership, mode share,
willingness to buy a new vehicle Ramit et al. India 2020 - - -
7 Mode share, trip motives Shamshiripour et al. US 2020 - - -
8 Mode share Meena India 2020 - - -
9 Mean radius of gyration Hernando et al. Spain 2020 - - -
10 Impacts on trip purposes Lou et al.
Worldwide
2020 - - -
11 Travel demand Circella US 2020 - - -
12 Travel demand Jay et al. US 2020 - - -
13 Radii of gyration; travel distance;
frequency of travel Iio et al. US 2021 - - -
14
Travel behaviour: distance
travelled; work and
non-work-related travel
frequency
Kar et al. US 2021 - - -

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 15 of 18
Table A1. Cont.
# Thematic Focus Authors Study
Area Year People on
Low Income Females Older
People
People with
Disabilities
15 Ride-hailing Matson et al. US 2021 - - -
16 Trip motives Assoumou Ella, Belgium 2020 - - -
17
Trip purpose; mode choice;
distance travelled; and frequency
of trips before and during
COVID-19.
Abdullah et al.
Worldwide
2020 - - -
18 Changes in the share of travel
modes Shakibaei et al. Turkey 2020 - - -
19 Walking distance, daily time
spent in common areas Yamada et al. Japan 2020 - - -
20 Activity time Rantanen et al. Finland 2020 - - -
21 Modal share changes during
COVID Ragland et al. US 2020 - - -
22 Social isolation Pant & Subedi
Worldwide
2020 - - -
23 Travel motives Oliver et al. Spain 2020 - - -
24
Behavioural changes: mask
wearing, PT avoidance, guest
avoidance
Daoust
Worldwide
2020 - - -
25 Ridership, distances travelled Kabiri et al. US 2020 - - -
26 Ridership, distances travelled Pullano et al. France 2020 - - -
27 Car; driving behaviour Stavrinos et al. US 2020 -
28
Outdoor activities; working from
home; home education; share of
travel mode; share of trip motives
de Haas et al.
Netherland
2020 - - -
29
Private car; public transport; ride
hailing/sharing; ferry; train; walk;
bicycle; trip motives
Beck & Hensher
Australia
2020 -
30 life-space mobility; active aging;
walk Rantanen et al. Finland 2021 - - -
31 Well-being and travel behaviour Ainslie UK 2020 - - -
32 Street time occupancy Eskyt˙
e et al. UK 2020 - - -
33 COVID and access on
transportation Cochran US 2020 - - -
34 Daily home time and daily
distance travelled Beukenhorst et al. US 2020 - - -
35 Commuting for PwDs Schur et al. US 2020 - - -
36 PT, Private car, walk, bicycle Thombre & Agarwal India 2020 - -
37
Changes in travel characteristics,
perceived risk of different modes,
mode preference after the
pandemic
Dandapat et al. India 2020 - -
38 Trip length and motives: Bhaduri et al. India 2020 - -
39
Private car; public transit;
paratransit, transportation
network companies; non-
emergency medical
transportation; walk and bicycle
Chen et al. US 2020 -
40 Telecommuting Rates During the
Pandemic Matson et al. US 2021 - -
41 Mobile phone data Heiler et al. Austria 2020 -
42 Distance; active days; modal
share; trip motives Molloy
Switzerland
2020 -
43 Public transport; car ownership Eisenmann et al.
Germany
2021 -

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 16 of 18
Table A1. Cont.
# Thematic Focus Authors Study
Area Year People on
Low Income Females Older
People
People with
Disabilities
44 Activity and travel patterns Lee et al. South
Korea 2021 -
45
Traits and regulatory compliance
during COVID lockdown;
mobility behaviour; willingness
to reduce outdoor mobility
Chan et al.
Worldwide
2021 -
46
Life-space mobility; Autonomy in
participation outdoor physical
activities; walk
Leppä et al. Finland 2021
47 Shared mobility services Rahimi et al. US 2021
48 Work-and non-work-based trip
patterns Pawar et al. India 2021 -
49 Social vulnerability and
stay-at-home behaviour Fu & Zhai US 2021
50 Travel behaviour patterns Politis et al. Greece 2021 -
References
1.
World Health Organisation. “WHO Coronavirus” WHO Website, no. April. 2020, pp. 18–19. Available online: https://www.who.
int/health-topics/coronavirus (accessed on 15 May 2021).
2.
WHO. “Tracking SARS-CoV-2 Variants,” World Health Organization. 2022. Available online: https://www.who.int/en/
activities/tracking-SARS-CoV- 2-variants/ (accessed on 30 January 2022).
3.
Aloi, A.; Alonso, B.; Benavente, J.; Cordera, R.; Echániz, E.; González, F.; Ladisa, C.; Lezama-Romanelli, R.; López-Parra, Á.;
Mazzei, V.; et al. Effects of the COVID-19 lockdown on urban mobility: Empirical evidence from the city of Santander (Spain).
Sustainability 2020,12, 3870. [CrossRef]
4.
Borkowski, P.; Ja˙
zd˙
zewska-Gutta, M.; Szmelter-Jarosz, A. Lockdowned: Everyday mobility changes in response to COVID-19. J.
Transp. Geogr. 2021,90, 102906. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5.
Matson, G.; McElroy, S.; Circella, G.; Lee, Y. Telecommuting Rates during the Pandemic Differ by Job Type, Income, and Gender.
UC Davis Natl. Cent. Sustain. Transp. 2021. [CrossRef]
6.
Abdullah, M.; Dias, C.; Muley, D.; Shahin, M. Exploring the impacts of COVID-19 on travel behavior and mode preferences.
Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2020,8, 100255. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7.
de Haas, M.; Faber, R.; Hamersma, M. How COVID-19 and the Dutch ‘intelligent lockdown’ change activities, work and travel
behaviour: Evidence from longitudinal data in the Netherlands. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2020,6, 100150. [CrossRef]
8.
Deloitte. Bicycle, e-bike, Motorcycle, and Electric Moped Sales in the Netherlands during COVID-19 in the Netherlands from March to June
2020 [Graph]; Statista: Hamburg, Germany, 2020.
9.
Dunne, D. Living Lab: Impacts of COVID-19 on Urban Mobility Measuers Impacts on Aberdeen. 2020. Available online:
https://www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/umd2020_dunne_david.pdf (accessed on 15 August 2021).
10.
Shakibaei, S.; de Jong, G.C.; Alpkökin, P.; Rashidi, T.H. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on travel behavior in Istanbul: A panel
data analysis. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020,65, 102619. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
11.
Thombre, A.; Agarwal, A. A Paradigm Shift in Urban Mobility: Policy Insights from Travel before and After COVID-19 to Seize
the Opportunity. Transp. Policy 2020,110, 335–353. [CrossRef]
12.
Molloy, J. MOBIS COVID-19 Mobility Report. In A Project of IVT, ETH Zürich and WWZ; Universität Basel: Basel, Switzerland, 2020.
13. C2SMART. C2SMART COVID-19 Dashboard—C2SMART Home; C2SMART: New York, NY, USA, 2021.
14. UITP. Public Transport Authorities and COVID-19; UITP: Brussels, Belgium, 2020; pp. 1–4.
15.
Beck, M.J.; Hensher, D.A. Insights into the impact of COVID-19 on household travel and activities in Australia—The early days
under restrictions. Transp. Policy 2020,96, 76–93. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16.
Pawar, D.S.; Yadav, A.K.; Akolekar, N.; Velaga, N.R. Impact of physical distancing due to novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) on
daily travel for work during transition to lockdown. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2020,7, 100203. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17.
Tirachini, A.; Cats, O. COVID-19 and public transportation: Current assessment, prospects, and research needs. J. Public Transp.
2020,22, 1–34. [CrossRef]
18.
Tirachini, A.; Cats, O. On Virus Spreading Processes in Ride-Sharing Networks; ResearchGate: Amsterdam, The Neatherlands, 2020.
[CrossRef]
19.
Yamada, Y.; Uchida, T.; Ogino, M.; Ikenoue, T.; Shiose, T.; Fukuma, S. Changes in Older People’s Activities during the Coronavirus
Disease 2019 Pandemic in Japan. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 2020,21, 1387–1388. [CrossRef]
20. Daoust, J.-F. Elderly people and responses to COVID-19 in 27 Countries. PLoS ONE 2020,15, e0235590. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 17 of 18
21.
Cochran, A.L. Impacts of COVID-19 on access to transportation for people with disabilities. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect.
2020
,
8, 100263. [CrossRef]
22.
Eskyt
˙
e, I.; Lawson, A.; Orchard, M.; Andrews, E. Out on the streets—Crisis, opportunity and disabled people in the era of
COVID-19: Reflections from the UK. Alter 2020,14, 329–336. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23.
Dandapat, S.; Bhattacharyya, K.; Annam, S.K.; Saysardar, K.; Maitra, B. Impact of COVID-19 Outbreak on Travel Behaviour:
Evidences from early stages of the Pandemic in India. SSRN Electron. J. 2020,19. [CrossRef]
24. Ella, G.A. Gender, Mobility, and COVID-19: The Case of Belgium. Fem. Econ. 2021,27, 66–80. [CrossRef]
25.
Chen, K.L.; Brozen, M.; Rollman, J. Transportation Access to Health Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Trends and Implications
for Significant Patient Populations and Health Care Needs. UC Off. Pres. Univ. Calif. Inst. Transp. Stud. 2020. [CrossRef]
26.
Heiler, G.; Hanbury, A.; Filzmoser, P. The impact of COVID-19 on relative changes in aggregated mobility using mobile-phone
data. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2009.03798.
27.
Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA
statement. BMJ 2009,339, 332–336. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28.
Kabiri, A.; Darzi, A.; Zhou, W.; Sun, Q.; Zhang, L. How different age groups responded to the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of
mobility behaviors: A case study of the United States. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2007.10436.
29.
Ragland, A.; Schor, M.; Felschundneff, M. The Impact of COVID-19 on the Mobility Needs of an Aging Population in Contra
Costa County. UC Off. Pres. Univ. Calif. Inst. Transp. Stud. 2020. [CrossRef]
30.
Pullano, G.; Valdano, E.; Scarpa, N.; Rubrichi, S.; Colizza, V. Evaluating the impact of demographic, socioeconomic factors, and
risk aversion on mobility during COVID-19 epidemic in France under lockdown: A population-based study. Lancet Digit. Health
2020,2, e638–e649. [CrossRef]
31.
Oliver, N.; Barber, X.; Roomp, K.; Roomp, K. The Covid19Impact survey: Assessing the pulse of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Spain
via 24 questions. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2004.01014.
32. Pant, S.; Subedi, M. Impact of COVID-19 on the elderly. J. Patan Acad. Health Sci. 2020,7, 32–38. [CrossRef]
33.
Stavrinos, D.; McManus, B.; Mrug, S.; He, H.; Gresham, B.; Albright, M.G.; Svancara, A.M.; Whittington, C.; Underhill, A.; White,
D.M. Adolescent driving behavior before and during restrictions related to COVID-19. Accid. Anal. Prev.
2020
,144, 105686.
[CrossRef]
34.
Leppä, H.; Karavirta, L.; Rantalainen, T.; Rantakokko, M.; Siltanen, S.; Portegijs, E.; Rantanen, T. Use of walking modifications,
perceived walking difficulty and changes in outdoor mobility among community-dwelling older people during COVID-19
restrictions. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2021,33, 2909–2916. [CrossRef]
35.
Rantanen, T.; Eronen, J.; Kauppinen, M.; Kokko, K.; Sanaslahti, S.; Kajan, N.; Portegijs, E. Life-Space Mobility and Active Aging as
Factors Underlying Quality of Life among Older People before and during COVID-19 Lockdown in Finland—A Longitudinal
Study. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2021,76, E60–E67. [CrossRef]
36.
Eisenmann, C.; Nobis, C.; Kolarova, V.; Lenz, B.; Winkler, C. Transport mode use during the COVID-19 lockdown period in
Germany: The car became more important, public transport lost ground. Transp. Policy 2021,103, 60–67. [CrossRef]
37.
Chan, H.F.; Moon, J.W.; Savage, D.A.; Skali, A.; Torgler, B.; Whyte, S. Can Psychological Traits Explain Mobility Behavior During
the COVID-19 Pandemic? Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 2021,12, 1018–1029. [CrossRef]
38.
Rahimi, E.; Shabanpour, R.; Shamshiripour, A.; Mohammadian, A. Perceived risk of using shared mobility services during the
COVID-19 pandemic. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2021,81, 271–281. [CrossRef]
39.
Fu, X.; Zhai, W. Examining the spatial and temporal relationship between social vulnerability and stay-at-home behaviors in New
York City during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021,67, 102757. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
40.
Lee, K.-S.; Eom, J.K.; Lee, J.; Ko, S. Analysis of the Activity and Travel Patterns of the Elderly Using Mobile Phone-Based Hourly
Locational Trajectory Data: Case Study of Gangnam, Korea. Sustainability 2021,13, 3025. [CrossRef]
41.
Ainslie, D. Coronavirus and the Social Impacts on Disabled People in Great Britain: May 2020; Office for National Statistics (ONS):
London, UK, 2020; pp. 1–18.
42.
Beukenhorst, A.L.; Collins, E.; Burke, K.M.; Rahman, S.M.; Clapp, M.; Konanki, S.C.; Paganoni, S.; Miller, T.M.; Chan, J.; Onnela,
J.-P. Smartphone data during the COVID-19 pandemic can quantify behavioral changes in people with ALS. Muscle Nerve
2020
,
63, 258–262. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43. Schur, L.A.; Ameri, M.; Kruse, D. Telework after COVID: A ‘Silver Lining’ for Workers with Disabilities? J. Occup. Rehabil. 2020,
30, 521–536. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44.
Bhaduri, E.; Manoj, B.S.; Wadud, Z.; Goswami, A.K.; Choudhury, C.F. Modelling the effects of COVID-19 on travel mode choice
behaviour in India. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2020,8, 100273. [CrossRef]
45.
Politis, I.; Georgiadis, G.; Nikolaidou, A.; Kopsacheilis, A.; Fyrogenis, I.; Sdoukopoulos, A.; Verani, E.; Papadopoulos, E. Mapping
travel behavior changes during the COVID-19 lock-down: A socioeconomic analysis in Greece. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev.
2021
,13, 21.
[CrossRef]
46.
Dong, X. Linking TNC with passengers: Investigating TNC use among lower-income residents with limited access to cars. Travel
Behav. Soc. 2022,27, 184–191. [CrossRef]
47.
Ruiz-Euler, A.; Privitera, F.; Giuffrida, D.; Zara, I. Mobility Patterns and Income Distribution in Times of Crisis: U.S. Urban
Centers during the COVID-19 Pandemic. SSRN Electron. J. 2020, 1–13. [CrossRef]

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10065 18 of 18
48.
Hernando, A.; Mateo, D.; Plastino, A. Social inequalities in human mobility during the Spanish lockdown and post-lockdown in
the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020. medRxiv 2020, 1–7. [CrossRef]
49.
Ramit, R.; Nishant, S.; Shalini, S. Impact of COVID-19 on Urban Mobility in Indian Cities. Transp. Commun. Bull. Asia Pac.
2020
,
90, 71–85.
50.
Matson, G.; McElroy, S.; Circella, G.; Lee, Y. Ridehailing Demand is Resilient Among Low-Income Travelers During the COVID-19
Pandemic. UC Davis Natl. Cent. Sustain. Transp. 2021. [CrossRef]
51.
Koehl, A. Urban transport and COVID-19: Challenges and prospects in low- and middle-income countries. Cities Health
2021
,5
(Suppl. S1), S185–S190. [CrossRef]
52.
Bert, J.; Schellong, D.; Hagenmaier, M.; Hornstein, D.; Wegscheider, A.K.; Palme, T. How COVID-19 Will Shape Urban Mobility;
BCG: Boston, MA, USA, 2020.
53.
Tirachini, A.; Guevara, A.; Munizaga, M.; Carrasco, J.A.; Hurtubia, R. Using Disaggregated and Latent Variable Analysis to
Investigate the Role of Income and Other Socioeconomic Factors in the Concerns about the COVID-19 Pandemic. SSRN Electron.
J. 2020, 1–13. [CrossRef]
54.
Lou, J.; Shen, X.; Niemeier, D. Are stay-at-home orders more difficult to follow for low-income groups? J. Transp. Geogr.
2020
,89,
102894. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
55.
Pawar, D.S.; Yadav, A.K.; Choudhary, P.; Velaga, N.R. Modelling work- and non-work-based trip patterns during transition to
lockdown period of COVID-19 pandemic in India. Travel Behav. Soc. 2021,24, 46–56. [CrossRef]
56.
Iio, K.; Guo, X.; Kong, X.; Rees, K.; Wang, X.B. COVID-19 and social distancing: Disparities in mobility adaptation between
income groups. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2021,10, 100333. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
57. DfT. National Travel Attitudes Study (NTAS)—Wave 4 (Final); Department for Transport: London, UK, 2021.
58. di Ciommo, F.; Shiftan, Y. Transport equity analysis. Transp. Rev. 2017,37, 139–151. [CrossRef]
59. AAPD. Equity in Transportation for People with Disabilities; AAPD: Washington, DC, USA, 2016.
60. Akyelken, N. Transport for women: Who decides what women need? Transp. Rev. 2020,40, 687–688. [CrossRef]
61.
Hong, J.; McArthur, D.; Stewart, J.L. Can providing safe cycling infrastructure encourage people to cycle more when it rains? The
use of crowdsourced cycling data (Strava). Transp. Res. Part A 2020,133, 109–121. [CrossRef]