Life or livelihood? Pandemic forces tough choice on low-income earners

People belonging to lower income brackets are hit harder by the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, rendering them unable and unlikely to adopt self-protective behaviours, such as social distancing and mask-wearing, according to a recent study.

“Both in the US and elsewhere, policies that assume universal compliance with self-protective measures—or that otherwise do not account for socioeconomic differences in the costs of doing so—are unlikely to be effective or sustainable,” the researchers said.

Drawing from a previously conducted survey, data from 1,006 participants were used in the present analysis. The sample was nationally representative and was enrolled from four states (Texas, New York, Florida, and California), each contributing around 250 individuals. The survey collected pandemic-related information, such as how it changed the respondents’ work arrangements as well as their current living situation.

At the time of the survey, 70 percent of the participants were employed, of whom 54 percent worked full time. Eighty-two percent reported that they were able to work from home. [J Popul Econ 2021;doi:10.1007/s00148-020-00818-x]

The pandemic changed the working situation for most respondents: 34 percent said that they shifted to tele-work while 38 percent were no longer working. On the other hand, 20 percent had undergone no change in their employment arrangements. On average, participants lost USD 770 of household income in the first trimester of 2020 because of the pandemic.

Compared to high-income individuals, those in the lowest two income quintiles were significantly less likely to be working at the time of the survey (59 percent vs 77 percent; p=0.00), and the ability to work from home was slightly but significantly greater in high-income respondents (76 percent vs 84 percent; p=0.01).

Notably, the termination of work due to the pandemic was 28-percent more common in low-income people (58 percent vs 30 percent; p=0.00).

As a result, low-income respondents expected a loss in household income ranging from 20 percent to 25 percent. In the highest quintile of income, in contrast, expected losses were from 10 percent to just below 15 percent.

In terms of safety behaviours, low-income participants were 7-percent and 13-percent less likely to adhere to the increased social distancing measures (50 percent vs 57 percent; p=0.06) and hand washing and mask-wearing (63 percent vs 76 percent; p=0.00).

 In subsequent linear probability models, the researchers found that “when all controls are included, a member of the fifth (highest) income quintile is 13-percent more likely to change their behaviours, 32-percent more likely to increase social distancing, and 30-percent more likely to increase hand washing or mask wearing.”

“In general, the income gradients presented here strongly suggest that the adoption of self-protective behaviours is a costly prospect, one that is easier for people with more income,” they said. “This information provides crucial insights into the real-world implications of the current pandemic and ought to inform policymakers as they respond to the latest resurgence of the disease.”