COVINFORM - Synthesis and lessons learnt on community and citizen responses and impacts – Update M36
Creators: name: Edwards, James
name: Rademacher, Helen
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2023

description: The present deliverable synthesizes the findings in COVINFORM work package 6, which focuses on citizen and community impacts and responses. Whereas the prior iteration (D6.4) was based on desk research and interviews with representatives of civil society organisations in ten target municipalities, this iteration also draws on the findings of interviews with low-socioeconomic-status women living in these municipalities. It addresses the research questions identified in previous deliverables(e.g., D6.6), integrating findings from both stakeholder and resident perspectives. It then derives lessons learned that are relevant to policy and practice, for instance:



Pre-existing spatial inequalities such as overcrowded housing, digital divides, and poor infrastructure multiplied the threat of COVID-19 and the repercussions of pandemic measures. CSOs attempted to break this cycle by offering localised (on-site and mobile) services, but were often overwhelmed, and sometimes lacked resources or coordination support.

Residents’ localised and digital social networks channelled both socio-psychological and material support, especially for groups with limited exposure to formal social welfare systems. Social networks were also pathways for secondary crisis communication – which sometimes helped fill information gaps, but also heightened exposure to misinformation.

Both CSOs and residents played a role in local multi-stakeholder responses. CSOs often filled gaps in governmental responses, including by mitigating their unintended consequences. Residents both volunteered with CSOs and self-organised to offer mutual aid. Such bottom-up participatory practices augmented resilience in the target sites.

Clusters of shared attitudes and behaviours emerged regarding the pandemic and response measures, which can be broadly categorised as ‘mainstream’ (tendency to trust/compliance) and ‘rejectionist’ (tendency to distrust/non-compliance). Most residents fell in between these extremes. ‘Rejectionism’ is individual and complex, and bursting the ‘rejectionist’ filter bubble would require two-way dialogue rather than just one-way messaging.

The pandemic exacerbated existing ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities, as well as giving rise to new modalities of discrimination. However, it also catalysed spontaneous expressions of cohesion and solidarity, from which policymakers and CSOs should try to learn.


The triangulation of data sources opens a constructively critical perspective on the COVINFORM risk assessment model. Key lessons learned are that vulnerable populations do not always perceive or prioritise threats in the same way as authorities; individual and systemic vulnerabilities are most often experienced as multidimensional (e.g., not only health-related, social, or economic, but all three); and resilience must be cultivated through bottom-up participatory practices as well as top-down policy interventions. Finally, the data triangulation deepens our understanding of the social-ecological systems framework as a tool for crisis management and communication.