Search

The current COVID-19 pandemic confines people to their homes, disrupting the fragile social fabric of deprived neighbourhoods and citizen's participation options. In deprived neighbourhoods, community engagement is central in building community resilience, an important resource for health and a prerequisite for effective health promotion programmes. It provides access to vulnerable groups and helps understand experiences, assets, needs and problems of citizens. Most importantly, community activities, including social support, primary care or improving urban space, enhance health through empowerment, strengthened social networks, mutual respect and providing a sense of purpose and meaning. In the context of inequalities associated with COVID-19, these aspects are crucial for citizens of deprived neighbourhoods who often feel their needs and priorities are ignored. In this perspectives paper, illustrated by a varied overview of community actions in the UK and The Netherlands, we demonstrate how citizens, communities and organizations may build resilience and community power. Based on in-depth discussion among the authors we distilled six features of community actions: increase in mutual aid and neighbourhood ties, the central role of community-based organizations (CBOs), changing patterns of volunteering, use of digital media and health promotion opportunities. We argue that in order to enable and sustain resilient and confident, 'disaster-proof', communities, areas which merit investment include supporting active citizens, new (digital) ways of community engagement, transforming formal organizations, alignment with the (local) context and applying knowledge in the field of health promotion in new ways, focussing on learning and co-creation with citizen initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 crisis impacts populations globally. This impact seems to differ for groups with low- and high-socioeconomic status (SES). We conducted a qualitative study in the Netherlands using a salutogenic perspective to examine experiences with stressors and coping resources during the pandemic among both SES groups to gain insight on how to promote the health and well-being of these groups. We conducted 10 focus group discussions and 20 interviews to explore the experiences, including resources and stressors, of respondents from low- (N = 37) and high-SES (N = 38) groups (25–55 years, Dutch speaking). We analyzed the findings at individual, community, and national levels. The results show that coping depends on government-imposed measures and the way individuals handle these measures; restriction to the home context with positive and negative consequences for work and leisure; psychological negative consequences and resourcefulness; and social effects related to unity (e.g. social cohesion or support) and division (including polarization). Respondents with lower SES expressed more problems with COVID-19 measures and experienced more social impact in their neighborhood than those with higher SES. Where low-SES groups especially mentioned the effects of staying at home on family life, high-SES groups mentioned effects on work life. At last, psychological consequences seem to differ somewhat across SES groups. Recommendations include consistent government-imposed measures and government communication, support for home schooling children, and strengthening the social fabric of neighborhoods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]