The legacy of COVID-19: lessons and challenges for city-scale air quality management in the UK

1

ABSTRACT

The lockdown enforced by the UK Government to prevent the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has led to an unparalleled reduction in traffic volumes and significant drop in nitrogen dioxide concentrations in most cities, although the picture emerging from residential emissions of particulate matter (PM₁₀ and PM_2.5) is more complex. The scale and degree of the intervention have exposed the level of change required to reduce pollution. Learning from the COVID-19 crisis, we identify three challenges that must be overcome to improve air quality in cities. First, what measures would be effective that balance civil liberties with enforcement action on air pollution? Second, how do we consolidate the cultural change needed to retain and normalise the social practices driving the observed pollution reduction? Third, how do we tackle these challenges in a way that breaks current patterns of socio-economic, health and environmental inequality?

KEYWORDS:

• COVID-19
• air quality management
• policy learning
• citizen engagement
• environmental justice

The effect of the COVID-19 crisis on UK air quality management in cities and the scale of the challenge

Traffic- and domestic-related emissions are both key sources of nitrogen oxides (NO_x) and particulate matter (PM₁₀ and PM_2.5) in the UK urban areas. Concentrations of these pollutants vary significantly by area and proximity to source, however, nationally, transport is responsible for approximately 80% of NOx emissions and domestic wood and coal burningcontribute 38% of primary emissions of PM_2.5 (Defra 2019). During an enforced lockdown period in which people were asked to remain at home and avoid all but essential travel, traffic volumes fell significantly. According to the UK Government, road transport use has fallen by 60–70% (Prime Minister’s Office 2020). Whilst predominantly traffic-related pollutants, such as nitrogen dioxide (NO₂), may have fallen at roadside sites, reductions in PM₁₀ and PM_2.5 have been less significant due to possible increases in other sources, e.g. domestic heating and garden waste combustion, as a result of the time of the year and people spending more time at home, and transboundary agricultural emissions due to meteorological conditions, which may have offset reductions from traffic sources (AQEG 2020). The return to either a ‘business as usual’ or a ‘new normal’ should consider the degree to which policies and citizen behaviour impact air quality from the perspectives of regulatory compliance and local public health, as well as the long-term behavioural changes that may result from learning to live with the virus.

The effects of the measures to contain the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus on air quality have exposed the scale and degree of the change required to reduce transport-related pollution. The urgency created by the pandemic required the implementation and enforcement of restrictive top-down lockdown measures in a way that is not sustainable in the long term, nor acceptable on deliberative decision-making grounds in a non-emergency scenario. The SARS-CoV-2 has affected different people differently, thus exacerbating some elements of inequality in our societies, with evidence suggesting that Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) communities and those living in more deprived areas, which are also exposed to higher levels of pollution concentrations (Barnes et al. 2019), are experiencing higher mortality rates (ONS 2020). Also, the measures to contain the spread of the virus have had a disproportionately negative effect on people from lower socio-economic backgrounds and those in more precarious employment (Banks et al. 2020).

Yet, during this period we have also witnessed NO₂ pollution reductions from traffic resulting from a radical and widespread change of citizen behaviour; a change that air quality management policies in the UK have failed to achieve since the initiation of the Environment Act, 1995 (Longhurst et al. 2016). To date, clean air policies in the UK have been based on incremental approaches, which largely relied on soft law, voluntary actions and weak enforcement which, have been undermined by a lack of common purpose and shared priorities between levels of governments (Barnes et al. 2018). Additionally, policy measures have been very techno-centric, focussing on improvements to technology, e.g. European vehicle emission standards (European Commission 2019) rather than influencing the daily practices and activities of the driver (e.g. commuting to work, leisure, shopping, etc.). More recently, the Clean Air Strategy 2019 (Defra 2019) envisioned a more joined-up and ambitious approach but there remains a gap between strategies and policies.

Preliminary evidence is emerging that COVID-19’s impact is more severe in highly polluted areas and that SARS-CoV-2 virus can be found on particulate matter (Setti et al. 2020), thus highlighting potentially close links between these issues. Interventions to tackle the COVID-19 crisis provide an opportunity for policy learning and for advancing our understanding of how to frame future air quality approaches. We need to reflect on the challenges that these top-down policies – albeit effective in changing citizen behaviour, as they resulted in car-free roads which encouraged cycling and walking – have raised in terms of democratic and deliberative decision-making, governance arrangements and social justice, as well the potential to increase other polluting practices, as highlighted by some councils in England which urged citizens not to burn garden waste or light bonfires during lockdown (AQN 2020).

We need to be aware that we are at a crossroads as we approach the post-lockdown transition. On the one hand, there is a strong risk that many cities may already be sleepwalking towards a recovery based on the old Business-as-Usual. This could be aggravated by citizens’ reticence to use public transport because of health concerns or a continuation of social distancing. On the other hand, cities, and particularly those that were already taking a lead on other existential issues such as climate change and social inequality, are starting to pave the way towards a more sustainable future. For instance, cities like Milan, Paris, and Brussels are reimagining commuting patterns and investing in active travel to compensate for the reduction in daily metro use, to avoid returning to severe pollution levels of the pre-lockdown periods (O’Sullivan 2020). Some cities in the UK, such as Brighton, are trying to follow the same example by widening cycle lanes and by allocating roads for walking and cycling to encourage upkeep of active travel in the long run (Brighton and Hove City Council 2020).

While a detailed analysis of the pros and cons of lockdown measures across all pollutants is beyond the scope of this commentary, we contribute to this debate by identifying three interrelated and multidisciplinary research and policy challenges that must be overcome using lessons learnt during the COVID-19 crisis to enable a long-term, radical and sustainable shift.

First, a governance and political challenge: why have some cities taken the opportunity offered by the lockdown to encourage and prioritise active travel while others still lag behind? Lockdown approaches in some countries for example Taiwan, New Zealand or Germany seemed to be more effective if supported across all levels of governments and if they included wide-ranging, comprehensive and coordinated interventions. This should encourage stakeholders to identify mechanisms for ambitious clean air policies that can be implemented locally with the support of national governments, and which are based on ambitious targets and effective implementation mechanisms and also enjoy broad citizens’ and stakeholders’ consensus. The new air quality policy mix can and should be bold and underpinned by a radical vision; yet decision-makers will need to find the right balance between a swift, sustainable transition and open, transparent and meaningful citizen involvement. Examples of innovative governance are already underway in the UK and internationally. For instance, Bristol developed the One City Approach, which as well as identifying a city-level sustainability pathway, is also directly shaping city-level environmental and climate change governance and supporting evidence-informed and participatory policymaking, through city-wide initiatives such as the Bristol Forum or the Bristol Advisory Committee on Climate Change. A more direct inclusion of post-lockdown air quality management within broader city-level frameworks could support the achievement of these radical visions.

Second, a cultural challenge: how do we consolidate the cultural change and individual intrinsic motivators needed to retain and normalise the more desirable social practices? In the early part of 2020, many people have had to adapt to different working patterns, which emphasised online connectivity and remote working over commuting. A cultural shift centred on sustainability and health benefits is required to identify and normalise sustainable practices in the workplace, which would give people more flexibility and control over their travel choices, as well as creating potential for significant efficiency savings and congestion reduction (Giovanis 2018). As not all jobs allow this flexibility, innovative work practices would require employers to think strategically and beyond the short-term crisis about the longer-term adjustments that the current crisis could bring about, and grasp potential unintended benefits of remote and flexible working.

This cultural change could also reduce the negative impact of less desirable practices such as increased biomass burning for domestic heating – a risk with increased home working. Cities and employers will have a crucial role in ensuring the success of the cultural change as they step up efforts to supply critical services, including improved waste management to reduce garden waste combustion accompanied by wide-scale retrofit schemes to improve domestic energy efficiency and district energy systems, strong support for public transport and active travel, remote working arrangements and flexible hours. Research projects such as the Horizon2020 ClairCity project (www.claircity.eu) explored the potential of citizen-led air quality solutions, which could enable such a cultural shift and lead to effective and comprehensive policy mixes based on consensus.

Third and underpinning the other two, a socio-economic, health and environmental inequality challenge: how do we tackle these challenges in a way that is sustainable, democratic and consensual and that, crucially, does not perpetuate current patterns of inequality and social injustice in exposure to air pollution or the measures to reduce it (Barnes et al. 2019)? As we pointed out earlier, the COVID-19 crisis is exposing and even exacerbating health and socio-economic inequalities, which are coupled with existing patterns of environmental injustice related to air pollution (EEA 2018). As solid fuels are cheaper, there is the risk that they will become the default option in a context of inequality and looming economic crisis. Therefore, non-transport polluting sources might undermine progress in reducing transport-related concentrations. It is therefore essential that we explicitly recognise and address these inequalities as we deal with current and future health and environmental crises if we want new approaches to succeed.

Concluding remarks

The key lesson from the COVID-19 crisis is that policies that are radical, ambitious and are accompanied by consistent implementation strategies are effective in delivering the intended environmental outcomes. There are many possible post-COVID-19 pathways: for a sustainable shift to happen it is crucial that cities seize the opportunity to replace old practices with sustainable interventions underpinned by progressive and radical sustainability and health narratives. As we are still learning how to manage life after the lockdown, future research will need to identify and assess the long-term consequences of the COVID-19 crisis on commuting, travels, leisure and shopping behaviours. We believe that tackling the governance, the cultural and the socio-economic, health and environmental inequality challenges is a precondition for a green and fair recovery.

While the challenges have a global relevance, the way in which they play out and potential solutions must be tailored to the local context but also supported by national governments, the EU and international organisations, e.g. World Health Organisation. Researchers and decision-makers have an unprecedented opportunity to identify processes of systemic lesson learning and to work together to radically re-think the model upon which air pollution and other existential challenges such as climate change are tackled. Meanwhile, city leaders must be proactive within existing networks (e.g. C40, Covenant of Mayors, etc.) and work with other cities around the world to drive bottom-up innovation. While their experiences of the COVID-19 crisis and the responses of respective governments will differ, cities will all face a governance and political challenge, a cultural challenge, and a socio-economic, health and environmental inequality challenge. In this regard, we envision a stronger role for research and practice aimed at transforming the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into a localised and operational framework to address these challenges. As such, the SDGs would offer an opportunity to frame future clean air policies at all levels through a sustainability lens (Longhurst et al. 2018), building on global consensus and at the same time reflecting local circumstances.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the ClairCity Project. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 689289.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme [689289].

Notes on contributors

Laura De Vito

Dr Laura De Vito has extensive experience working in EU environmental politics, policy and practice at local, national, EU level. Since 2017 she has been employed in the Air Quality Management Resource Centre (AQMRC) at the University of the West of England (UWE), Bristol. In this role she is contributing to the NERC-MRC CADTIME project, researching mitigation for air pollution in Delhi and she is also working on other projects at the AQMRC. Before being employed by the AQMRC, she worked on a project on the contribution of green infrastructure to urban resilience at the International Water Security Network at UWE. Her research background is in Public Policy and Environmental Policy. https://people.uwe.ac.uk/Person/LauraDevito

Jo Barnes

Dr Jo Barnes has 16 years’ experience working in air quality management, policy and practice research working with and on behalf of numerous local authorities, Defra and the Devolved Administrations, other Member States, the European Environment Agency and the European Commission. Jo’s main research interests are in urban air pollution, particularly from road traffic, helping to understand and raise awareness of the health impacts and environmental justice issues relating to local air pollution, and other urban stressors, to shape and influence policies to improve public health in towns and cities globally. Jo is also UWE lead for the NERC-MRC CADTIME project. https://people.uwe.ac.uk/Person/JoBarnes

James Longhurst

James Longhurst is Professor of Environmental Science and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Environment and Sustainability at UWE, Bristol. Jim leads the university’s sustainability agenda ensuring that sustainability considerations are present in the university’s teaching, research, campus operations and civic engagement work. In 2019/20 he is leading the development of UWE’s innovative Climate Action and Sustainability Strategy. He has nearly 35 years’ experience of research leadership specialising in air quality and carbon management and has published some 300 papers, book chapters and edited works in the peer-reviewed literature. https://people.uwe.ac.uk/Person/JamesLonghurst

Ben Williams

Dr Ben Williams has 13 years’ experience in air quality monitoring modelling and management, working across research, consultancy and regulatory spheres. Recently, Ben has been seconded to the Environment Agency where, as part of a team, was tasked with critiquing the UK’s air quality monitoring networks, with a view to the development of a future next-generation network. Ben’s current research interests are in the modelling of bioaerosol dispersion and exposure, the measurement and characterisation of airborne microplastics in both indoor and outdoor environments, and the management of these pollutants. https://people.uwe.ac.uk/Person/Ben3Williams

Enda Hayes

Prof Enda Hayes has over 20 years’ experience working on air quality and carbon challenges in the UK and internationally. He is a scientific director of two EU projects, ClairCity and WeCount, focussing on citizen behaviour, public engagement and citizen science related to transport and air pollution. He has supported the UK local authorities and UK Government, European Commission and European Environment Agency, developing air quality policies and understanding the relationships between air quality, health and socio-economic status. His primary interest lies in the role of citizen’s daily practices and activities in generating air pollution. https://people.uwe.ac.uk/Person/EndaHayes