Policy measures aimed at containing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic had unintended consequences on economic activities globally. In this study, we isolate and investigate the short-term partial impacts of six such measures on the farm and nonfarm incomes of agricultural households and examine the related resilience factors. Using Nigeria as a case study, we find that the COVID containment measures had mixed effects on farm and non-farm incomes in the short run. These varying effects are due to households\' resilience and vulnerability factors, including land size, wealth, income diversification, involvement in processing activities, and reliance on hired labor. Our findings highlight the need for more targeted health crisis containment measures which consider the uniqueness, diversity, and regional heterogeneity of agriculture, especially the potential implications for farm viability.

While nighttime curfews are less severe restrictions compared to around-the-clock curfews in mitigating the spread of Covid-19, they are nevertheless highly controversial, with the scarce literature on their effectiveness providing mixed evidence. We study the effectiveness of the nighttime curfew in Hamburg, Germany\'s second largest city, in mitigating the spread of Covid-19. This curfew forbid people from leaving their home between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m. for non-essential businesses. Applying both difference-in-differences and synthetic control methods, we find that the curfew was effective in reducing the number of Covid-19 cases. As it is unclear whether and how the virus will mutate in the next time, policy-makers might have to resort to non-pharmaceutical interventions again. Nighttime curfews should be kept in the toolbox of policy-makers to fight Covid-19.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, some countries introduced early evening curfews. Several studies try to measure the effectiveness of such measures across different countries, but disentangling competing effects can be elusive. We examined the impact of an early evening curfew on mobility by studying a shift in curfews from 9pm to 6pm in Greece using Google mobility data. We followed a difference-in-differences (DiD) econometric approach, where we compared trends in mobility in residential spaces as well as groceries and pharmacies, before and after the introduction of the 6pm curfew in Attica with trends in three other comparable Regions. We found little or no evidence of an effect of the early curfew on daily mobility relating to groceries and pharmacies, and that an 18.75% reduction in hours where people were allowed to leave home led to a relatively small increase in time spent in residential spaces. This less-than-proportionate reduction in mobility outside the household suggests a possibility that the curfew led to more people coinciding in indoor public spaces, such as grocery shops - which constitutes a contagion risk factor. Results should be treated with caution, especially with regards to the magnitude of any effect, as Google mobility data do not report the time of the day, so the time density of activities cannot be estimated. Lockdowns and other measures are necessary to tackle Covid-19, but it is important to avoid substitution by activities that contribute further to spreading the virus. Interventions should therefore be based on a thorough analysis of human behaviour.

BACKGROUND: Firearm-related injury is a public health crisis and remains the 3rd most common cause of death from ages 1 15 years. By evaluating events surrounding such injuries, evidence-based intervention strategies efforts may be targeted to maximize impact.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for firearm-related injuries in patients 15 years-old and under at an urban Pediatric Level 1 Trauma Center between January 2016 and December 2020. Age, gender, race/ethnicity, injury severity score (ISS), reported cause of injury, timing of injury around school and curfew, and mortality were evaluated. Medical Examiner data identified other deaths that occurred within the hospital\'s catchment area.
RESULTS: There were 195 injuries including 14 from the Medical Examiner. Overall, 82.6% were male with median age of 14 years (range 1-15; IQR 13-15), and median ISS of 5 (IQR 1-10). African-American children comprised 74.9% of the cohort while only representing 35.9% of local schools. Intentional interpersonal injuries comprised 65.6%; 17.4% were bystanders; 7.2% were negligent discharges; and 0.5% suicide. Median age for intentional interpersonal injuries was 14 years (IQR 13-15) compared to 11 years (IQR 8-14, P = 0.03) for negligent discharges. Regarding timing, 6.9% of injuries occurred during school hours; 56.4% after school or during non-school days; and 36.7% were after legal curfew. Mortality rate was 17.4%.
CONCLUSIONS: Firearm safety education and community-based violence intervention should start in the pre-teen years. Pediatric firearm-related injury prevention strategies must be multifaceted addressing structural racism, truancy, curfew violation, extra-curricular activities, childcare options, firearm safety education, violence reduction, suicide prevention, and recidivism.

Since the beginning of the global novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) pandemic, the response of governments has varied significantly across the world. This was one of the main reasons behind the difference in the disease fatality rates between countries. In this study, the public progressive measures taken in Saudi Arabia (SA) are described in detail. This is a descriptive study in which measures were retrieved via the government official news agency-Saudi Press Agency (SPA). The total number of Covid-19 cases and its fatality rate were obtained/calculated from the Saudi Ministry of Health (MoH) official Covid-19 port, as well as the WHO COVID-19 dashboard. SA took active measures in order to interrupt the spread of Covid-19 which were strict, rapid, and progressive in nature. Social distancing was at the heart of almost every measure taken by the government. The main themes of these interventions are as follows: travel bans, suspending religious activities, closure of non-essential shops, enforcing changes at workplaces, and imposing curfews. This was followed by the gradual return to working life with various precautions to prevent a spike in the number of cases. The imposed measures in SA succeeded in reducing the burden of Covid-19 and its fatality rate. Comparatively, the fatality rate in SA was significantly lower compared to developed countries with better healthcare infrastructure such as the United States and United Kingdom.

Historically and etymologically, curfews are public health measures imposed to guard against risks to health and safety. On occasion they have been deployed oppressively, disproportionately and without proper regard to their ramifications. It is important that they not be used during a pandemic unless there is sufficient medico-scientific reason to conclude that they will serve a constructive purpose and that they are the least restrictive available governmental response. Inevitably, they impact adversely on a variety of human rights, particularly freedom of movement. They isolate and inhibit human connection. However, in the context of a worldwide pandemic causing terrible loss of life, there are occasions where they may be a necessary adjunct to these restrictions. This article identifies a variety of scenarios in which curfews have been imposed on different populations and identifies legal challenges that have been made to them. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic it reviews the Kenyan judgment of Law Society of Kenya v Mutyambai [2020] eKLR and the Victorian Supreme Court judgment of Loielo v Giles [2020] VSC 722. It contends that the carefully reasoned decisions in each instance constitute an important reassurance that decision-making about a lengthy curfew in order to reduce the spread of the COVID-19 virus was reasoned, rights-aware and suitably responsive to the risks posed.