Place category aggregated mobility trend
Retail and recreation
For the retail and recreation category (Fig. 2a), Sokoto showed median mobility of zero while some States experienced an increase (compared to baseline) mobility for this place category. Zamfara showed a very high increase in mobility (median 51%). Kebbi, Borno, Yobe, Gombe, and Ebonyi represents a group of State with relative median mobility decline of less than 10% (relative to baseline). The greatest decline (ranging between 45 and 56%) in mobility were recorded across various States (Ekiti, Kaduna, Lagos, FCT, and Edo) spanning various regions of the country. The largest decline was recorded for Edo State. Generally, most of the States recorded median mobility decline ranging between 44% and 10%.
Parks
In the Parks place category (Fig. 2b), Gombe State is the only State with the increased median mobility across the country during the period under investigation. Abia, Adamawa, Jigawa, Ebonyi, Bayelsa, and Bauchi State showed a slight decline in mobility (relative to baseline) ranging between 7% and 1%. FCT, Benue, Ekiti, and Lagos witnessed the highest decline ranging between 65% and 45%. While the remaining States recorded declines between 39% and 10%.
Grocery and pharmacy
For this place category, all the States witnessed a decline relative to their baselines for the period under consideration (Fig. 2c). The lowest decline was recorded for Yobe State (3%) and the greatest was recorded for Zamfara State (57%), this was followed by Ekiti (51%), and Kano (41%). Most of the States (67%) recorded a relative decline ranging between 39% and 10%.
Transport stations
This place category witnessed a relatively high mobility decline ranging between 75 and 3 (Fig. 2d). Three States namely Ebonyi, Nasarawa, and Niger recorded a median mobility value indicating a slight increase relative to their baseline values (3%–4%). Kebbi and Kogi showed a slight decline of 3% while 70% of the geographic units considered recorded decline ranging between 44% and 14%. Six States (including the FCT) showed a considerably high level of decrease in mobility with a median change from baseline ranging between 75% for the FCT and 44% for Rivers State.
Workplaces
Zamfara recorded a median increase of 5% relative to the baseline mobility for the Workplaces category (Fig. 2e). This is the only outlier State for this category (i.e. it bucks the trend of declining mobility for this category). States like Yobe, Bauchi, Katsina, Kogi, and Adamawa recorded a slight decline median values raging between 9% and 2%. Most of the States recorded a decline ≥ 10% while four geographic units—Kwara, FCT, Kano, and Lagos recorded a decline above 30%.
Residential
This place category witnessed a high mobility increase, with a relative percentage increase ranging between 0 and 28% (Fig. 2f). The largest increase is recorded for Lagos (the epicentre of the COVID-19 infection in Nigeria) while the lowest (no change in mobility) is recorded for Kogi (one of the last State to record a COVID-19 case). This is a wide variation in the increase across different States and regions, with about 65% of the State recording 10% or more median mobility increase for this place category.
Summed mobility across unsafe place categories
Mobility values for all the place categories except Residential were summed to indicate mobility across places where infection may be spreading (unsafe). This term unsafe is relative in this context since there is a possibility that mobility towards residential areas could also spread the disease (Community spread). The median mobility (Fig. 3) for these unsafe categories showed a general reduction in mobility with the lowest mobility decline recorded for Ebonyi State (34.5) while the greatest decline was recorded for FCT (237). This computation gave a cumulative overview of how mobility varied for these place categories across States. 21 out of the 37 States and FCT showed a cumulative decline above 100, while only three States (Ebonyi, Kebbi, and Zamfara) recorded a cumulative decline of less than 50. From the values, four major hotspots for the decline could be identified around Lagos, Ekiti, FCT (Kaduna, Kano) as well as Akwa-Ibom State.
Space-time trend of mobility
Mobility trend for retail and recreation
Examination of the weekly aggregated mobility for the retail and recreation category showed that 7 states exhibited no statistically significant trend (Fig. 4a). Five of these States spanned across the north–west and north-eastern part of the country while the other two can be found in the south (Bayelsa) and the middle belt (Taraba). Three States showed a statistically significant downtrend for mobility for this place category, with all of them in the northern part of the country. All other States displayed an uptrend in mobility for this place category.
Mobility trend for parks
For Parks, most of the States showed no statistically significant trend (Fig. 4b). However, Bayelsa and Abia States showed a downward trend in mobility for the category. All the other States (in the Southern part and the middle belt of the country) showed an upward trend in mobility.
Trend mobility for grocery and pharmacy
Yobe and Gombe States recorded a declining trend for mobility in the Grocery and Pharmacy place category (Fig. 4c). Twelve States across the north-western, north-eastern, middle belt, and southern (Bayelsa and Cross River) parts of the country displayed no statistically significant trend in mobility for this place category. The remaining States spread across different parts of the country—mostly in the southern part displayed a statistically significant upward trend of mobility for this place categories.
Trend mobility towards transportation hubs
For this place category, the trend of mobility revealed that there are three contiguous regions across the country (Fig. 4d). Kaduna, Plateau, and FCT formed a region of uptrend across the central part of the country, while the States from Kwara to Lagos down to Delta and Abia formed another contiguous region with a statistically significant uptrend in mobility. A contiguous region of no statistically significant trend surrounds Kaduna, FCT, and Plateau uptrend region. This region of no discernible trend extends down to Ebonyi, Cross River, Akwa-Ibom, Rivers, and Bayelsa State.
Trend mobility towards workplaces
Only a handful of States (Borno, Jigawa, Kano, Katsina, and Sokoto) showed no statistically significant trend in mobility for workplaces. Most States showed an upward trend in mobility during the period under consideration.
Trend mobility toward residential areass
For the residential place category, two States–(Benue and Kogi) showed an upward trend in mobility. This could be attributed to a late onset of infection recorded in these States. Most of the States across the north-eastern and north-western regions of the country showed no discernible trend of mobility. However, from Kano down to Abuja and Nasarawa, Niger to Lagos, Ondo through Imo to Cross River, there is an upward trend of mobility. Ebonyi, Rivers, and Bayelsa are outliers with no definite mobility trend while being surrounded by States with a clear trend.
Space-time trend of new cases
A look at the new cases of COVID-19 diagnosed during this same period (Fig. 5) revealed that there is a statistically significant uptrend across many States of the federation. Osun, Cross River, and Taraba States represent a group of outliers, as they have no statistically significant trend and are surrounded by other States with an upward trend in the number of (weekly) new cases. Sokoto, Zamfara, Kano, Jigawa, and Yobe State also have no discernible trend, however, they have neighbours with an upward trend in the number of new cases (Fig. 5).
Grouping of mobility trend categories
The multiple correspondence analysis identified two dimensions within the mobility trend designation recorded for each State for the six place categories (Table 1). The first dimension (D1), showed as high internal consistency (Cronbach's Alpha = 0.898) with an explained variance of 66%. The second dimension (D2) has explained a lesser proportion of the variance across the variables and has a lower level of internal consistency.
Table 1 Model summary of the multiple correspondence analysis The summary from Table 2 shows how correlated each of the quantified variables is related to the dimensions. Most (4) of the variables loaded highly (measures ≥ 0.700) into D1 while none have similar attributes for D2. This explained why D1 has a lower percentage of explained variance and lower internal consistency.
Table 2 Discriminant measures summary for identified dimensions From the result (Table 2), there is an indication that D1 is the most relevant dimension for subsequent discussion. Hence, the distribution of the Object Scores for D1 for each State was represented in Fig. 6. From Fig. 6, there are some contiguous regions with similar characteristics across the northern and southern regions of the country. While there is an element of a divide across the two regions, the difference is pronounced along the south-west and spanned across the south–east with distinct characteristics for Rivers, Bayelsa, Cross River, and Ebonyi States. Across the central part of the country, Niger and Kogi exhibited distinct characteristics (Object Score for D1) compared to their neighbors. Similarly, Kaduna and FCT also showed distinction in D1 object score when compared to their neighbors.
Two-step cluster analysis (IBM 2016) was carried out to examine the natural groupings that may exist within D1 Object Scores. The internal consistency of the members within the groups identified was examined using the Silhouette measure of cohesion and separation (Rousseeuw 1987). For this measure, cluster set with Silhouette measure value > 0.5 is considered to have a good cluster quality while < 0.5 but > 0.2 is considered fair.
The summary of the auto-clustering operation presented in Table 3, indicated that two clusters are the optimal number of clusters from the D1 object scores. The identification of two clusters is because the highest ratio of distance measure (Table 3) is greatest at 4.690 when the number of clusters is 3 compared to 4.453 for 3 clusters and 2.708 for 6 clusters.
Table 3 Summary of the auto-clustering diagnostic for the two-step clustering analysis Based on this result, the cluster distribution showed that 18 States (51.4%) belong to Cluster 1 while the remaining belong to Cluster 2 (Fig. 7). This clustering exhibited a good cluster quality (internal consistency) with a silhouette measure of 0.8. The object score utilised is a multidimensional index quantify the trend of mobility across six place categories during the national lockdown period. As such the groups identified could give a reflection of the perception of risk of infection among people of each group of States.
Examining the cluster membership against the trend categories depicted in Fig. 4a–f, the association can be identified (Table 4). Cluster 2 members are mostly showing uptrend for Grph Park, and Trst while most of them recorded a downtrend for Resd. The mobility trend for RtRc and Wkpl could not distinguish between the two clusters. However, for Resd, Cluster 2 is quite distinct with most members having a downtrend in mobility, while most members of Cluster show no discernible trend. Most members of Cluster 1 also showed no discernible trend for Grph, Park, and Trst.
Table 4 Crosstabulation of trend category and cluster designation Discussion
State median mobility
There is a wide variation in changes from baseline mobility for this period across the country. Residential witnessed an overwhelming increase towards it while all the other place categories witnessed a decline relative to baseline. Moreover, there is no clear-cut regional pattern discernible from the median mobility values for all the place categories. Furthermore, while cumulative mobility for the unsafe place categories identified some hotspots of decline, a north–south divide is evident from the pattern. However, highly populated States such as Kaduna and Kano in the northern part of the country bucked that trend.
Space-time pattern/trend
As the lockdown draws longer, mobility toward retails and recreation facilities is ticking upwards. This is an indication that people need to get necessities and earn a living, movement cannot be effective if there are no alternatives to earn and secure daily needs. For Parks, there seems to be a North–South divide in the mobility trend. While mobility is picking up in the south, there is no clear trend recorded in the north. This could be attributed to the spread of the disease from the south towards the north. Many groceries and pharmacies in most States are allowed to open, albeit, some restrictions, this place category is expected to witness increased mobility. This is partly due to the need to meet daily necessities and the need to take care of other existing or new ailments.
Mobility towards transportation hubs indicated that across States where infections were discovered earlier and States around them, people are beginning to accept the risk and travel more. In essence, people are making decisions (to travel) despite the constraints (Zsolnai 1998)—the risk of exposure, potentially lack of full understanding of the disease, and their chances of survival. The mobility trend for the workplaces indicated that fatigue is taking hold, and more people are moving towards their workplaces. This could be as a result of the overwhelming population of people who need to earn daily to survive despite the risk. Thus, as more people gravitate toward their workplace the mobility trend recorded for residential areas is not surprising. Across most States, people are venturing out more as the fatigue of staying at home gets overwhelming, and the need to earn a living is becoming more dominant on their mind.
For reported new cases, the upward trend during the lockdown could be partly attributed to the varying level of enforcement of the mobility restriction, coupled with the need for many people to seek their daily income. This may have increased people's exposure and consequently infections. The ‘infodemic’ of misinformation—many conspiracies and fake news about the virus circulating on social media and the internet (Zarocostas 2020) may also be partly responsible for this trend as there is a lot of scepticism across many parts of the country. Write-ups and messages about instant remedies for the virus and several race targeted news were being propagated on various platforms (Rathore and Farooq 2020). This surely will impact how seriously people considered the need to respect the mobility restriction orders.
From the trend, there is an indication that mobility decision is being guided across most States by the risk acceptance principle. Mobility is picking up with people likely considering COVID-19 as just one of those ailments they are likely to get, as such they are willing to take the risk. With many States also having a few cases, there is also the tendency for people to underestimate the risk. Most significantly, the need to earn a living is a more dominant driver of mobility as evident in the uptick in mobility towards transportation hubs, workplaces, and downward mobility trends for residential areas. Recent studies showed that in the United States of America, COVID-19 infection rates increased with city size (Stier et al. 2020). Thus, the spread is effectively aided by mobility and proximity to urban landscapes as the quantum of cases is considerably higher for highly urbanised and densely populated States. Therefore, the increase in mobility across most States, is an indication of either poor perception of the risk posed by increased mobility and/or adoption of risk avoidance (non-pharmaceuticals) measures.
While some can afford to stay at home, many cannot as they must earn their living every single day evidently, the mobility restriction is a luxury for some and a severe cost for others. It is thus evident that the mitigation measures taken by each country will determine the course of the pandemic (Anderson et al. 2020). For example, there is evidence showing that as travel restrictions were implemented, this effectively slowed down the spread in the early days of the outbreak (Chinazzi et al. 2020; Kraemer et al. 2020). While this may be the case, prolonged lockdown without adequate provision to manage the individual challenges such posed to many households (especially in Nigeria where many required daily income to survive) will likely witness the waning of compliance as observed. This category of households as well as the rural dwellers were least compliant to the measures (Carlitz and Makhura 2020). It is well established that vulnerability and extent of the impact of disaster or hazard are a function of location as well as the socio-economic circumstances of the people affected (Lawal and Arokoyu 2015).
From the mobility trend during the pandemic, some indications of risk perception could be deduced. For example, the level of risk acceptance is almost similar across most States especially considering their mobility towards retail, recreation, and workplaces. However, from the mobility around residential area Cluster 2 States are venturing out (more acceptance) while Cluster 1 States are neither here nor there about venturing out—an indication of uncertainty about the risk. This uncertainty was also indicated in their mobility towards Parks, grocery, and pharmacy as well as transport hubs. The result indicated how knowledge, experience, values, attitudes, and feelings influence the judgement and decision about the acceptability and seriousness of risk–risk perception (Slovic 1987). There are differences between voluntary (knowingly taken risk) and involuntary (risk we are unable to control or not aware of) risk perception and the public willingness to accept voluntary risk is several folds greater than that of involuntary risks (Smith 2013). The way people view risk or perceived it is a major problem for mitigation. This was evident from the way varied mobility across the different Cluster of States. Therefore, actions taken by people (prevention and avoidance) is a function of their perception of the hazard (Coppola 2011). This perception also skews how they view the consequences and the likelihood of them getting infected. In essence, the actions captured by mobility gave a general indication of some aspects of peoples’ perception of the risk, consequences and likelihood them getting infected.