The COVID-19 response system and collective social service provision. Strategic network dimensions and proximity considerations

Abstract

This paper aims to study and question the emerging social response network to the COVID-19 health crisis in the Valencian region (Spain). Our approach is twofold: a network approach using social network analysis techniques and a social services approach. We seek to analyze the different roles, strategic positions, ego-density and brokerage of the participating organizations. Furthermore, we examine the critical factors for explaining why the different organizations in the ecosystem cooperate. We find that associations and knowledge agents play the most relevant roles. Conversely, local and non-local governments rarely played brokerage roles to coordinate or interconnect isolated operations of individual organizations. Finally, our results suggest important guidelines for practitioners that may facilitate the collaboration, coordination, and performance of a response network in the future.

The survival of hotels during the COVID-19 pandemic: a critical case study in Vietnam

“…Germany’s labor minister has said that the owners of this plant must be held to account for this new outbreak of COVID-19. Germany’s coronavirus reproduction (or R) rate suddenly increased to 2.88 shortly afterwards largely as a result of this outbreak (Belso-Martínez et al 2020 ). Approximately 7000 people were sent into quarantine as a result of the outbreak, and schools and kindergartens in the region that had only recently been re-opened were forced to close for the rest of the school year (BBC 2020 ).…”

“…Even though there is a general belief that tourism will rebound after the COVID-19 pandemic is under control, as it did from previous diseases such as SARS (Ahmed et al 2020 ), there is evidence that the crisis will deliver a different result for tourism and hospitality industries with the corresponding implications for the hotel sector and employment in these industries (Cheng et al 2018 ; Ahmed et al 2020 ). Given the negative influences of the COVID-19 pandemic and the countermeasures such as social distancing and travel restrictions, most hotels have been closed or have experienced a very low rate of tourists (Belso-Martínez et al 2020 ), thus, making revenue forecasts for the hotel sector suffer a significant dropdown in 2020. Besides, what is not yet clear is how hotels will survive after the COVID-19 pandemic, and even if they do, how they will continue to provide health and sanitation capabilities for clients arriving in the future.…”

Russian Tourism Enterprises’ Marketing Innovations to Meet the COVID-19 Challenges

“…In the context of crisis, it is also highly important for SMEs to cooperate, since combining scarce resources and sharing knowledge within an ecosystem brings organizations more grounds for sustainability [34,35]. Network members not only share resources, but commonly learn to face the challenges of critical situations [36].…”

Perceived Crowding and Risk Perception According to Leisure Activity Type during COVID-19 Using Spatial Proximity

“…According to a study by Choon [ 19 ], experiences of leisure activities influence satisfaction with crowded settings, which is more affected by the surroundings than by spatial crowding. Non-spatial dimensions of proximity can serve as criteria for perceived crowding [ 20 ]. Additionally, it has been argued that while proximity is generally considered to be essential in our daily lives, excessive proximity can be harmful [ 21 ].…”

“…It was also found that while social proximity is crucial regarding a personal sense of responsibility and emotional intimacy, familiarity is less important in terms of privacy [ 22 ]. Stating that “space is special”, Longley, Goodchild, Maguire, and Rhind [ 23 ] highlighted the usefulness of an alternative research method modeling spatial dependence and spatial heterogeneity in explaining spatial effects in the leisure sector [ 20 ]. That is, spatial crowding has a direct effect on people’s lives, and people require social distances, or psychologically safe distances.…”