The current COVID-19 pandemic has affected global mobility both in terms of international mobility restrictions and restrictive measures on internal movement. To better understand how COVID-19 affects global mobility, IOM has developed a global mobility database to gather, map and track data on these restrictive measures impacting movement. This report provides a global perspective of the COVID-19-related measures and restrictions imposed by countries, territories and areas impacting cross-border, as well as the resulting effects on stranded migrants and other population categories. The information in this report relies on a compilation of inputs from multiple sources, including from IOM staff in the field, DTM reports on flow monitoring and mobility tracking.
Points of Entry (PoEs):
• 3,502 PoEs were assessed in 169 C/T/As, including 764 Airports, 2,130 Land Border Crossing Points and 608 Blue Border Crossing Points.
• Overall, 40 per cent of the assessed PoE were fully closed (no relative change compared to last week), 40 per cent partially operational (i.e. -1 p.p. on a weekly basis) and 14 per cent fully operational (+1 p.p.), however the operational status of PoEs varied across IOM Regions and PoE types:
o The IOM Region with the highest share of fully closed PoEs was Central and West Africa (59%, i.e. a 1 p.p. decrease on a weekly basis), followed by the Middle East and North Africa (57%, i.e. a 2 p.p. decrease compared to last week);
o The European Economic Area was the IOM Region with the highest percentage of fully operational PoEs (29%, i.e. no change compared to last week’s figure), followed by South-Eastern Europe, Eastern Europe and Central Asia (17%, i.e. a 3 p.p. increase on a weekly basis)
o 48 per cent of the assessed land border crossing points globally were fully closed, while this percentage was respectively 31 and 22 for airports and blue border crossing points, with no relative change across all PoE types;
o The share of fully operational PoEs was more stable across PoE types (17% for airports, 16% for blue border crossing points and 12% for land border crossing points).
• Mobility restrictions on arriving to or departing from the assessed PoEs were the most adopted restrictive measures in all the types of PoE (around 70% of the assessed PoEs), followed by medical requirements (more than 30% in all PoE types with a peak of 44% for airports).
• The most common expected duration of the restrictive measures adopted in the assessed PoEs was 14 days to one month (40% of the cases for airports), however the foreseen duration of these restrictive measures was unknown for 51 and 43 per cent of the blue and land border crossing points, respectively.
• Regular travelers and nationals were the most affected population categories across all PoE types.
• Airports were the PoE type where public health measures, such as health screening through non-contact thermometers, the provision of information about COVID-19 on site or the presence of a handwashing station, were most commonly adopted by the managing authorities. Aligned with this result, airports were also the PoE type with the highest number of available tools in the event of a suspected COVID-19 case transiting through the PoE. These available tools included standard operating procedures for the detection and management of ill travelers, referral systems and availability of an isolation space for suspected COVID-19 cases.
Source: International Organization for Migration