Journal Archive

Most countries and their cities are currently recovering from the long-lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has affected the world since late 2019, spanning almost three and half years.

Although progress is being made, the pandemic’s impact continues to linger, and its lasting impact will shape the direction of society’s restoration and the establishment of a new normal. One notable consequence of the pandemic is its influence on people's perception and utilization of urban spaces.

The heightened awareness of infectious diseases in enclosed environments has prompted changes in people's mobility patterns, resulting in a shift towards outdoor spaces, particularly green areas, where individuals can maintain a safe physical distance from others (Landry et al., 2021; Ugolini et al., 2020). The preference for outdoor spaces has persisted even after the end of the pandemic, leading to various behavioral changes in the utilization of these outdoor areas.

This study aims to assess the pandemic’s lasting impact on creating a new society. Specifically, the research focuses on perception, attitude, and behavior (e.g., consumption, health, work, shopping, and leisure or tourism) at the individual level. At the city and regional level, intensive studies have been conducted on how the environment, economy, housing, and community have changed in this short period of time (e.g., Bago et al., 2021; Chollisni et al., 2022; Debata et al., 2020). However, a remaining issue of COVID-19 research is that most of it has focused on statistics or surveys conducted at a single point in time with a specific city as a case. While infectious diseases spread globally, the perception and behavioral changes related to these diseases can differ significantly based on each country’s response to the diseases as well as its cultural, political, and socio-economic context. Notably, response policies to infectious diseases differ among nations, and their impact can vary depending on urban settings.

Specifically, this study aims to compare and contrast these changes between Seoul and Shanghai, two East Asian megacities with comparable urban settings. Both cities experienced confirmed cases of COVID-19 around the same time and share similarities as economic and transportation hubs with densely developed areas. However, they differ in terms of disease control policies, as well as political and cultural characteristics, which may lead to diverse influences on individuals' perceptions and behaviors during the pandemic. Data for the study were collected through surveys conducted in both cities using the same questionnaire format. The surveys were conducted during similar time periods and repeated twice over the course of one year. If similar changes occurred in both cities, it implies a certain level of generalizability. Conversely, if different changes were observed, further investigation was conducted to identify the factors contributing to these differences, including group interviews with experts familiar with each city.

In Seoul, both surveys used the same respondents, enabling inferential statistics like paired t-tests to assess consistent or differentiated changes due to the pandemic. This helps determine if changes were temporary or adaptive over a year. Surveys were conducted during similar daily case counts to control for their influence. The study also assessed if perceptions and behaviors were maintained or strengthened (e.g., learning effect). Using a quasi-experimental design, it compared pre-pandemic and post-pandemic data from the experimental and comparison groups (Seoul and Shanghai) to enhance reasoning validity.

The remaining sections of the paper are structured as follows: The next section reviews planning literature to explore the main survey items, focusing on the perceptions and behaviors affected by the pandemic. The methodology of the study is then detailed, including the pandemic trends in Seoul and Shanghai, the economic damage attributed to the pandemic, and the countermeasures implemented. The survey design, including sampling and questionnaire details, is also described. This is followed by descriptive statistics of the survey responses and inferential statistics (independent samples t-test, paired sample t-test) to examine whether the effects of the pandemic were consistent or different in the two cities (Seoul and Shanghai) and between the first and second peaks (in Seoul). Finally, the study concludes with the interpretation of the main findings and presents a few policy implications.

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has brought about profound transformations in urban spaces, reshaping the ways people interact, move, and perceive their built environments. Traditionally, cities are designed to facilitate social interaction and gatherings among strangers, with considerations for accessibility and intended purposes (Oh, 2022; Stevens, 2006). However, it is important to note that urban spaces have played a role in the transmission of COVID-19, with over 90% of confirmed cases occurring in urban areas (UN, 2020). As global urbanization rates continue to rise, reaching 56%, and with over 80% of GDP being generated in cities (World Bank, 2023), cities' vulnerability to infections and the implementation of preventive policies have significantly influenced people's lives, leisure activities, and spatial visits within urban areas. This session provides a comprehensive examination of the pandemic's effects on cities and its impact on people's perceptions and behaviors, particularly highlighting the vulnerability of cities to infectious diseases and the changes in individuals' perceptions and behaviors resulting from infection control policies.

Compared to previous pandemics, COVID-19 stands out for its rapid global spread. Its primary mode of transmission through respiratory droplets has made urban spaces characterized by “Closed, Crowded, Close contact (3Cs)” particularly susceptible to transmission (WHO, 2021). Mass infections have been reported in enclosed indoor spaces where adherence to personal protective measures and social distancing is challenging (Yip et al., 2021). The Korean Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) attributed these mass infections to the unique characteristics of enclosed spaces with poor ventilation, where individuals remove their masks to eat and drink (KDCA, 2022). Similarly, a mass infection transmitted through air conditioners in a restaurant was reported in China, underscoring the vulnerability of densely populated areas with inadequate ventilation and close contact among individuals, leading to rapid infection spread (Lu et al., 2021).

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about various changes in urbanism interventions and policies aimed at controlling the spread of infectious disease. These changes include alterations in physical activity, the implementation of social distancing and home isolation measures, and shifts in choice of urban spaces and transport options (Rojas-Rueda and Morales-Zamora, 2021). The pandemic has also had a significant impact on individuals' perceptions of urban spaces, leisure behavior, and their sense of community. It has resulted in reduced mobility, adverse economic conditions such as unemployment and decreased income levels (Kemp and Spearritt, 2021; Lee and Yang, 2022). Furthermore, commercial activities have been significantly affected, with a notable shift towards online consumption resulting in the decline of traditional retail sectors (Zhou et al., 2023).

The changes in perception and behavior regarding urban spaces during the pandemic can be attributed to both government response policies and individual risk perception. The KDCA implemented measures such as regulating the number of users and operating hours of multi-use facilities based on distancing guidelines have influenced people’s utilization of urban spaces (Kim. M. H. et al., 2021). Many countries have controlled or closed the use of multi-use facilities in cities (Honey-Rosés et al., 2021). Additionally, the increased awareness of risks associated with indoor spaces and the sharing of numerous cases of mass infections through mass media and social networking platforms have heightened the risk perception associated with urban spaces (Faruk et al., 2022). Therefore, there has been a noticeable decline in foot traffic in commercial facilities and city centers, as people have congregated less in these areas (Song et al., 2023). The utilization of urban spaces has fluctuated according to the course of the COVID-19 outbreak and the intensity of policy measures (Benzell et al., 2022).

On the other hand, outdoor spaces have been perceived as safer due to their ample ventilation and the ability to maintain social distancing. In urban areas, there has been a surge in the number of people utilizing urban parks, and a growing interest in leisure activities that involve connecting with nature, such as camping and hiking. Additionally, there has been an increased preference for outdoor leisure activities and individual pursuits at home in urban settings (Kim, H. et al., 2023).

Furthermore, the prolonged time spent at home during the pandemic has led to exacerbated social conflicts within communities, particularly in densely developed urban areas with shared living spaces (apartment complexes or multi-family residences). The pandemic has led to increased time spent at home, with 35 percents increased compared to before COVID-19 (Aljanzeera, 2020). The prolonged time spent at home has led to increased incidents of neighbor-to-neighbor conflicts such as noise disturbances (Hoehn-Velasco et al., 2020). Additionally, increased contact within families has led to a rise in domestic tensions and conflicts, in addition to domestic violence incidents. However, the impact of the pandemic on the perception that one's health is affected by others and the sense of community prior to the pandemic can influence the impact of the pandemic in different ways.

The impact of infectious diseases can vary depending on infection control policies and the characteristics of residential areas. In particular, the effects of infectious diseases on cities and individuals' perceptions of them can differ based not only on social, economic, and infrastructural factors but also on cultural, historical, and political differences. For example, East Asian and Pacific countries have shown a higher level of risk perception regarding infectious diseases compared to other regions (Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America) (Huy et al., 2021). During major outbreaks such as the 2002 SARS and 2015 MERS, East Asian countries were able to respond quickly by establishing the necessary systems and infrastructure for infectious disease control. Hong Kong, Taiwan, and South Korea, which have experienced past epidemics, responded rapidly to the spread of COVID-19 compared to Western countries and exhibited a high level of voluntary participation in personal hygiene practices to avoid infection (Kim, J.H. et al., 2023). Moreover, within East Asia, political and cultural differences among countries have influenced specific responses to infectious diseases, ultimately having a significant impact on the perception of infectious diseases and individuals' behaviors. Notably, countries in East Asia, including Chinese cities such as Wuhan, where the first outbreak of COVID-19 was reported, implemented large-scale testing and surveillance systems to swiftly identify and isolate confirmed cases. Even within East Asia, the political and cultural differences among countries influenced detailed responses to infectious diseases, consequently resulting in meaningful effects on the perception of infectious diseases and individual behaviors.

Understanding the multidimensional changes in urban spaces caused by the pandemic and comparing the vulnerability to infectious diseases in settings resembling megacities is crucial for enhancing preparedness for future pandemics. The cultural and political characteristics of cities, along with their preventive behaviors, have a significant impact on individuals' perceptions and behaviors during a pandemic.

This study compared perceptions and behaviors of urban residents during the COVID-19 pandemic in Seoul and Shanghai—two prominent megacities in East Asian with similar geographical characteristics. The primary aim was assess and compare these dimensions quantitatively. Significant differences in perceptions and behaviors were found between the cities, with Shanghai residents perceiving a stronger impact due to stricter COVID-19 prevention meausres.

Both cities' residents acknowledged the profound influence of the pandemic on daily life, especially on social activities and phyical environment. Notably, Shanghai residents perceived a more substantial impact than those in Seoul. This variance can be contextualized by examining the inherent nature of COVID-19 as a respiratory disease and the respective disease prevention strategies implemented. WHO (2020) has emphasized preventive measures like mask-wearing, avoiding crowded places, and highlighted the risk in enclosed spaces with poorly ventilated; leading to adivce for people to stay at home and restriction on multi-purpose facilities. Large outbreaks occurred in enclosed spaces such as cafes, restaurants, and indoor sports facilities, where mask-wearing or distancing is challenging. Responding to these risks, Shanghai adopted more rigorous prevention protocols than Seoul, including comprehensive restrictions on movement and closing non-essential facilities. From a behavioral economics perspective, complete access restrictions, as observed in Shanghai, tend to amplify the perception of impact. Prospect Theory suggests people exhibit greater sensitivity to losses more acutely than gains (Haines et al., 2018). Hence, stringent access restrictions, like those in Shanghai, can amplify the impact of the pandemic more strongly.

This study unveiled a high awareness in both cities about population density and shared facilities affecting disease spread. Notably, Seoul exhibited a stronger association between urban characteristics and disease transmission compared to Shanghai, indicating a notable disparity between the two cities. Seoul had a stronger link between city traits and disease spread than Shanghai due to Seoul’s much higher density (15,550 people/km²) compared to Shanghai (3,900 people/km²). While Seoul is smaller in population and size than Shanghai, its heightened density makes it more vulnerable to COVID-19 transmission (Bhadra et al., 2021; WHO, 2020), thereby influencing perceptions.

Conversely, Shanghai's urban growth was decentralized and dispersed, with multiple smaller centers, reducing dense areas and offering more urban spaces (Zhang et al., 2019). Shanghai residents felt shared facilities didn’t directly spread diseases, possibly due to strict measures against them. This, in contrast to Seoul, where such facilities remained open, could explain Shanghai’s lower perceived risk.

Both cities had increased disease risk perception, but Shanghai had a higher fear level than Seoul. Shanghai had stricter control measures. Shanghai was more concerned about personal transmission, while Seoul's government policy was generally seen favorably. Shanghai had an unfavorable perception of government policy, possibly due to its prolonged and strict nature.

Following the survey, protests against the Chinese central government's high-intensity zero-COVID-19 policy occurred in major cities such as Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangzhou (Holbig, 2023; Lyu et al., 2023). As a result, in December 2022, the Chinese government eased the lockdown measures in major cities and resumed the operation of multi-purpose facilities in low-risk areas, improving certain policies (Hankyoreh, 2022/12/01). On the other hand, in Seoul, the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency shared daily updates on the spread of infectious diseases, highlighting the effectiveness of social distancing measures through campaigns like “Thanks to You Challenge (덕분에 챌린지).” It has been shown that these policies and campaigns have a positive impact on individuals' preventive behaviors (e.g., vaccination, personal hygiene) (Kim et al., 2022).

Differences in preventive behaviors greatly impacted individual evaluations. Shanghai was more proactive, avoiding crowded places and staying home, while also canceling travel plans. In contrast, Seoul residents opted for alternative travel rather than canceling trips. Initially, in 2021, there was a trend of canceling trips and staying home, but by 2022, domestic travel surged with a 46% accommodation revenue increase (Techworld, 2022/01/27).

Shanghai had stricter travel restrictions, while Seoul adapted measures based on transmission trends. Thus, Seoul residents were more conscious of non-participation and more aware of their compliance with guidelines. Shanghai was safer than Seoul during COVID-19. Multi-use spaces spread diseases; masks while eating are risky (Arashiro et al., 2022). Despite distancing rules, transmission risk persisted indoors, requiring visitor perception understanding. Shanghai enforced strict policies, limiting facility hours, promoting remote work, and closing high-risk venues. Medium-risk places offered take-out until January 2023.

This study found higher risk perception in indoor spaces (e.g., restaurants, entertainment venues) due to poor ventilation. Green areas were considered safe. Urban spaces saw little change before the pandemic. Seoul saw more green space interest. Studies in Shanghai (Zhang et al., 2023) and Seoul (Heo et al., 2021) showed green spaces reduce depression. Green spaces offer alternatives for indoor activities during pandemics. People preferred outdoor activities for social distancing, given the emphasis on medical facility access.

In addition, Seoul and Shanghai faced pandemic-related challenges about leisure and tourism, affecting resident satisfaction. Seoul had smaller changes in indoor leisure and visiting friends compared to Shanghai, showing intercity differences. Seoul had more significant shifts in remote leisure activities. We analyzed pre-and post-pandemic leisure activity frequencies in both cities.

Overall, if an activity was more common before, it tended to continue during the pandemic, with exceptions. Seoul had more indoor leisure activities pre-pandemic, but Shanghai had more during it. Both cities saw reductions, but Seoul's decrease was larger due to various factors. The survey focused on perception, with Shanghai citizens possibly not seeing the drop as significant. Seoul restricted non-mandatory activities, impacting citizens' perception of indoor leisure. Differences in the definition of "indoor leisure activities" may also have contributed, as Seoul linked them to outside activities, while Shanghai included home-based ones.

In summary, Seoul and Shanghai didn't significantly differ in perceived leisure activities, except due to comprehensive (Shanghai) or selective (Seoul) restrictions. Targeted restrictions led to stronger perceived limits on behaviors. Regarding tourist facility preferences, both cities showed increased awareness of COVID-19 transmission control. They favored safety and fewer visitors. Shanghai had a greater shift toward 'cleanliness and low visitors' post-pandemic, now statistically similar to Seoul's preference, which was higher before the pandemic.

Before COVID-19, Seoul had higher hygiene expectations than Shanghai. During the pandemic, both cities stressed preventive measures like handwashing, masks, and distancing. Seoul focused on personal hygiene with hand sanitizers, disinfection, and mask penalties. Shanghai emphasized cleanliness, leading to disease transmission concerns. Urban precautions reduce perceived risks (Zhong et al., 2021). Shanghai saw increased domestic tourism awareness due to border closures (Huang et al., 2021).

Seoul saw a notable shift in tourist facility preferences during the pandemic, favoring natural and less crowded places in the second phase, reflecting a pandemic-related learning effect (Korea Tourism Organization, 2021). In Shanghai, conflicts with close individuals decreased, possibly due to strict government lockdowns. During the expert interviews, it was observed that community cooperation became crucial during the lockdown period, as community access was prohibited. Quoting Interviewee A directly:

“Each apartment building has WeChat (a social networking platform). During the pandemic, if there were any complaints or improvement suggestions, the management office would collect and relay them to the local government for sharing. Additionally, with the prohibition of community access, there was an increase in collaborative activities among residents, such as picking up delivery items in designated areas within the apartment complex.”

Furthermore, according to the China Population Census Yearbook (2020), Shanghai has 30.58m2 per person, while Seoul has 26.6m2 (Statistics Korea, 2021). Residential area per person and population density affect stress (Chan et al., 2020) and household conflicts. In Seoul, more time at home and family contact increased conflict potential and reduced relationship satisfaction. Social relationships can have both positive and negative effects. Trust levels in Shanghai and Seoul remained consistent: family, friends, neighbors, foreigners, and strangers, unaffected by the pandemic.

This study examines differences in the perceptions and behaviors of urban residents in Seoul and Shanghai, both major East Asian megacities and economic hubs, in response to the pandemic. The research highlights the role of factors such as population density, urban distribution patterns (e.g., polycentricity), and cultural characteristics in shaping individual responses during the pandemic, leading to variations between the two cities.

A main finding is the significant impact of COVID-19 control policies on individuals' perceptions and their views of their respective cities. South Korea's decentralized approach emphasizes individual responsibility and behavior that doesn't harm others, while China adopted a centralized strategy, involving close cooperation between central and local authorities, enforcing strict urban activity restrictions. Gradual control measures prove more effective in raising awareness of spatial risks compared to complete lockdowns. However, overly stringent policies can negatively affect the economy, potentially harming urban residents.

Considering the potential fatigue and drawbacks of sustained intense policies, finding a balanced approach is essential. During the pandemic, there was a negative shift in perceptions of urban space utilization compared to pre-pandemic times. Nonetheless, open green spaces continued to receive positive evaluations, even under behavior-restricting policies. Given the positive impact of green spaces on mental and physical health, addressing infectious disease transmission in the future is critical. Moreover, infectious diseases significantly influenced individuals' leisure activities and choice of tourist destinations, underscoring the meaningful impact of personal hygiene policies. Shanghai, for instance, demonstrated higher hygiene considerations compared to regions with strict personal hygiene policies like Seoul.

Finally, to clarify how the effects of the pandemic differ based on national and city characteristics, it is necessary to expand the research to other Asian megacities with similar urban characteristics, such as Tokyo, Singapore, and Taipei. This would allow for a comparative analysis and a better understanding of the varied impacts of the pandemic. In future research, it is necessary to analyze the impact of city structure and demographic and socioeconomic characteristics by comparing changes in cities with similar quarantine policies and enforcement structures following the infectious disease.