Ten Takeaways from the COVID-19 Pandemic for Transportation Planners

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has created significant challenges but also unprecedented opportunities for transportation researchers and practitioners. In this article, the major lessons and gaps in knowledge for those working in the transportation sector are identified, including the following: (1) integration between public health and transportation; (2) technology to support contact tracing and tracking of travelers; (3) focus on vulnerable, at-risk operators, patrons, and underserved members of society; (4) re-engineering of travel demand models to support social distancing, quarantine, and public health interventions; (5) challenges with Big Data and information technologies; (6) trust relationships between the general public, government, private sector, and others in disaster management; (7) conflict management during disasters; (8) complexities of transdisciplinary knowledge and engagement; (9) demands for training and education; and (10) transformative change to support community resilience. With a focus on transportation planning and community resilience, the lessons from the pandemic need to be shared and customized for different systems, services, modalities, and users. While many of the interventions during the pandemic have been based on public health, the management, response, recovery, adaptation, and transformation of transportation systems resulting from the crisis require multi-disciplinary, multi-jurisdictional communications and coordination, and resource sharing. Further research to support knowledge to action is needed.

In the U.S., as of June 29, 2021, 601,506 people have died of COVID-19 and 33,451,748 people have had COVID-19 ( 1 ). Worldwide, there have been an estimated 3.9 million deaths, with over 181.5 million reported cases in 220 countries ( 2 ). By October 1, 2021, projected deaths in the U.S. are estimated to reach 949,335 people ( 3 ). While 2.9 billion vaccine doses have been administered worldwide, the pandemic is far from over ( 2 ).

The pandemic has had a staggering impact on health and the economy across all sectors, including transportation. It has caused the deepest recession since the end of World War II. The global economy contracted by 3.5% in 2020 ( 4 ). It also led to unprecedented levels of government spending of nearly $16 trillion across the world ( 4 ). The slowdown in economic activity and movements reduced vibrations caused by moving vehicles and industrial machinery captured by seismometers around the world ( 5 ). While overall economic activity initially dropped, some sectors rebounded faster than others, as consumers shifted spending to non-contact goods and services (6–8). Home deliveries, as well as companies supporting online activities (shopping, education, meetings, etc.), surged in response to the pandemic. Airlines, cruise ships, public transit, and entertainment suffered from government-ordered restrictions and the public’s unwillingness to travel (9–12). Parr et al. found that the closure of tourism and entertainment activities, with government emergency declarations in Florida, led to a 47.5% reduction in same-day-travel volumes in 2020 compared with 2019 ( 13 ). The study found significant variation across locations, with urban and highway traffic declining much more than rural or arterial roadway volumes. The reduction in travel led to initial decreases in fossil fuel use and emissions, mitigating greenhouse gases in the transportation sector. It should be noted, however, that responses by governments and across the transportation sector have varied widely, with some exhibiting greater flexibility as to travel restrictions than others ( 14 ). There have been innovative responses and creative solutions to COVID-19. Both the impacts of the pandemic and the responses by the transportation sector are examined to understand the broader lessons for transportation resilience. Resilience involves the ability to absorb shocks and disruptions, but also quickly restore operations and functionality. Because transportation is an essential service and important for emergency response, evacuation, health care, livelihoods, and societal functioning, transportation resilience supports overall community resilience.

Methods

The research is based on examination of peer-reviewed publications, and reports and studies conducted in the public, private, and non-governmental sectors on the response and recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis is supported by national surveys administered to U.S. transportation agencies immediately following the declaration of the pandemic and with follow-up interviews conducted with state and local officials and other stakeholders ( 15 ). The author was part of a team that developed a pandemic playbook for transportation agencies ( 16 ). This team conducted online surveys and virtual and in-person interviews with practitioners and analyzed responses using quantitative and qualitative methods. In addition to contacting every state transportation department and metropolitan planning organization, other informants were identified through professional alliances. Responses to the survey questions were coded and analyzed in relation to measures of central tendency, dispersion, and variance, and through content analysis of frequently occurring terms or phrases using the NVivo 12 software to produce word clouds and frequency distributions of responses. The research included review of many state and local pandemic response plans and after-action reports. The highlights and key takeaways from these research activities are included in this paper. The author has conducted research for decades on emergency management and transportation planning with a focus on disaster response and recovery capabilities such as evacuation, sheltering, and transportation resilience (17–20). He is Editor of Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives which has published more than 100 manuscripts on the pandemic ( 6 ). He has also led graduate seminars and international workshops with researchers studying the response and recovery from the pandemic. The intent of this paper is to provide a wide-ranging summary of impacts with implications for transportation planners, emergency management researchers, and practitioners. Of special interest are the training needs of transportation service providers and emergency managers, and those in urban planning, design, engineering, and construction. Broader discussion of policy changes and lessons is likely to continue, as well as deliberation of the implications of the pandemic on community resilience.

Key Findings

In this section, the main takeaways as to the impacts and implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on transportation and community resilience are summarized.

Based on a national survey of transportation agencies (N = 416) conducted in the spring of 2020, 92% reported the implementation of social distancing, while 35% reported quarantine activities in their jurisdictions ( 15 ). Using the NVivo 12 content analysis software, a word cloud generating the 500 most commonly used words in response to what caused a lockdown or service cancelation (Figure 1) reveals the importance of COVID-19, but also other events included “hurricane,”“weather,”“threats,”“winter,”“Sandy,” and “tsunami.” Most reported that actions were triggered by emergency declarations (53%) or administrative orders (43%). A total of 41% of the respondents reported taking “discretionary actions,” although 71% reported no previous experiences with “lockdown of transportation.” Among respondents, only 3% reported experiences with disease outbreaks other than COVID-19. Only 30% of respondents reported having had training on quarantine, isolation, and social distancing, with 70% stating that that they needed additional training to prepare for, respond to, and recover from the pandemic.

Figure 1.

Word clouds for causes of lockdown or service cancellations.

The different responses summarized in the pandemic playbook included closing facilities, cleaning and sanitation of vehicles and facilities, continuity of operations planning, expanding communications and sharing information with staff and customers, and increasing coordination with other agencies ( 16 ). The playbook provides templates or “plays” for planning, training, and exercises to be implemented should another pandemic emerge or if current conditions persist. Among the most critical plays are a focus on employee health and safety and the need to address absenteeism, testing, and vaccination of employees, and the provision of “reasonable accommodation” to reduce health risks in the performance of tasks. The playbook builds on earlier work, recognizing the occupational health risks to essential workers, including transit operators (21–23).

Transportation has been responsible for the spread of the disease between and within communities, and transportation policies were central to containment of COVID-19 (24–26). Before the development and distribution of vaccines and medical treatments, the initial response and mitigation efforts relied on the restriction of movement through quarantine, isolation, and social distancing as the principal interventions to manage the disease (27–29). While pandemic planning exercises such as Clade X and Event 201 have been held in the past, overall, there has been limited experience with disease outbreaks ( 30 ). There has been reporting and modeling of transmission of diseases through air travel (31, 32). Yet the U.S. and many other countries were largely unprepared for the COVID-19 disaster ( 33 ). The lack of readiness for the pandemic was greater in smaller, rural communities, which face ongoing transportation problems including safety, access, and mobility issues, coupled with limited financial and technical capabilities for managing a pandemic outbreak (21, 34). Health care resources were stretched thin before the pandemic and have required customized approaches to address risk and resilience ( 35 ). There are multiple dimensions of transportation disadvantage in rural communities, including the limited supply of services, social vulnerabilities, and weaker planning and governance capabilities ( 36 ). The pandemic illuminated challenges for federal agencies, including the Department of Transportation, which “received over $36 billion to prevent, prepare for, and respond to COVID-19 across all modes of transportation” ( 37 ). The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act provided approximately $2.4 trillion in federal aid to address public health and economic crisis needs resulting from COVID-19 ( 37 ). There have been questions as to fiscal policies and the response to the pandemic, including responsibilities, availability of resources, and priorities for preparedness and response (33, 38).

Integration of Public Health and Transportation

The pandemic has served as a reminder of the close relationships between transportation and public health. Isolation, or the separation and treatment of sick people, and quarantine, or the holding or restriction of movement of healthy but suspected carriers of disease, have long been practiced. Quarantine comes from the Italian word, “quarantino,” referring to a 40-day period of stay in a holding area before entry to 14th century coastal towns ( 39 ). Based on surveys and interviews, better understanding of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) as defined in the Department of Health and Human Services guidance, as well as more training on authorities, responsibilities, and roles for national, state, local, tribal, and territorial governments, are needed (15, 16, 22, 23, 29). There are uncertainties and conflicts over enforcement of NPIs and mandated behaviors such as face coverings, vaccinations, or proof of negative tests or vaccinations, affecting the movement of people and participation in social activities. Mandates versus voluntary actions raise vexing concerns as to enforcement authorities and the roles of federal and subnational governments in public health response and recovery (40, 41). Deep connections between transportation, critical infrastructure, land use, housing and development, and public health have long been recognized (42, 43). The emergence of quarantine, isolation, and social distancing policies has also led to racial discrimination, stigmatization, and unfair treatment of minorities and sick people (44, 45).

Contact Tracing and Tracking of Travelers

Effective response and mitigation of infectious disease begins with testing suspected carriers and tracing the contact of confirmed infected individuals with other people who they may have infected. Contact tracing is “one of the oldest public health tactics…as soon as you know of a person who may have a virus…you work to isolate that person…and then you work with that person to understand who they may have come in contact with…” ( 46 ). Because of limited testing capabilities and shortages in trained contact tracers, two key points emerge. First, there are strategic opportunities for the use of technology to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of contact tracing. Second, there are large unmet training and workforce development needs associated with the implementation of effective and expanded tracing and tracking systems.

Digital solutions to support travel and gatherings in crowded locations, as well as tracking those who have tested negative or were vaccinated, have been implemented unevenly across the world and within countries and states. South Korea rapidly implemented drive-thru and walk-up testing with mobile applications to alert the public as to the movements of infected individuals and high-risk locations ( 47 ). Transport facilities and vehicles also provided a means of protecting health care workers involved in screening, and separating potentially infected motorists who came to mobile, drive-up testing centers. Other jurisdictions, including Hawaii, used transportation facilities such as the H-3 highway tunnel for screening and testing of thousands of motorists ( 48 ). Hawaii also imposed additional testing and reporting requirements, along with mandatory quarantine for in-bound travelers ( 25 ). The state has also set up its own system for reporting and tracking passengers from airlines and cruise ships who have been vaccinated ( 49 ). As an island state, Hawaii has been better able to institute and enforce these travel requirements, since it is not possible to drive from another jurisdiction. Technologies using Bluetooth, GPS, and mobile mapping and location services have been developed and tested to support tracing and tracking of travelers within and between jurisdictions. While the technologies and apps for smartphones and digital communication devices have been quickly developed, challenges as to the protection of privacy and use across a plethora of platforms and operating systems have been identified ( 50 ). While digital contract tracing and data protection systems can be readily implemented, with many successful pilots and proof-of-concept projects, problems such as recall errors on the part of app users, delays in capturing and disseminating information, scalability, insufficient recruitment, and limited adoption remain as barriers to implementation (51–53). Uneven access to smartphones and digital technologies are also limiting factors as to who can use and benefit from these innovations and virtual platforms ( 54 ).

Renewed Need to Focus on Vulnerable at-Risk Underserved Populations

The COVID-19 pandemic, like other disasters, has disproportionately affected low-income, minority, elderly, and underserved communities. Low-income households are more likely to be exposed to infectious diseases and lack medical insurance and resources for testing and treatment (6, 54, 55). These groups also have more limited access to transportation services, hampering access to health care during the pandemic but also travel to work and other opportunities ( 56 ). Cutbacks in public transportation and other services further reduced the mobility of these underserved populations. O’Brien and Eger, and Shah describe how minorities, foreign nationals, and other under-represented groups face stigma, social pressures, and difficulties receiving health care and social services (44, 45). In addition to increased health risks to the elderly and those with chronic medical conditions, young children face elevated risks from the disease and not being eligible for vaccinations, along with the negative effects of quarantine and social distancing ( 57 ).

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (2020) and the Department of Labor (2020) have identified transportation operators and patrons as being at higher risk of exposure to COVID-19 and other infectious diseases. Additional guidance to protect drivers, staff, and passengers has been developed (16, 23, 58). Transportation operators were among the earliest groups to be diagnosed with the disease, leading to reductions in public transit and paratransit service because of sick or quarantined operators and curtailment of services (11, 12, 22). Trips for education, health care, recreation, church, and other non-essential purposes declined more significantly among persons with disabilities, leading to greater isolation, loneliness, and lower rates of socialization (8, 59, 60). The reductions in mobility and accessibility reveal not just a decline in transportation services during the pandemic, but also a diminished quality of life for underserved populations.

Many communities also experienced social protests during the COVID-19 pandemic over policing, social justice, and systemic racism. Violence contributed to disruptions in transportation services and greater unwillingness to travel, further exacerbating the disparities in health care and access to jobs, education, and vital services. The need to expend more resources on policing, fire suppression, and responding to civil disobedience also led to a reduction in budgets and staffing for social services (54, 55, 61).

The pandemic served to highlight disparities between rich and poor countries in the access to testing, contact tracing, treatment, vaccines, health care, medical insurance, and recovery resources. Poor countries not only had limited supplies for face coverings, sanitizing supplies, and cleaning equipment, but also had less compliance with lockdown and social distancing orders. Mogaji, and Dzisi and Dei document the difficulties faced by transit operators in the Global South, and the shortages of masks and the difficulties of implementing social distancing orders on crowded vehicles (62, 63). O’Brien and Eger, moreover, describe how the pandemic has increased hostility toward international migrants and caused delays in the issuance of visas, affecting the immigration of highly trained scientific personnel and researchers ( 45 ).

Re-Engineering of Travel Demand Models

Until the pandemic, most transportation modeling focused on predicting and analyzing growth in travel demand from increased population for the planning and construction of new facilities. Davidson et al. summarize the evolution of travel demand modeling from conventional approaches to more realistic contemporary activity-based models based on the behaviors of travelers or households in tour-based, rather than elemental, trip formulations ( 64 ). These modeling improvements have been supported by advances in computing power and more detailed data on individual trip making, trip-chaining, and tour-based travel, instead of merely zonal data based on the traditional four-step (trip generation, distribution, mode choice, and network assignment) approach. Activity-based approaches support broader inclusion of other users and stakeholders, and studies on energy consumption, emissions, Americans with Disabilities Act requirements, new-start benefit calculations, and other topics ( 64 ). In addition to Census data and traditional sources such as the National Household Travel Survey, and data from traffic monitoring systems, transit ticket sales, or passenger counts, there is new mobility data from mobile phone records and app-based tracking of digital devices (12, 13, 47, 65–68). Integration of diverse data sources from social media, coupled with real-time alerts as to the spread of disease and movements of infected individuals, provide new approaches for transportation resilience arising from the pandemic (46, 47, 69, 70).

Four changes in travel demand modeling have arisen from the pandemic. First, because of lockdowns and social distancing orders, and the growth in teleworking, home schooling, and home deliveries, the generation of trips has been reduced or changed in relation to origins and destinations as well as the frequency, timing, and duration of travel (5, 7, 8, 14, 54, 57, 68, 70, 71). Second, changes in trip generation affect the spatial and temporal distribution of travel, especially for non-essential trips (8, 25, 26, 72, 73). Not all trips have been equally affected by the pandemic. Discretionary travel, vacation trips, dining, and entertainment have been most affected, as have been trips to crowded, indoor locations (8, 9, 72, 74). Third, there were changes in travel mode, with reductions in air, cruise ship, public transit, and ridesharing, and increases in both personal vehicle and active modes, to avoid contact with infected travelers (8, 9, 11, 12, 36, 59, 60, 75–78). Fourth, the pandemic has led to changes in network volumes, as the frequencies, distribution, and modality of trip-making have shifted (5, 8, 13, 70, 79).

While travel demand modeling has been extended to support other transportation planning needs such as evacuation planning, the pandemic raises new questions about the activities and movements of essential workers, activity-based travel (shopping, health care, and other trips) and the effectiveness of travel restrictions on curbing the spread of the virus and treating “tourists as disease vectors” (25, 27, 80, 81). In the past, demand modeling has been used to justify expansion of capacity but, with the pandemic, the attention has shifted to social distancing, reduction in travel, and avoidance of popular attractions. The long-term changes from more people learning how to work from home initiated by the pandemic but facilitated by improvements in technology also need to be further researched. The models need to be reworked for trip generation, distribution of travel across time and space, mode choice, increased walking and bicycling, and the longer-term changes in urban form and transportation infrastructure investment ( 82 ).

Big Data and Information Technologies

Ngan and Kelmenson report on advances in the use of Big Data and information technologies to support public health monitoring and surveillance, using real-time geolocation, mobile phone signals, video tracking systems, machine vision/learning, and integration of novel data sources such as credit card spending, to track movements and stem viral spread ( 67 ). The use of Big Data analytics with the authorized use of personal information has been justified because of the public health emergency and has been used more often in authoritarian regimes such as China and Hong Kong, as well as in smaller, more technologically advanced societies with centralized governments ( 47 ). In these settings, the arguments in favor of using technology have prevailed over concerns about privacy, individual freedoms, and the negative aspects of surveillance (50, 51, 67, 69, 83). While the collection of timely, accurate data on infectious disease spread is essential to an “evidence-based approach” to pandemic response, concerns over the handling, storage, use, dissemination, and ownership of personal health information are further complicated by the practices of multinational corporations and technology firms, national, state, and local agencies, and international organizations such as the World Health Organization and many philanthropic and humanitarian relief providers ( 33 ).

The pandemic has strained operations and trust relationships, increasing conflict within and across agencies overseeing health safety and public security. The strains on medical personnel, first responders, and essential workers in relation to health and mental health are evident, as is the aggravation of existing maladies, chronic conditions, and deficiencies across society (84, 85). The next three takeaways, including trust relationships, intensification of conflict and turmoil, and increased complexities, require transdisciplinary thinking and new approaches for convergence across roles, responsibilities, perspectives, and ideologies. Reliance on traditional, legacy systems and approaches limits opportunities for learning, transformation, and advancement.

Trust Relationships

Trust relationships are often based on familiarity and previous interaction with organizations and people with defined roles, responsibilities, and shared understandings. Karic and Mededovic describe how public trust is based on the judgments of citizens that the system—including government, health care providers, public health experts, and agencies—are responsive and reliable ( 86 ). Trust is important among emergency managers and responders and those providing aid and assistance during a health crisis. Rules, procedures, and systems for mutual aid and resource sharing are essential to emergency response during disasters. While responders and emergency managers may have experienced flooding, hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, mass shootings, and other hazards, fewer have had experience or training with disease outbreaks or epidemics (15, 16). Based on interviews with agency personnel, the lessons from Zika, Ebola, and SARS have been of limited value because those outbreaks were limited in duration and extent compared with COVID-19. Moreover, few of those interviewed had participated in pandemic training exercises, and many reported unfamiliarity with public health policies on quarantine, isolation, and social distancing. The lack of experience contributed to confusion, inconsistent messaging, and poor communications with the public. The management of “fear in humans” and how it affects behavior, combined with the increased politicization of science during a global pandemic and widespread social conflicts, also created new challenges for those in emergency management (87, 88). Low levels of concern with low levels of trust have further undermined compliance with government guidelines, restrictions, and recommended actions ( 89 ). Han describes how people lost trust in the Singaporean government and its rollout of digital contact tracing technologies when promises to ensure the privacy of health information were broken and private data were shared with law enforcement for criminal investigations ( 90 ). The breach of trust occurred at a time of widespread protests about policing, racism, and trust relationships with minority communities (55, 56, 91). Westra has argued that there is a strong relationship between ecosystem integrity, ethics, and social justice, and the mitigation of threats to human health, including racism ( 92 ).

Conflict Management

The pandemic has increased conflicts across society because of scarcity of resources and supply chains disrupted by labor shortages and changes in consumer behavior. The disaster has resulted in uneven impacts across economic sectors, transportation service providers, and communities. The virus affected groups such as the elderly, young children, and minorities more than others (22, 54, 55, 57). The pandemic exacerbated tensions and conflicts between groups and has increased racism (45, 93). There have been conflicts over the origins of the disease, the effectiveness of mitigation strategies, and the priorities for addressing economic versus health needs affecting the locus and timing of interventions (26, 33, 37, 38, 40, 94). These conflicts reveal disagreements as to macro- and micro-level actions, as well as bottom-up versus top-down responses to the COVID-19 crisis. There have been simultaneous disaster and emergency declarations issued by national, state, provincial, and local levels of governments across the world, which have led to conflicting, overlapping, redundant, and divergent authorities and calls to action. Different concepts, terminology, roles, and responsibilities converge during major disasters. Both improved communications and stronger coordination across agencies, and connectedness between management and operations are needed with adaptive, agile approaches to bridging short- and long-term planning (91, 95, 96). The pandemic is a complex “wicked problem” described by Rittel and Webber as lacking definitive formulation, having no stopping rule, being not true or false, with no immediate or ultimate test of a solution, and no opportunity to learn by trial and error ( 97 ). Much has happened because of the pandemic in a short period of time affecting many different systems and actors throughout the world adding to the complexity and wickedness of the problem. As a wicked problem, the pandemic has generated disagreement over health and economic goals and the means for addressing public health, including vaccines, testing, contact tracing, and disease surveillance. Simply throwing more data and information at wicked problems does not result in apparent solutions nor collective agreement over outcomes. A more robust strategy for addressing complexities and crises is needed.

Complexity and Transdisciplinarity

The COVID-19 disaster is marked by widespread uncertainties and complexities as to cause and effect pertaining to knowledge and action. The uncertainties arise from limited understanding of the virus, including its lethality and the effectiveness of vaccines and other protective actions taken to prevent the spread of disease. The pandemic requires an adaptive rationale to manage uncertainty ( 98 ). This requires understanding of systems, networks, and interactions between human, built, and natural environments, with the ability to model, simulate, and evaluate change over time and space, which are familiar activities for transportation planners. A global pandemic is further complicated by physical, environmental, social, economic, cultural, and political systems, which influence multi-scalar reactions and behaviors of viruses, organisms, and human agents, resulting in complexities that Ackoff described as a policy “mess” ( 99 ). It is one thing to simply observe or characterize the messiness of the pandemic, but it is far more difficult to plan, intervene, and manage this disaster.

Untangling and addressing complex problems involves understanding the interrelationships between coupled human and technological systems, and the inevitability of accidents, such as such the earthquake that triggered a tsunami resulting in flooding and nuclear power plant failure in Fukushima, Japan ( 100 ). The relationship of the pandemic to climate change demonstrates not just complexity but cascading spillover effects, as the degradation of natural environments and urbanization has facilitated infection from non-human species spread by the movements of travelers on airplanes and other travel modes (27, 101, 102). Using transportation systems to contain the pandemic is understandable, but is wrought with difficulty. Transportation operators serve the community and work to improve safety, security, and quality of life. Transportation systems also generate pollution, energy consumption, and other externalities including accidents, fatalities, and injuries. While the pandemic led to initial reductions in traffic and a temporary reduction in global CO₂ emissions, without major structural changes in the global economy and the systems of production and consumption, the world is likely to revert back to business (and pollution) as usual (5, 13, 79).

Planning with complexity requires transdisciplinary approaches to address wicked problems with an emphasis on collaborative rationality and engagement with diverse stakeholders using different methods and sources of information to address uncertainties and conflicts over goals and the means or technologies to address challenges ( 103 ). In addition to collaborative processes, facilitation, mediation, and deliberative actions to find and advance policies and actions, these approaches rely on convergence among diverse stakeholders and communities of practice, social sciences, and traditional science ( 104 ). It also requires reflexivity, learning, and integration of theory, practice, and “how professionals think in action” ( 105 ). The pandemic has demonstrated the need for increased collaboration between public health and transportation researchers and practitioners to plan, manage, and operate systems to protect health and enable economic activity but also support recovery, adaptation, and transformation of systems to address ongoing social and environmental needs.

Training and Education

The challenges for training and education arising from the pandemic are significant. There are questions as to what and who to teach (content) and how to upgrade training for learners and their instructors. Figure 2 shows the word cloud generated by analysis of responses to a national survey of transportation agencies about the training needs arising from the pandemic. While respondents often mentioned “social distancing,”“quarantine,” and “isolation,” other words, such as “policies,”“practices,”“implement,” and “differences,” as well as terms such as “people,”“public” and “community,” were frequently used. Coupled with interviews and needs assessments conducted over this period, it is evident that there are unmet operational, management, strategic planning, and decision-support training needs. The pandemic playbook developed for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine includes lessons and best practices, but also identifies gaps where more research on plans, policies, and procedures for pandemic response, mitigation, and recovery is needed ( 16 ). There are cross-cutting capabilities, such as sanitizing equipment and facilities and protecting operators and customers, but safety and operating requirements may vary across travel modes, passengers, and systems. Further attention to risk assessment and management, as well as communicating with employees, customers, stakeholders, and the general public, is needed. The “protective action decision model” can be expanded to further identify diverse, competing sources of information and communications channels, including traditional news, social media, and other pathways for dissemination of warnings, alerts, and promoting actions such as social distancing, face coverings, vaccines, and using exposure notification apps ( 106 ). This framework provides a coherent logic model for systematically evaluating information flows and public trust, and for the planning, decision making, and allocation of pandemic resources.

Figure 2.

Word cloud for training needs.

The word cloud on training suggests the need for “whole community” engagement across preparedness, response, and recovery, and encouragement of cross-, multi-, and trans-disciplinary capabilities with convergence across diverse fields of knowledge, and holistic, agile, and innovative approaches to resilience (99, 104, 107). Rather than focusing narrowly on a single type of transport, there is need for multi-layered, multi-modal approaches where strategies are used in combination to address health and other threats as well as existing disparities in society (29, 43, 51, 54, 61). There is useful experience from other crises which offers lessons for pandemic response and recovery of transportation systems (19, 20, 99, 108, 109). While there are differences between the pandemic and other disasters, many of the same emergency managers and responders, including transportation agencies, are on the front lines of response and recovery. After-action reports and evaluations of lessons learned need to be taken seriously to avoid repeating the same mistakes ( 110 ). There needs to be a clearinghouse for lessons from the pandemic and dedicated funding for research and evaluation of best practices, policies, and systems for advancing transportation and community resilience. These platforms should support continuous learning and improvements in pandemic and overall disaster resilience.

Transformative Change

The pandemic provides a catalyst for change in transportation planning and emergency management. It demonstrates the complex challenges of safely moving people and goods across and within communities and the need to improve transportation systems to prevent the spread of infectious diseases, but also to address persistent mobility and accessibility needs to support livelihoods, health, and quality of life. While there is a need for sunlight, fresh air, clean water, and hygiene to protect operators and patrons, there is also need for innovation and better systems for testing, tracing, tracking, treatment, and training to address the wicked challenges of a global pandemic. Rather than merely “bounce back” to levels of service before the pandemic, there should be more attention to transforming transportation systems to adapt to future shocks and disruptions. Addressing social and economic disparities through robust, innovative, and progressive transportation systems are key to a resilient, just, and sustainable future. The pandemic, like other disasters, has magnified weakness and deficiencies in existing systems, and the disparities between rich and poor people, developing and advanced economies, and urban and rural areas. While the connections between climate change and zoonotic disease and the inevitability of disasters arising from closely-coupled natural, human, and technological systems have been well established, there is further need for collaborative rationality to support convergence, learning, adaptation, and transformative change (98–101, 103–105, 107, 110).

Discussion

This essay has covered a wide range of concerns arising from the pandemic specific to transportation researchers and emergency managers. The pandemic has generated many research questions across disciplines, pre-empting agendas at conferences, workshops, and meetings of professional societies ( 111 ). It has also spawned great interest in the longer-term adaptation and management of transportation infrastructure, supply chains, and community resilience (6, 7, 20, 35, 36, 40, 82). Researching and writing about the pandemic has been, for many, a strategy for coping with and understanding the disruptions associated with this disaster.

There are other motivations for further research on the pandemic. First, the disease itself continues to spread and change, requiring continued vigilance and attention to primary as well as secondary impacts associated with the disaster. The second and third waves of the pandemic are different in relation to health consequences and responses by authorities and the public ( 112 ). Second, there are thousands of other viruses with potential for another outbreak and repeat occurrence (101, 102, 113). While lessons from the current pandemic can be used to update guidance for pandemic planning for the transportation sector, the challenges and barriers to learning and adaptation persist ( 114 ). An innovative project to use a highway tunnel as a mass testing site in Hawaii was not supported by the Federal Highway Administration ( 48 ). In addition to overcoming institutional barriers and resistance to novel solutions, another key to success involves deeper understanding of the reasons for mistrust of new technologies, and coping with the politicization of science, complacency, and the erosion of trust (55, 56, 89, 115). Third, the lessons from this pandemic are applicable to other hazards and threats such as climate change, global warming, and cyberthreats, and larger, looming wicked problems and catastrophes. Transportation planners play a prominent role in responding to, preparing for, mitigating, and recovery from disasters, but increasingly need to lead deeper transformative action across and within society to challenge the status quo and legacy systems of “business as usual.”

More attention to recovery from the pandemic is needed. The pace and extent of recovery, as well as the metrics for success, especially for transportation systems, need further work. More comparative research across modalities, systems, and user groups is needed. Unlike other disasters where the physical infrastructure and facilities may have been damaged, the pandemic has directly affected lives, health, and livelihoods. A human-centered approach to recovery is needed, with greater caring and helping in society (94, 95). Instead of focusing only on the roads, vehicles, and technologies, more attention to the people served by these systems and their needs and conditions will support recovery and resilience. Universal alleviation of pain and suffering is part of larger, necessary, difficult transformations in society. Transportation planners are uniquely positioned to support these changes that bring diverse members of society together for collaborative improvements that go beyond “bouncing back.”

Conclusions

While this list of concerns and takeaways is not exhaustive and might have been influenced by the isolation and social distancing caused by the pandemic, it is hoped that others will add to, re-organize, and improve deliberation of lessons learned and implications for action and increased resiliency. Many of the issues in this paper, including the need for improved equity, governance, sustainability, and resilience, have been also identified in the recent publication by the National Academies entitled “COVID-19 Addendum to Critical Issues in Transportation” ( 116 ). There is a need for deeper and more widespread engagement with these issues in the research community to support transformation and increased resilience. The pandemic has demonstrated the steep challenges faced and has reinforced the centrality of transportation in the spread and containment of infectious disease. Because of the urgency of the crises caused by the pandemic, one of the challenges involves marshaling attention and resources to address the longer-term threats of climate change, deferred infrastructure maintenance, and investment in education, training, and workforce development. While there are powerful forces unleashed by urbanization, globalization, and new technologies that channel movements of people, goods, services, and ideas, deep concerns persist over not just public safety and human security, but also social justice and more effective governance of our global commons.