This analysis examines distance equivalence impacts on public health and mobility in Chinese cities, suggesting effective policy strategies.
Travel policies during crises strongly reshape mobility patterns, raising the challenge of protecting public health while minimizing socio-economic disruption—an essential concern for sustainable development. Most evaluations quantify changes in travel volume, which hampers cross-city comparison and policy monitoring. This study proposes a distance-based sustainability metric—distance equivalence (DE)—that translates policy-induced mobility frictions into interpretable “added distance” within a gravity framework, enabling consistent measurement and monitoring of policy impacts. Using inter-city flows for 358 Chinese cities during the Stay-in-Place for Lunar New Year (SIP) guidance, we map DE, test spatial dependence (Moran’s I; LISA), and apply fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to identify city-level configurations associated with high DE. DE exhibits significant spatial clustering, concentrating east of the Hu line, where dense urban networks amplify advisory checks. Three recurrent configurations—combining case counts, health-care capacity (hospital beds), and average inter-city distance—are linked to high DE. As a sustainability assessment tool, DE supports adaptive management, region-differentiated strategies, and ex-ante risk assessment for governments, public-health authorities, and transport agencies. The framework generalizes to short-term mobility interventions under crisis conditions, advancing the quantification of policy impacts on sustainable mobility and urban resilience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: