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.

Data has been collected between 13 March and 9 July 2020. Information for 6 per cent of the PoEs has been updated in July, with 36 per cent of the PoEs updated in June, while 24 per cent of the data was last updated during the month of May and 17 per cent of PoE data was last updated in April. The remaining data (16%) was last updated in March.

Points of Entry (PoEs):

• 3,528 PoEs were assessed in 169 C/T/As, including 758 Airports, 2,157 Land Border Crossing Points and 613 Blue Border Crossing Points.

• Overall, 33 per cent of the assessed PoE were fully closed (-1 p.p. compared to the previous report), 33 per cent partially operational (-2 p.p.) and 28 per cent fully operational (+4 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%, no relative change on a fortnightly basis), followed by South America (54%, i.e. a 1 p.p. increase compared to two weeks ago) and Southern Africa (48%, no relative change);

o  The European Economic Area was the IOM Region with the highest percentage of fully operational PoEs (71%, i.e. an 11

1. increase compared to the previous report), followed by South-Eastern Europe, Eastern Europe and Central Asia (40%, i.e. a 5 p.p. increase on a fortnightly basis);

• 39 per cent of the assessed land border crossing points globally were fully closed, while this percentage was respectively 26 and 23 for airports and blue border crossing points, with a fortnightly decrease for land border crossing points and airports (- 2 p.p. for both PoE types) and a slight increase for blue border crossing points (+ 2 p.p.);

• The share of fully operational PoEs significantly increased for airports (38%, i.e. a 9 p.p. increase compared to the previous report) and blue border crossing points (25%, i.e. a 7 p.p. fortnightly increase), with a less marked increase for land border crossings points (25%, i.e. a 1 p.p. increase compared to two weeks ago).

• Mobility restrictions on arriving to or departing from the assessed PoEs were the most adopted restrictive measures in all the types of PoE (around 65% of the assessed PoEs), followed by medical requirements (more than 30% in all PoE types with a peak of 51% for airports).

• The most common expected duration of the restrictive measures adopted in the assessed PoEs was 14 days to one month (33% of the cases for airports), however the foreseen duration of these restrictive measures was unknown for 51 and 46 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.

---

IOM COVID-19 Impact on Points of Entry Weekly Analysis is meant to serve IOM Member States, IOM, UN and voluntary partner agencies, the civil society (including media) as well as the general population in analysing the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on Points of Entry. It is particularly relevant when identifying and addressing specific needs faced by migrants and mobile populations, disproportionately affected by the global mobility restrictions.

 

The report is based on information provided by IOM field staff, using resources available at the IOM country office level and is accurate to the best of IOM’s knowledge at the time of compilation. All information is being constantly validated, including the geolocation and attributes, and through regular assessments and triangulation of information. The updates depend on the time frame within which the information becomes available and is processed by IOM. For this reason, the analysis is always dated and timestamped in order to reflect the reality at a given time. However, as the situation continuously evolves and changes, despite IOM’s best efforts, the analysis may not always accurately reflect the multiple and simultaneous restrictive measures being imposed at a specific location.

---

Please read the complete report below.