S - . Review of Economic Perspectives - Národohospodářský obzor
Vol. 21, Issue 1,2021, pp. 57-78, DOI: 10.2478/revecp-2021 -0004
Transport in times of an epidemic: public transport
measures in the Czech Republic and its regions
Martin Vrana, Simona Surmafova, Petr Hlisnikovsky, Jifi Dujka1
Abstract: In the first half of 2020, the global pandemic of the COVID-19 virus became
a phenomenon affecting all spheres of human life. Measures against the spread of the
virus have led to restrictions in life in public spaces and have also affected the transport
sector. These impacts consisted of two types - firstly, the number of connections was
reduced due to a drop in transport demand, and secondly, it was necessary to comply with
hygiene measures on the part of carriers and passengers. The impacts of these measures
could be monitored at all spatial levels, from global to local. This paper deals with the
course of the so-called first wave of the pandemic in the Czech Republic in relation to
public transport and its organization. The aim of the paper is to provide an overview of
these measures in relation to general government regulations and their subsequent
implementation at the national, regional (county) and local (selected large cities) level.
Furthermore, the paper uses three case studies to show what changes long-distance
domestic transport has undergone on selected routes. There was a significant reduction in
the number of long-distance connections, some lines were not operated at all, and of
course, all cross-border connections were canceled. The paper covers the period from the
turn of February and March 2020, when the measures began to take effect, to the end of
May 2020, when almost all the adopted measures were gradually relaxed. The paper
concludes with a summary of the basic features of the organization of transport during
the validity of the special measures, as well as areas where significant changes took place
and whose consequences may persist afterthe pandemic subsides.
Keywords: COVID-19, epidemic, public health, public transport, restrictions, soft
measures
JEL Classification: R40, R41,118
Received: 6 October 2020 / Accepted: 21 December 2020 / Sentfor Publication: 16 March 2021
Introduction
The viral pandemic of coronavirus labeled COVID-19 became a significant global
phenomenon in the 1 st half of 2020. Its impact on humanhealth, society and the economy
is often compared to the pandemic of the so-called Spanish flu from the first half of the
20th century. In most countries of the world, measures have been put in place to prevent
the spread of the disease and reduce the number of victims. The free permeability of state
1
Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Administration, Masaryk University,
Brno, Czech Republic, vrana.martin@mail.muni.cz, simona.surmarova@gmail.com,
petr.hlisnikovsky@mail.muni.cz, jiri.dujka@mail.muni.cz
©2021 by the authors; licensee Review of Economic Perspectives/Národohospodářský obzor, Masaryk University, Faculty
of Economics and Administration, Brno, Czech Republic. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms
and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license, Attribution- N on Commercial - No Derivatives.
Review of Economic Perspectives
borders has been restricted and the complete closure of individual countries has often
been carried out. These measures consist mainly in various degrees of spatial or social
isolation, preventing in particular the concentration of a large number of people. There
were closures of services, stores, shopping malls, the cancellation of sports, cultural and
social events, and to a lesser extent also the reduction of industry.
In the Czech Republic, everyday life was also significantly affected in the form in which
it functioned during the first two months of 2020. The aim of this paper is to present and
describe the measures by which public transport in particular was restricted during the
coronavirus pandemic in Czechia. The article focuses mainly on passenger bus and rail
transport at the national level and at the level of individual regions (administrative and
self-governing units). This division reflects the way in which public transport is organized
in the Czech Republic, where regional public transport (rail and road) is ordered and
operated within individual regions (NUTS 3). Long-distance rail transport on selected
backbone lines is organized by the state (Ministry of Transport), long-distance bus
transport in Czechia is handled exclusively by private carriers without conceptual
coordination. Measures regulating the operation of urban public transport in the largest
cities of the country are also outlined. Due to the high interconnectedness of individual
regional levels (state - region - micro-region - city), these measures were usually similar.
The second part of the article presents three case studies concerning long-distance rail
and bus transport. These studies are based on the analysis of the number of connections
during the pandemic measures and their comparison with the state according to the
standard timetable. In railway transport, the operation of the state carrier České dráhy is
compared with the operation of two private carriers, RegioJet, which also operates longdistance
bus transport, and Leo Express, on the busiest railway line in the country, Prague Ostrava.
In bus transport, the approaches of the two majority long-distance bus carriers,
the Czech company RegioJet and the international group FlixBus, were compared, and
on selected lines also carriers specializing primarily in regional transport.
The article is not focused on thorough analyses of the situation and the possible impacts
of the measures. A global pandemic of this nature is unique at the current stage of global
civilization and is still ongoing, although emergency measures are being eased up (the
situation in May 2020, when this article was written). It is, therefore, only possible to
draw partial conclusions based on the description of the measure and the cross-sectional
partial analysis rather than trying to address the whole problem. Road and rail freight
transport was also not included in the analyzes.
Public transportation under the epidemic influence
The proper functioning of transport is a combination of quality assurance of the relevant
infrastructure built for individual transport modes and suitable conditions for their
operation. The safety and smoothness of traffic consist primarily in complying with traffic
rules and trying to maintain normal traffic without the occurrence of emergencies.
However, there are unavoidable events. The ability of transportation systems to cope with
these emergencies is discussed in the literature through the concepts of vulnerability
(Mattson, Jenelius, 2015; Mitsakis et al., 2014), survivability (Mattson, Jenelius, 2015)
and resilience (Woodburn, 2019; Mattson, Jenelius, 2015; Tamvakis, Xenidis, 2012).
Rather, these concepts address their ability to overcome physical disruption and the
58
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
difficulty of rebuilding the system (Mattson, Jenelius, 2015). It is not entirely clear
whether these concepts can also be applied to transport restrictions during the corona virus
epidemic, because it is a limitation on a scale that modern society has not experienced
before, and a reason that has never been the cause of such extensive transport changes.
Most disasters have direct destructive effects on infrastructure or create conditions in
which material damage and life-threatening danger can occur in the form of traffic
accidents or incidents. Such disruptions to the transport network lead to outages in the
supply chain and it is necessary to look for alternative routes or ways to ensure the
transport of goods (Kleindorfer, Saad, 2005) and people.
Emergencies are usually divided according to their origin into natural (earthquakes,
hurricanes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, snowstorms, etc.) and man-made (traffic
accidents, riots, political instability, terrorism). However, some may be of both origins
(floods, fires, or epidemics/pandemics) (Kleindorfer, Saad, 2005; Tansel, 1995). Other
divisions define, for example, the probability of their occurrence (Taniguchi, Thompson,
Yamada, 2010; Tansel, 1995) or a scale of the range (Tansel, 1995). If we focus on the
relationship between transport emergencies and the scope, we find that most of these
events are local or regional in scope. The literature deals mainly with their influence on
transport infrastructure (Huibregtse et al., 2016; Dalziell, Nicholson, 2001; Pregnolato et
al., 2017; Taniguchi, Thompson, Yamada, 2010) or changes in passenger transport
behavior (Kvizda, Seidenglanz, 2014). With an increasing scale, the number of cases is
declining and disasters on a global scale are rare in history, especially epidemics (plague,
cholera, Spanish and bird flu, SARS, etc.). However, their frequency is still increasing in
modern history (Tatem, Rogers, Hay, 2006). The gradual development of transcontinental
modes of transport (sea, rail, air), bringing the world together, and accelerating the
transport of goods and people are helping to spread national epidemics to other countries,
which may turn into globalpandemics. The ability to expand or the way it spreads through
space can be anotherway of dividing emergencies.
Epidemics are unique among emergencies in that they do not cause material damage to
infrastructure, but in the context of the supply chain, affect its safe provision by
"attacking" the health of people (the workforce) without which it cannot function. Finding
and securing alternatives is organizationally difficult because public transport is one of
the exposed places to spread the virus in society. In the case of epidemics, transport
measures are partly a voluntary and partly necessary decision of the competent authorities
to serve as a tool to address the further spread of the epidemic.
The coronavirus epidemic in 2002,known as SARS, was the first similar epidemic in the
21st century. It is thus a good example of a comparison of transport behavior and
measures implemented during a corona virus epidemic. Air transport is considered
essential for its worldwide expansion (Cherry, Krogstad, 2004). It was recorded in a total
of 32 countries, but only in 6 of them were more than 50 cases identified in the end (WHO,
2003). However, the outbreak elicited a response at the international level. Countries
restricted entry to citizens of countries with outbreaks, flights were canceled, special
travel visas were introduced or measures against the temporary return to these countries
for foreign workers and students (Teo, Yeoh, Ong, 2005). Teo, Yeoh and Ong (2005)
describe the situation inside Singapore during this epidemic and emphasize the general
need to act responsibly as crucial in combating the spread of the epidemic. In the area of
transport, all entrances to Singapore were equipped with temperature scanners, and people
59
Review of Economic Perspectives
with fever had to remain in quarantine for 14 days. Public places, including public
transport, were subject to the obligation to wear a mask (not observed due to temperatuie)
and were also disinfected more often. Fear of infection led to a decrease in the number of
both TAXI and public transport passengers (Teo, Yeoh, Ong, 2005). Wang (2014)
describes a change in behavior and a decrease in the daily number of passengers in Taipei,
Taiwan, using the example of the backbone subway system, where at the time of the
culmination, there was up to a 50% loss of passengers compared to the usual state in the
given annual period. The gradual return of passengers showed a slower course than the
previous decrease. However, other special measures in transport were not introduced.
Assuming that the epidemic is spreading through human-to-human transmission, it is
logical in transport that long-distance public transport lines, especially airlines, are today
the fastest way to spread the virus between continents and countries. At the nationaland
regional levels, these are the busiest transport lines. Not only the means of transport
themselves, but also the transport terminals are risky places of transmission. In a means
of transport, the risk of transmission lies in the length of time spent with the infected
person, in transport terminals in the totalnumber of passengers present and an increased
possibility of contact with potentially infected persons (Xu, McCluskey, Cressman,
2013). The effective halting of the spread of the epidemic in transport depends above all
on understanding the principles of the spread of the virus (Mangili, Gendreau, 2005;
Morawska,Cao,2020) and the behavior of society during danger(Moussaid,2013). The
interconnection of these two areas leads to the introduction of measures aimed atreducing
the likelihood of transmission during the use of public transport and related transport
infrastructure to create suitable conditions for the renewal of the supply chain through the
safe transport of labor. Despite the protocols on the protection of the world environment
and the global scale of the spread of the disease, there is no worldwide uniform procedure
for dealing with an epidemic/pandemic (Teo, Yeoh, Ong, 2005). Although the affected
countries think in a global context, they address their situation individually and implement
their own rules and measures to reduce the risk of transmission in transport and to ensure
the safe functioning of the supply chain.
Methods of research
During the preparation of chapters "State measures on public transport" and "Measures
in public transport implemented in the regions of the Czech Republic", an extensive
search was carried out on the official websites of state administration bodies, regional
self-governments and their companies organizing transport, as well as the websites of
private carriers. At the state level, a summary of implemented measures and their
chronological sequence was prepared, for which data were drawn mainly from official
records of resolutions of the Government of the Czech Republic and the Ministry of
Health as the main bodies in managing pandemic situations. At the regional level, data is
obtained through a quantitative desk research, where the main sources were the websites
of regional authorities or companies established by the region (managing integrated
transport systems). Important sources were also the websites of individual carriers, i.e.,
public transport operators.
Based on the publicly published information on this website, a list of measures
implemented in connection with COVID-19 was created and it was quantified in which
60
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
regions these measures were implemented and when. In many cases, the regions did not
provide information about the exact date of the introduction of individual measures.
Therefore, the resulting table (Table 1) does not contain this data. Differences in terms of
the measures were demonstrated by the timelines (Figure 1). The resulting list was
verified by individual regional authorities or companies, which had the opportunity to
supplement it with information that was not published on the website, or had already been
deleted by the time the site was surveyed. The capital city of Prague and the Mora vianSilesian
Region only referred to the websites for data verification. The websites are
managed in different ways. On some, new information on COVID-19 was published
through the common system of current news and traceable in the news archive. Other
sites have created a special section dedicated only to current transport restrictions, which
is gradually updated and does not contain information from the past.
The chapter "The effect of epidemic on transregionalpublic connections" is the case study
focused on the analysis of the change in the number of provided connections in two -way
traffic, on selected train and bus lines, before and after the introduction of emergency
measures. A common feature of all analyzed lines is the fact that more carriers are
involved in providing transport. The data is drawn from the timetables that were available
on the websites of individual carriers, or from the timetables on the IDOS websites.
Wednesday (representative of working days) and Saturday (weekend) were chosen as the
analyzed days.
The Prague - Ostrava line was chosen for the analysis of train connections, which provides
an important connection between Prague and Northern Moravia and Silesia. The line is
part of the second and third railway corridors and can currently be considered one of the
railway arteries in the country.
Three routes were selected for the analysis of long-distance bus transport: Prague - Brno,
Prague - Liberec and Brno - Kromefiz. The Prague - Brno route is a connection of the two
largest cities in the Czech Republic, with the fastest long-distance connections being run
almost exclusively along the main highway D l and there is no direct competition with
the railway (the railway between these cities is routed elsewhere). The Prague - Liberec
route represents a connection of national importance between the capital and metropolitan
city, with the fastest long-distance connections being operated mainly along the D10 and
D35 highways, and there is no comparably high-quality and fast railway connection to it.
The Brno - Kromefiz route is a connection between a metropolitan city and a town of
regional importance, with the fastest connections being operated on the D l motorway,
without a comparable railway alternative. However, parallel off-highway connections,
serving cities and towns along the route, also play an important role on this route.
State measures on public transport
The effect of the COVID-19 coronavirus on transport in the Czech Republic first
manifested itself in international transport. The set of the following measures was aimed
at preventing the uncontrolled infiltration and spread of coronavirus from across the state
border in Czechia. The basis for most of the resolutions adopted is the declaration of a
state of emergency on 12 March (Gov-CZ, 2020a) and its gradual prolongation, which
has made it possible to quickly take additional restrictive and relaxing measures in
connection with the disease.
61
Review of Economic Perspectives
Although the first three cases of coronavirus infection in Czechia were confirmed on 1
March (MZČR, 2020a), the first manifestation of transport restrictions was a resolution
adopted on 3 February with effect from 9 February, when the government issued a ban
on all flights to China, i.e., 12 connections per week (MZČR, 2020b; ČTK, 2020). A
reduction in other direct flights to/from countries that were the main sources of potential
coronavirus infection at the time, namely South Korea and Italy followed on March 5
(MZCR, 2020c; M Z C R , 2020d). A turning point in international air transport was the
adoption of Government Resolution No. 197 of 12 March, which, with effect from 14
March, meant the temporary reintroduction of internal air border protection, with the
exception of Václav Havel International Airport in Prague and Kbely Military Airport
(Gov-CZ, 2020b) and Resolution No. 198, which prohibits the entry of all foreigners from
countries identified by the Ministry of the Interior of the Czech Republic as high-risk.
The list of these states has been and still is being gradually updated. This resolution also
completely suspends the processing (with approved exceptions) of international visas for
entry (Gov-CZ, 2020c). These steps, together with the restriction of the free movement
of citizens of the Czech Republic (Gov-CZ, 2020d), and thus their travel, had the direct
effect of reducing demand and gradually reducing the total number of flights from/to
countries outside the list of high-risk countries. The only routes in operation for the whole
period remained air services to Sofia (Bulgaria) and Minsk (Belarus) (Prague Airport,
2020).
Simultaneously with the adoption of air border control, the land border control with
Austria and Germany was reintroduced despite the Schengen area (Gov-CZ, 2020b) and
with effect from 15 March this protection was extended to the borders with other states
neighboring Czechia, i.e., Slovakia and Poland (Gov-CZ, 2020e). All legal movement
across the stateborderwas thus limited to selected border crossings. These measures were
followed by a resolution of the Government of the Czech Republic adopted with effect
from 14 March, banning all carriers in internationalroadpassengertransport provided by
vehicles with a capacity of more than nine persons from carrying passengers across the
borders of the country. Similarly, the resolution included a ban on all carriers in
internationalrailpassenger transport as well as in cross-border inland waterway passenger
transport (Gov-CZ, 2020f). The aim of the restriction was to abolish all international
public transport connections to/from the Czech Republic and thus gain greater control
over the movement of people, especially when entering the country. Each person crossing
the state border towards the country had to prove himself with a negative virus test or stay
in domestic quarantine for 14 days. Thanks to these measures, individual car transport
has become the only option for internationalcommuters,i.e., citizens going to work in a
neighboring state on a daily basis for work. However, these persons are subject to other
measures restricting their free movement upon return to the country (Gov-CZ, 2020g).
Restrictions in internationaltransportandthe closure of the stateborder were, therefore,
the first to affect transport in the Czech Republic. The abolition of international pub lie
transport connections (excluding direct services) has also affected domestic transport on
certain routes. In domestic public transport, on 18 March the Czech government directly
restricted only those connections which are organized and financed by the state. These
are long-distance railway connections operated by the state carrier České dráhy a.s. (GovCZ,
2020h; Gov-CZ, 2020i). Other long-distance bus and rail connections operated by
private companies were not affected by this restriction. Limiting the number of
connections by private carriers was a decision based on their own economic strategy.
62
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
As mentioned above, the organization of domestic transport in the country is the
responsibility of regional governments in particular and is provided by regional
organizations that are transport organizers of both road and rail regional transport
connections. This is the reason why the role of the state is rather a framework-based on
when implementing measures in regional transport. The Government of the Czech
Republic adopted general resolutions, which set the main goal of preventing the overall
spread of the virus in society. It also affected national transport. In particular, it is
Resolution No. 215 of 15 March, which, with effect from 16 March, prohibits, with
certain exceptions, the free movement of persons throughout Czechia and orders persons
residing in the country to restrict movement in publicly accessible places to the period
necessary, to remain at their place of residence and to limit contacts with other persons to
what is strictly necessary. This fundamental resolution had a significant impact, in
particular, on the restriction of leisure travel (Gov-CZ, 2020g; Gov-CZ, 2020d). The two
resolutions adopted on 18 March are of a hygienic nature with the clear aim of preventing
the spread of the virus in areas of frequent occurrence and circulation of persons. The first
prohibits all persons from moving and staying in all places away from home, without
respiratory protective equipment (nose, mouth) such as a mask, scarf, shawl or other
means (Gov-CZ, 2020g) and the second resolution recommends all public transport
operators to disinfect places which people often touch (especially doorhandles, handrails,
door controls, handgrips, seat backs), at least after each ride (Gov-CZ, 2020j). On March
30, a government resolution was issued imposing further restrictions on state-ordered
connections, together with adjusting the method of selling tickets, transport and
reservation documents in national transport so as to limit direct contact between
passengers and employees of the carrier as much as possible. These same procedures were
also recommended to the management of all regional self-governments to meet the
current reduced passenger demand forpublic transport services (Gov-CZ, 2020k).
Following the general provisions, it can be stated that in addition to the forced restriction
of international transport, the measures taken after the state of emergency on March 12
are a market response to restrictions on free movement and that the state only minimally
interferes with transport clients and carriers in deciding what restrictions to introduce in
transport. However, both municipalities and carriers must act in accordance with the
generally adopted provisions.
Measures in public transport implemented in the regions of the Czech Republic
At the level of NUTS 3 regions and cities, the measures introduced largely follow upon
nationalregulations. Most of the resolutions had a direct impact on the operation of public
transport, whether it was a resolution restricting the free movement of persons, wearing
protective equipment or disinfecting transport means. However, regions and individual
carriers were able to approach these resolutions individually, which is why in many cases
the government's resolution is supported by a decree of the governors of individual
regions.
A number of carriers and transport companies also introduced various measures, which
were an extension of the general conditions set by the regional self-government. As a
result, we have registered a totalof 30 different soft measures taken in various regions to
slow down the spread of COVID-19 in public transport.
63
Review of Economic Perspectives
The introduced measures could be divided into six subgroups, which can, however,
intersect (see Table 1). The first group includes the prevention of the physical spread
of the virus, i.e., procedures to increase hygiene. This involves travelling only with the
mouth and nose covered, which relies on the responsibility of passengers to comply with
this rule. Other measures in this category may be applied by the carrier. These include
increased disinfection of cars, disinfection of ticket vending machines, placement of
disinfection dispensers, especially in railway stations or vehicles, ventilation of vehicles
at final stops, automatic stopping at all stops (even with signaling), automatic door
opening and prohibition of using the STOP button. The latter three measures seek to
reduce the physical contact of passengers with the parts of the vehicles that are used
frequently and are therefore more likely to transmit the infection. The last measure in this
category is the provision of protective equipment to carriers from the region. The regions
provided the carriers directly with masks, shields, disinfection, or other aids or
contributed financially. The carriers then distributed them to drivers and other personnel
who come into contact with the public.
The second identified purpose is the protection of personnel employed in the public
transport sector. In connection with the COVID-19 infection, there was a decrease in the
workforce in a number of companies for several reasons. One was the ordered 14-day
quarantine after contact with a sick person. The second important reason was also the
closure of schools (MZCR, 2020e), which forced many employees to leave the workplace
temporarily due to childcare. Parents of children under the age of 13 are entitled to
financial compensation from the state, the so-called nursing allowance (MPSV, 2020). In
order to avoid excessive staff losses and to make public transport operational, a ban on
entry through the front door in buses was introduced and a front protection area for
drivers was established, i.e. it was forbidden to sit in the seats in the row behind the driver.
Other measures below could also be seen asprotection of staff, in particular those related
to the cancellation of passengercheck-in.
Another category of restrictions imposed was the closure of premises and restrictions
on physical contact, both between passengers and staff but also between passengers
themselves. These included closing or changing the opening hours of some carriers'
counters, restricting the operation of toilets in stations and closing contact and
information points, which are mainly used to purchase subscription tickets and cards.
Due to the fact that the greatest contact, and thus the potential spread of the virus, occurs
in public transport during physical contact, a number of fare-related measures were
introduced to prevent or minimize such contact (handing over tickets, cash, etc.) One of
the most important measures was the abolition of check-in by train attendants and the
abolition of driver check-in on buses on regional routes. Thanks to this, in systems where
no other method of paying the fare was introduced, there was also the provision of free
transport, which was often not directly advertised by carriers, although these situations
occurred in practice. At the same time, check-in by the check-in device (e.g., automatic
machine) at the front door was canceled. Carriers encouraged passengers to purchase
travel documents online using a website or application. In transport means where the fare
was not canceled, only visual inspection of the tickets was introduced. The finances also
related to the compensation of unused fares, where the validity of documents was
extended or the possibility of returning unused fares, for example due to the cancellation
of used connections.
64
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
One of themost important groups of measures in terms of public transport operation was
the reduction of connections. This occurred mainly due to a reduction in demand for
public transport, which was caused by the possibility of working from home, as well as
the abolition of contact teaching at all types of schools, orby limiting a number of services
throughout the country. Last but not least, public transport has also become a place where
more people are present at one time, and thus, compared to individual transport, it has
become riskier. There was a reduction in connections for bus and train lines as well as
for urban public transport connections. A special case of the reduction of connections was
the ban on transport to isolated municipalities, which mainly concerned the Olomouc
Region, where several municipalities were closed, the first three of which were Uničov,
Červenka and Litovel. Apart from the Olomouc Region, this also concerned one
municipality in the Vysočina Region. The connections only passed through the
municipalities without stopping, or they went around them completely. As a result of the
reduction of connections in railway transport, the number of passenger trains were
reduced. However, to ensure the serviceability of some settlements, there were also cases
where express trains stopped at more stops than specified in the original timetables.
The last group of introduced measures is the restriction of above-standard /
recreational transport. Locally, the operation of cycle buses was suspended and the
operation of ski buses was terminated earlier. At the same time, the operation of historical
and tourist lines of trains, trams, cable cars and shipping was not started or was canceled.
However, these measures were implemented at a relatively low frequency.
Table. 1. Measures introduced against COVID-19 in public transport at the regional level in
the Czech Republic in March and April 2020
eo o ._ o
- ö S ? S? cn c .2 cu'
I I I S I * & 11 I i P i % I *
^ O o 3 0£ -ro O) r r F t ; tz > — •—
MEASURE
o ö o * 5
v) o w ^
<
i—
o
1
2
3
4
5
Travelling only with a covered
nose and mouth / / / / / / / / / / / / / N /
Increased disinfection of
vehicles / / / / / / / / / / 7 7
Disinfection of vending
machines 7
Placement of disinfectant
dispensers 7 7 7 7 7 7
Ventilation of vehicles at final
stops V V V
6 Automatic stopping at all stops 7 7 7 7 7 7
7 Automatic dooropening 7 7 7 7
8 Ban on using the STOPbutton 7 7 7
14
12
1
6
3
6
4
3
65
Review of Economic Perspectives
Provision of protective
9 equipment to carriers from the
region
• y y y y y y y y y y 11
10
Ban on entry through thefront
0
10
doorof the bus • y y y y y y y y y y y y y 14
z.
11
Front protection area for
drivers y y y y y y y y y y y y y 13
12 Closing some carrier counters y y y y y y 6
13
Changing the hoursof some
13
carrier counters y y y y y y y y 8
14
15
Changing the opening hoursof
3.
14
15
some waiting rooms
Restricting the operation of
bathrooms at stations
y
y
y y
y
y
y
y
y
5
4
16
Closure of contact and
16
information points y y y y y y y y 8
17
Cancellation of check-in by
17
train attendants y y y y y y y y y y y y 12
18
Cancellation of check-in by
18
drivers y y y y y y y y y y y y y 13
19
Cancellation of check-in by
19
check-in device y y y y y y y y y y 10
4.
20
Inspection of ticketsdoneonly
visually y y y y y y 6
21
Recommendation to pay by
21
card orvia an application y y y y y y y y y y 10
22 Free transport provision y y y y y y y 7
23
Compensation for unused
23
fares y y y y y 5
24
Bus lines-reduced
24
connections y y y y y y y y y y y y y y 14
25
Train lines - reduced
c
25
connections y y y y y y y y y y y y y y 14
0.
26
27
CD express trains stop at mote
stops
Ban on transport to isolated
municipalities y
y 1
1
28
Suspensionof the operation of
cycle buses y y y y y y y 7
c 29
30
Termination of the operationof
0. 29
30
ski buses
Not starting/cancelling of
historic (tourist) lines
y
y
y
y y y y
2
5
TOTAL
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
0
1
9
1
8
1
7
1
7
1
7
1
5
1
1 9 9 9
22
5
Source: Own research based on the official website of the NUTS 3 regions of the Czech Republic,
integrated public transport systems and carriers
Note: The individual bars in the table indicate the different categories mentioned in the text above.
66
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
The measures introduced against the spread of COVID-19 in public transport are
summarized in Table 1. For each region, there is a column in the table that indicates
whether the measure has been implemented. The measures are sorted according to the
groups defined above, while the regions are sorted according to the number of
implemented measures. In addition to the regional level, we also monitored the city level,
which is not included in the table. As the city level is dedicated to the introduction of
measures in urban public transport, primarily regional cities are taken into account, but
actions in public transport of smaller cities have also been adopted.
The table shows that the activities related to COVID-19 were not broadly applied, with
some exceptions, and did not occur in some regions. Only four measures were applied in
all regions. These include travel with only the mouth and nose covered, a ban on entry
through the front door of the bus and a reduction in the connections between bus and
train lines. Very often, there was also the creation of a front protection area for drivers,
the abolition of check-in by the driver and increased disinfection of cars. It therefore
mainly involved measures to prevent the physical spread of the virus, to protect personnel
and to reduce connections, which were unavoidable in all regions for the reasons
described above. At the level of urban public transport, the situation is similar, the most
frequently implemented measures concern the reduction of connections, travel with
covered airways, disinfection of cars and protection of staff, namely the abolition of driver
check-in and the ban on boarding through the front door.
The least implemented measures are cases that are mentioned rather individually in
different regions according to their specific situation, are of a recreational nature, or are
an extension of other more basic measures. For example, vehicle ventilation, a ban on the
use of the stop button or automatic door opening can be an extension of the more
widespread increased disinfection of vehicles. We can perceive, for example, the stopping
of express trains at more stops or a ban on transport to isolated municipalities as
localized events, because these municipalities were not located in the territory of all
regions. Measures such as the limited operation of ski buses or cycle buses are of a
recreational nature. The smaller number of their restrictions may also result from the fact
that not all regions operate these services.
In addition to the measures implemented at the regional level, other measures were also
identified that were implemented locally at the level of individual carriers or urban public
transport. In the case of urban public transport, for example, the operation of senior buses
was suspended. A significant numberof companies operating urban public transport also
started to reduce connections, similarly to the national and regional level. In particular,
connections providing transport to schools or Sunday services were limited. Individual
carriers also introduced some specific restrictions to combat the spread of the disease. An
example is the national carrier České Dráhy, which abolished seat reservations and
refreshments, reduced staff in cars and introduced the disinfection of stations, which also
added information boards and leaflets with recommended procedures for people returning
from areas affected by COVID-19.
In addition to the frequency of implementation of certain measures, the dates of their
implementation also differ in individual regions. To demonstrate the significant
differences, sample timelines of three measures implemented between 10,15, and 22 days
were created (see Figure 1). These measures were selected as they were presented in more
67
Review of Economic Perspectives
than 12 regions, and at the same time, the speed of their implementation varies
considerably. It is noticeable on the diagram that some regions reacted very quickly to
one type of measure and reacted to others only later. However, it should be noted that the
high speed of implementation of measures does not always coincide with the provision
of the best services. For example, the later the regions reduced routes, the longer they
tried to maintain a high quality of service for their passengers.
Figure 1. Timelines of selected measures introduced in the regions of the Czech Republic,
2020.
entrance via front bus door forbiden
Central Bohemian
South Bohemian
Olomouc
Prague 16/3 vysočina 1S/3 Hradec Králové 24/3 South Moravian
IS/3 Pfzeft
Karlovy vafy
übe ret
Moravian-Silesia n
17/3 f ' d l í l l j I j I L O
/ l i r
19/3 Usii nad Labern dale
unknown
reduction of bus line connections
South Moravian 13/3 Liberec 16/3
South Bohemian
PlřEřň
/Im 26i 3
Prague
Moravian-Silesia n
12/3 Pardubice
Olomouc
15/3 Central Bohemian
Ústi nad Labem
Vysočina
Hr,j(ií-í - ; r , j 0 7 H -
13/3 KarlovyVary date
unknown
increased disinfection of vehicles
Moravia n-Silesian 6/3 Olomouc 16/3 Plřeň 23/3
South Bohemian
South Moravian
Liberec
Pardubice
Zlín
2/3 Prague 13/3 Hradec Králově 17/3 Central Bohemia date
ÚstinadLabern unknown
Source: Own research based on the official website of the regions of the Czech Republic, individual
integrated public transport systems and carriers.
Apart from the diagram, there is also a specialcase of the introduction of a covered airway
travel order, which all regions accepted within only four days (March 16-19). However,
this measure is based on the national government resolution No. 247, which, effective
from March 19, prohibits all persons from moving and staying in all places outside their
place of residence without protective respiratory equipment (Gov-CZ, 2020g). Therefore,
68
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
if the regions and carriers did not introduce this measure by March 19, it would apply to
their passengers even without their direct order.
At the same time, it is worth mentioning that some regions introduced measures in
advance of govemmentregulations. As the regions are transport organizers, they have the
opportunity to react flexibly to an unfolding situation. For similar reasons, the
administration of some integrated transport systems also reacted earlier than the regions
themselves.
Thus, it can be said that although individual regions have chosen different approaches
and often different measures in the fight against COVID-19, all regions have sought to
effectively protect passengers and employees in transport companies. The total number
of measures in place varies considerably between regions. However, different regions
informed about changes in transport in different ways. On the websites of regions and
their integrated transport systems, there is often a continuous deletion of news and the
display of only currently valid information, which could affect the absolute number of
implemented measures. However, in order to avoid these fluctuations, the regions were
contacted and asked to verify the data.
Our analysis shows that, within the Czech Republic, there are regions that were more
active in the application of measures than others. Liberec Region introduced the largest
number of measures, 22, Olomouc Region and Zlín Region followed with 21 measures,
each. A total of 20 measures were introduced by the Hradec Králové Region. These
regions have provided considerable protection to passengers and employees in operation.
It is evident that the administration of the regional transport departments, integrated
public transport systems, carriers and therefore also the founders of urban public transport
took the epidemiological situation seriously and did their utmost to minimize the spread
of the virus and at the same time maintain the functioning of public transport.
In the fight against COVID-19 in public transport, the regions of South Bohemian Region
(19 measures),Ústí Region (18 measures), CentralBohemia Region (17 measures),Pilsen
Region (17 measures) and South Moravian Region (17 measures) were active on an
average to above-average level. For these regions, one could describe a strategy that
introduces basic soft measures, similar to less active regions, butatthe sametime, there
are also measures that can be perceived as superstructure (e.g., compensation of unused
subscription fares; ventilation of vehicles at final connection stops) or relatively specific
(e.g., termination of ski bus operation).
We could rate the City of Prague (14 measures) and the Vysočina Region (11 measures)
as below average in their activity towards COVID-19. The Karlovy Vary Region, the
Moravian-Silesian Region and the Pardubice Region each applied only nine measures.
From the projection of the implemented measures of the three least active regions, it is
possible to identify the absolute necessary minimum that had to be introduced: travelling
only with a covered mouth and nose, no entry through the front door in the bus, front
protection area for drivers, cancellation of driver check-in and the reduction of bus and
train connections. It therefore involves a basic hygiene regulation, the protection of
personnel and the reduction of connections as a necessary consequence of lower demand
and sales.
69
Review of Economic Perspectives
The activity of regions in measures applying was very different, but the anti-covid effect
of every simple measure was not clear. The connection between the number of applied
measures and positive cases per capita in regions, until April 30, was not really proved.
In a short comparison between the most and least active regions, 0,056% of inhabitants
were infected in the Zlín region and 0,051% in the Pardubice region. Although the
difference between the number of applied measures is 12, the amount of positive cases
per capita is similar (MZČR, 2020a). On the one hand, it is a very simple way to verify
such relation. On the other hand, the infection does not spread equally or only in public
transport. That could be a great topic for another deeper analysis. The aim of this study
was to provide an overview about applied measures and to present a different regional
activity across the country.
The effector the epidemic on transregional public connections
Extraordinary measures related to the fight against the coronavirus epidemic are
manifested in public transport, mainly by a reduction in demand for it. Therefore, in
response to the reduction in demand, carriers reduced the number of connections on
individual domestic routes. This chapter discusses the extent to which the demand for
transport has decreased or the number of connections during the day has decreased. The
case study was performed on selected transport connections. Specifically, there was one
train line Prague - Ostrava and three long-distance bus lines Prague - Brno, Prague Liberec
and Brno - Kroměříž.
As we can see in Table 2, in the period before the emergency measures, a total of 62
connections traveled in both directions on working days between Prague and Ostrava.
However, after the introduction of individual government measures, the connections were
reduced to only 20 connections per day. In summary, we can talk about the cancellation
of more than 2/3 of all connections, with the most reductions being introduced by private
carriers. Leo Express was forced to reduce the number of connections by more than 80%.
From the original 12 connections, it then operated only 1 connection in each direction. In
addition, the connections were not operated at typical times of morning or afternoon
peaks, but at times when other carriers rather canceled their connections (departure at
10.04/14.08). This suggests that the numberof thosebeingtransportedflattenedout even
during rush hours. RegioJet limited traffic from the original 18 connections to only 4 of
them. With less than 78%, the percentage reduction in connections is close to the values
of Leo Express's competitors. České Dráhy has been forced to reduce the number of
connections by approximately 56%, which is significantly less than for private carriers.
The connections were interrupted throughout the day and it was mainly the fastest and
most luxurious layer of trains on the line - SuperCity Pendolino, which were completely
canceled. Thus, instead of an 80-minute interval, České Dráhy vehicles ran every two
hours. However, České Dráhy, unlike other carriers, runs a part of long-distance
connections on the basis of an order from the state (Ministry of Transport) within the
transport service of the territory, i.e., as a public obligation. Other carriers, which operate
only commercial connections, had to respond more to the decline in demand for transport.
70
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
Table 2. Number of direct train connections between Prague and Ostrava (in both direction)
Before quarantine During quarantine Preserved (%)
iany M a M v
'
Wednesday Saturday Wednesday Saturday Wednesday Saturday
České Dráhy 32 30 14 14 43.8 46.7
RegioJet 18 19 4 5 22.2 26.3
Leo Express 12 12 2 2 16.7 16.7
Total 62 61 20 21 32.3 34.4
Source: České dráhy (2017), REGIOJET (2020), Leo Express (2020), own calculation
The analysis of long-distance bus transport was performed in a similar way. There are
only three bus operators that specialize exclusively in long-distance bus services, namely
the domestic company RegioJet (formerly Student Agency), the international company
FlixBus and Arriva, predominantly owned by the German company Deutsche Bahn.
Long-distance transport in the Czech Republic is also operated on a smaller scale by
regional carriers, but this is an ad hoc connection of the region (district) with the relevant
facilities. For these connections, frequent maintenance was only in a partialroute or to a
limited extent,butdue to the specificity and fragmentation of this group of long-distance
connections, the changes were not analyzed in more detail here.
However, the response to emergency measures for long-distance bus operators varied
from route to route. An example is the carrier Student Agency, which did not restrict its
connections on the Prague - Liberec route as it did on the Prague - Brno route. Prior to
the measure, 16 connections were operated on the Prague - Brno line in each direction.
However, the connections were reduced to only 3, which represents a reduction in
connections of approximately 81%. The connections, which originally left the initial stop
almost every hour, ran only once every 5 to 6 hours at the time of the measure. The
reinforcements on Friday and Sunday connections for university students, who no longer
had to commute to school due to the established distance learning, were also canceled.
Table 3. Number of direct bus connections between Prague and Brno (in both direction)
Before quarantine During quarantine Preserved (%)
Wednesday Saturday Wednesday Saturday Wednesday Saturday
StudentAgency 32 32 6 6 18.8 18.8
Flixbus X X 0 0 0.0 0.0
Total 32 32 6 6 18.8 18.8
Source: CHAPS (2020), own calculation
Note: For FlixBus, pre-emergency measure timetables are not traceable
In contrast, on the Prague - Liberec route (see Table 4) in the period before the measures,
there were a total of 43 connections of various lines during working days, which were
reduced by only 28%. Afterwards, there were 31 connections a day on the line. Moreover,
in the case of this line, we cannot talk about a mere disruption of connections, as with the
Prague - Brno line, as there was often only a reduction in journeys within days of the
week. The connections that ran every day afterwards only ran on weekdays or only on
71
Review of Economic Perspectives
weekends. At the same time, this adjustment of timetables ensured that, in most cases,
two consecutive connections were in operation throughout the week. In practice, this
means that if the connection at 9:00 am was run only on working days, the connection at
10:00 am was run only on weekends. The German carrier FlixBus also operates transport
on both of the above-mentioned routes, but it has suspended all domestic services in the
Czech Republic.
Table 4. Number of direct bus connections between Prague and Liberec (in both direction)
Before quarantine During quarantine Preserved (%)
iany M a M v
'
Wednesday Saturday Wednesday Saturday Wednesday Saturday
StudentAgency 43 37 31 23 72.1 62.2
Flixbus X X 0 0 0.0 0.0
Total 43 37 31 23 72.1 62.2
Source: CHAPS (2020), own calculation
Note: For FlixBus, pre-emergency measure timetables are not traceable
Long-distance transport on the Brno - Kroměříž route is operated mainly by 3 carriers StudentAgency,
FlixBus and with a limited numberof connections also Arriva. AH three
carriers have decided to suspend all connections on a given line, and, in the case of
Student Agency, we can observe anotherof the approaches to responding to emergency
measures. Regional and long-distance regional transport (partly along the motorway,
partly off it) is operated by the carriers ČSAD Vsetín and Krodos. As we can see in Table
5, ČSAD Vsetín decided to cancel all connections on the given line. Krodos, which
provides passenger transport mainly on working days, canceled about 37% of its
connections. Mainly the connections outside the peak hours were disrupted. At the same
time, transport was suspended all the way to Brno itself, with all connections in this
direction starting/ending in Vyškov, which is a town about halfway alongthe route. Due
to the fact that the Brno - Vyškov section (and back) is usually ridden along the D l
motorway as a long-distance route, the remaining connections on the Kroměříž - Vyškov
route can be considered regional. In summary, connections between Brno and Kroměříž
were reduced by more than 72% on working days and by 92% on weekends.
Table 5. Number of bus connections between Brno and Kroměříž (in both directions)
Before quarantine During quarantine Preserved (%)
Company
Wednesday Saturday Wednesday Saturday Wednesday Saturday
StudentAgency 6 4 0 0 0.0 0.0
FlixBus X X 0 0 0.0 0.0
Arriva 14 14 0 0 0.0 0.0
Krodos 19 2 12 2 63.2 100.0
ČSAD Vsetín 4 4 0 0 0.0 0.0
Total 43 24 12 2 27.9 8.3
Source: CHAPS (2020), own calculation
Note: For FlixBus, pre-emergency measure timetables are not traceable.
72
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
Unlike rail transport, long-distance bus transport in Czechia is operated exclusively at the
risk of the carrier (with the exception of specific subsidies such as fares for schoolchildren
or seniors) andis notorderedby the Ministry of Transport. However, some long-distance
lines operating like non-express can be considered as regional thanks to their stop policy.
In such cases, the region (NUTS 3) subsidizes part of that line on its territory as a regional
service. Such subsidy could be a motivation for carriers to keep more operating
connections. Carriers without such a contract could react to the situation and proceed
more in economic terms. Cancellation of all FlixBus lines connections could be an
example of such an economic strategy during COVID-19 epidemic. Czech carrier Student
Agency chose a different strategy based on a friendly approach to customers and their
loyalty to keep reduced connections on some exclusive lines without any other carrier
despite no subsidies.
Conclusion
Compared to 2002, there is a clear difference between the consequences of the SARS and
COVID-19 epidemics. Although it is a similar type of infection, the strength of the two
epidemics is completely different. There were only 6 of 32 countries worldwide with
more than 50 cases during SARS in comparison with more than 120 countries over 10
000 cases during COVID-19. However, the research of measures was performed during
the first wave of the epidemic. Evidence of this may be the number and nature of measures
implemented in the organization of (public) transport.
Due to the nature of the organization of public transport in the Czech Republic, transport
measures were implemented mainly at the regional and local level. Nationwide
government measures created a framework that was implemented by individual regions
and subsequently required individual carriers. The measures differed only in details, such
as the extent (degree) of disinfection of vehicles or the date from which the measures
were introduced. Large cities also proceeded in a similar way within the scope of their
urban public transport.
Many measures in public transport were introduced in the country, which were felt mainly
by passengers, but also by transport companies, which had to make a number of
adjustments to normal transport. These were mainly actions aimed at preventing the
spread of the COVID-19 virus. A large number of restrictions were of a hygienic nature,
related to fares and changes in traffic, but the emphasis was also placed on the protection
of transport company personnel.
In response to these facts, connections on domestic and international routes were reduced.
The difference between the two levels is that while domestic routes were often restricted
due to insufficient demand, international routes encountered restrictions on the crossborder
movement of people.
The limited offer of connections was introduced for severalreasons. The main reason was
a reduction in demand - if possible, work from home was preferred, contact teaching was
abolished, services were limited and citizens were encouraged not to go out unless
absolutely necessary. The reduction in demand could also be linked to the fear of
infection, as public transport is used by more people than individual transport and is
therefore riskier. Transport companies thus had to start a viable operation from a financial
73
Review of Economic Perspectives
point of view, also because the number of available employees decreased due to the
COVID-19 pandemic.
Around Easter 2020, i.e., from the end of the first ten days of April, the gradu a1relaxa tbn
of the established measures began. At present, i.e., at the end of May 2020, the
organization of society has formally returned to almost the pre-pandemic state. There are
certain hygienic rules, such as the obligation to wear hygienic masks in certain places,
increased emphasis on hand disinfection, safety distances of people, etc. Similarly,
measures in transport were gradually relaxed and the number of connections increased to
the level before the introduction of emergency measures. At present, long-distance bus
connections and international land and air connections are limited, as the possibility of
cross-border movement has still not been fully restored.
The question is how the presence of an epidemic will influence public transportation in
the future. Even though it's not possible to estimate the next progress in travel behaviour,
we would like to give the matter a thought. The longer the pandemic lasts, the more people
could get accustomed to a way of life, which is linked to higher interaction in the online
environment. This could lead to less physicalinteraction and a smaller number of trips in
general. One could prefer an individual means of transportation at the expense of public
transport due to a smaller risk of infection. The potential return to public transportation
use can be possible through an increase of hygienic standards in comparison with the prepandemic
state, vaccine development and accomplishing absolute control over the
pandemic of COVID-19. The current pandemic situation is a warning for potential future
emergencies and we would like to think that the measures implemented during the first
wave of the COVID-19 epidemic will serve as an example of how to deal with them.
Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Mgr. Daniel Seidenglanz, Ph.D.
for finding the time to provide valuable insight into this topic, and also to the
representatives from integrated public transport systems and regions included in this
study, who kindly supported us in obtaining required information.
Funding: This article is the output of the project called "New Mobility - High-Speed
Transport Systems and Transport-Related Human Behaviour", Reg. No.
CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_026/0008430, co-financed by the "Operational Programme
Research, Development and Education"
Disclosure statement: No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
References
CHERRY, J. D., KROGSTAD, P., (2004). SARS: The First Pandemic of the 21st
Century. Pediatric Research, 56(1), 1-5. DOI: 10.1203/01 .PDR.OOOO 129184.87042 .FC
CHAPS (2020). IDOS - vývěsné jízdní řády [online]. Available 2020-05-05 from:
http://www.portal.idos.cz/Search.aspx?c=7&mi=2
ČESKÉ DRÁHY (2017). Line timetables [online]. Available 2020-05-04 from:
https://www.cd.cz/en/jizdni-rad/tratove-jizdni-rady/
74
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
ČTK (2020). Czech News Agency. Lufthansa ruší kvůli koronaviru spojení s Čínou.
E15.cz [online]. Available 2020-04-02 from: https://www.el5.cz/byznys/doprava-alogistika/lufthansa-rusi-
kvuli-koronaviru-spoieni-s-cinou-1366365
DALZIELL, E., NICHOLSON, A , (2001). Risk and Impact of Natural Hazards on a
Road Network. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 127(2), 159-166. DOI:
10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2001)127:2(159)
Gov-CZ (2020a). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky
ze dne 12. března 2020 č. 194 o vyhlášení nouzového stavu pro území České republiky
[online]. Available 2020-04-02 from: https://apps.odok.cz/attachment/-
/down/IHOABMNHPBSV
Gov-CZ (2020b). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky
ze dne 12. března 2020 č. 197 o dočasném znovuzavedení ochrany vnitřních hranic České
republiky [online]. Available 2020-04-02 from: https://apps.odokcz/attachment/-
/down/IHOABMNHPHXW
Gov-CZ (2020c). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky
ze dne 12. března 2020 č. 198 o přijetí krizového opatření [online]. Available 2020-04-
02 from: https://apps.odok.ez/attachment/-/down/IHOABMNHPMSG
Gov-CZ (2020d). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky
ze dne 15. března 2020 č. 215 o přijetí krizového opatření [online]. Available 2020-04-
02 from: https://apps.odokcz/attachment/-/down/IHOABMOVW63P
Gov-CZ (2020e). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky
ze dne 15. března 2020 č. 221 o dočasném znovuzavedení ochrany vnitřních hranic České
republiky [online]. Available 2020-04-02 from: https://apps.odok.cz/attachment/-
/down/IHOABMOVWNX8
Gov-CZ (2020f). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky ze
dne 12. března 2020 č. 200 o přijetí krizového opatření [online]. Available 2020-04-06
from: https://apps.odok.ez/attachment/-/down/IHOABMNHPRJX
Gov-CZ (2020g). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky
ze dne 18. března 2020 č. 247 o přijetí krizového opatření [online]. Available 2020-04-
08 from: https://apps.odok.ez/attachment/-/down/IHOABMTK5CCN
Gov-CZ (2020h). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky
ze dne 18. března 2020 c. 244 k informaci o dočasném omezení provozu dálkových vlaků
Českých drah, a.s. v objednávce státu [online]. Available 2020-04-08from:
https://apps.odok.ez/attachment/-/down/IHOABMTJNX5W
Gov-CZ (2020i). Government of the Czech Republic. Příloha usnesení vlády ze dne 18.
března 2020 č. 244 [online]. Available 2020-04-08 from:
https://apps.odok.ez/attachment/-/down/IHOABMTJNZY5
Gov-CZ (2020J). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky ze
dne 18. března 2020 č. 251 o doporučení provádět dezinfekci v některých veřejně
přístupných prostorech [online]. Available 2020-04-08 from:
https://apps.odok.ez/attachment/-/down/IHOABMTJPFDC
75
Review of Economic Perspectives
Gov-CZ (2020k). Government of the Czech Republic. Usnesení vlády České republiky
ze dne 30. března 2020 č. 335 k minimalizaci dopadů pandemie koronaviru COVID 19
při zajišťování dopravní obslužnosti veřejným i službamiv přepravě cestujících [online].
Available 2020-04-08 from: https://apps.odok.ez/attachment/-/down/IHOABN7SBR20
HUIBREGTSE, E., NAPOLES, O. W., HELLEBRANDT, L., PAPROTNY, D., WIT, S.,
(2016). Climate change in asset management of infrastructure: Ariskbased methodology
applied to disruption of traffic on road networks due to the flooding of tunnels. European
Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 16(1), 98-113. DOI:
10.18757/eitir.2016.16.1.3116
KLEINDORFER, P. R., SAAD, G. H., (2005). Managing Disruption Risks in Supply
Chains. Production and Operations Management, 14(1), 53-68. DOI: 10.111 l/j.1937-
5956.2005.tb00O09.x
KVIZDA, M . , SEIDENGLANZ, D., (2014). Out of Prague: a week-long intermodal shift
from air to rail transport after Iceland's Eyjafjallajókull erupted in 2010. Journal of
Transport Geography,37', 102-111. DOI: 10.1016/i.itrangeo.2014.04.014
LEO EXPRESS (2020). Train timetables [online]. Available 2020-05-05 from:
https://www.leoexpress.com/en/where-we-go/timetables/train
MANGILI, A , GENDREAU, M . A , (2005). Transmission of infectious diseases during
commercial air travel. The Lancet, 365(9463), 989-996. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-
6736(05)71089-8
MATTSON, L - G , JENELIUS, E., (2015). Vulnerability and resilience of transport
systems-A discussion of recent research. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and
Practice, 81,16-34. DOI: 10.1016/i.tra.2015.06.002
MITSAKIS, E., PAPANIKOLAOU, A., AYFADOPOULOU, G , SALANOVA, J.,
DOLL, C , GIANNOPOULOS, G , ZEREFOS, C , (2014). An integrated framework for
linking climate change impacts to emergency adaptation strategies for transport networks.
European Transport Research Review, 6(2), 103-111. DOI: 10.1007/sl2544-013-0114-0
MORAWSKA, L., CAO, J., (2020). Airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2: The world
should face the reality. Environment International, 139. DOI:
10.1016/i .envint.2020.10573 0
MOUSSAID, M . , (2013). Opinion Formation and the Collective Dynamics of Risk
Perception. PLoS ONE, 8(12). DOI: 10.1371 /iournal.pone.0084592
MPSV (2020). Ministry of labour and Social Affairs of the Czech Republic. Ošetřovné
[online]. Available 2020-04-06 from: https://www.mpsv.cz/osetrovne
MZČR (2020a). The Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic. COVID-19: Přehled
aktuální situace v ČR. Onemocnění aktuálně [online]. Available 2020-04-02 from:
https://onemocneni-aktualne.mzCT.cz/covid-19
MZČR (2020b). The Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic. Ochranné opatření - zákaz
letů z Číny. [online]. Available 2020-04-02 from: https://www.mzcr.cz/ochranneopatreni-
zakaz-letu-z-ciny/
76
Volume 21, Issue 1, 2021
MZČR (2020c). The Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic. Ochranné opatření - zákaz
letů z Korejské republiky. [online]. Available 2020-04-02 from:
https://www.mzcr.cz/ochranne-opatreni-zakaz-letu-z-koreiske-republikv/
MZČR (2020d). The Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic. Ochranné opatření - zákaz
letů z Itálie, [online]. Available 2020-04-02 from: https://www.mzcr.cz/ochranne opatreni-zaka
z-letu-z-it a lie/
MZČR (2020e). The Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic. Mimořádné opatření ze
dne 10. 3. 2020. [online]. Available 2020-04-02 from: https://www.fulsoft.cz/download/
fulsoft/covidl9 2.pdf
MZČR (2020f). The Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic. Covid-19: Přehled
aktuální situace pro kraje [online]. Available 2021-01-11 from: https://onemocneni-
aktualne.mzcr.cz/covid-19/kraje
Prague Airport (2020). Currently available destinations [online]. Available 2020-04-02
from: https://www.prg.aero/en/currently-available-destinations
PREGNOLATO, M., FORD, A., GLENIS, V., WILKINSON, S., DAWSON, R., (2017).
Impact of Climate Change on Disruption to Urban Transport Networks from Pluvial
Flooding. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 23(4). DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-
555X.0000372
REGIOJET (2020). Jízdní řády [online]. Available 2020-05-04 from:
https://www.regiojet.cz/jizdni-rady-a-zastavky/jizdni-rady/
TAMVAKIS, P., XENIDIS, Y., (2012). Resilience in Transportation Systems. Procedia
- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 48, 3441-3450. DOI: 10.1016/i.sbspro .2012.06.1308
TANIGUCHI, E., THOMPSON, R. G , Y A M A D A , T., (2010). Incorporating risks in
City Logistics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(3), 5899-5910. DOI:
10.1016/i .sb spro .2010.04.005
TANSEL, B., (1995). Natural and manmade disasters: accepting and managing risks.
Safety Science, 20(1), 91-99. DOI: 10.1016/0925-7535(94)00070-J
TATEM, A. J., ROGERS, D. J., HAY, S. I., (2006). Global Transport Networks and
Infectious Disease Spread. Advances in Parasitology, 62,293 -343. DOI: 10.1016/S0065-
308X(05)62009-X
TEO, P., YEOH, B. S. A , ONG, S. N , (2005). SARS in Singapore: surveillance strategies
in a globalising city. Health Policy, 72(3), 279-291. DOI:
10.1016/i •healthpol.2004.11.004
WANG, K-Y., (2014). How Change of Public Transportation Usage Reveals Fear of the
SARS Virus in a City. PLoS ONE, 9(3). DOI: 10.1371/iournal.pone.00894Q5
WHO (2003). World Health Organization. Summary table of SARS cases by country, 1
November 2002 - 7 August 2003 [online]. Available 2020-05-27 from:
https://www.who.int/csr/sars/country/country2003 08 15.pdf?ua=l
77
Review of Economic Perspectives
WOODBURN, A., (2019). Rail network resilience and operationalresponsiveness during
unplanned disruption: A rail freight case study. Journal of Transport Geography ,11', 59-
69. DOI: 10.1016/i .i trangeo .2019.04.006
XU, F., M C C L U S K E Y , C. C , CRESSMAN, R., (2013). Spatial spread of an epidemic
through public transportation systems with a hub. Mathematical Biosciences, 246(1),
164-175.DOI: 10.1016/i.mbs.2013.08.014
78