Characterizing Types of Human Mobility to Inform Differential and Targeted Malaria Elimination Strategies in Northeast Cambodia

Human population movements currently challenge malaria elimination in low transmission foci in the Greater Mekong Subregion. Using a mixed-methods design, combining ethnography (n?=?410 interviews), malariometric data (n?=?4996) and population surveys (n?=?824 indigenous populations; n?=?704 Khmer migrants) malaria vulnerability among different types of mobile populations was researched in the remote province of Ratanakiri, Cambodia. Different structural types of human mobility were identified, showing differential risk and vulnerability. Among local indigenous populations, access to malaria testing and treatment through the VMW-system and LLIN coverage was high but control strategies failed to account for forest farmers’ prolonged stays at forest farms/fields (61% during rainy season), increasing their exposure (p?=?0.002). The Khmer migrants, with low acquired immunity, active on plantations and mines, represented a fundamentally different group not reached by LLIN-distribution campaigns since they were largely unregistered (79%) and unaware of the local VMW-system (95%) due to poor social integration. Khmer migrants therefore require control strategies including active detection, registration and immediate access to malaria prevention and control tools from which they are currently excluded. In conclusion, different types of mobility require different malaria elimination strategies. Targeting mobility without an in-depth understanding of malaria risk in each group challenges further progress towards elimination

Re-imagining malaria: heterogeneity of human and mosquito behaviour in relation to residual malaria transmission in Cambodia

BackgroundIn certain regions in Southeast Asia, where malaria is reduced to forested regions populated by ethnic minorities dependent on slash-and-burn agriculture, malaria vector populations have developed a propensity to feed early and outdoors, limiting the effectiveness of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLIN) and indoor residual spraying (IRS). The interplay between heterogeneous human, as well as mosquito behaviour, radically challenges malaria control in such residual transmission contexts. This study examines human behavioural patterns in relation to the vector behaviour.MethodsThe anthropological research used a sequential mixed-methods study design in which quantitative survey research methods were used to complement findings from qualitative ethnographic research. The qualitative research existed of in-depth interviews and participant observation. For the entomological research, indoor and outdoor human landing collections were performed. All research was conducted in selected villages in Ratanakiri province, Cambodia.ResultsVariability in human behaviour resulted in variable exposure to outdoor and early biting vectors: (i) indigenous people were found to commute between farms in the forest, where malaria exposure is higher, and village homes; (ii) the indoor/outdoor biting distinction was less clear in forest housing often completely or partly open to the outside; (iii) reported sleeping times varied according to the context of economic activities, impacting on the proportion of infections that could be accounted for by early or nighttime biting; (iv) protection by LLINs may not be as high as self-reported survey data indicate, as observations showed around 40% (non-treated) market net use while (v) unprotected evening resting and deep forest activities impacted further on the suboptimal use of LLINs.ConclusionsThe heterogeneity of human behaviour and the variation of vector densities and biting behaviours may lead to a considerable proportion of exposure occurring during times that people are assumed to be protected by the distributed LLINs. Additional efforts in improving LLIN use during times when people are resting in the evening and during the night might still have an impact on further reducing malaria transmission in Cambodia

Unspoken inequality: How COVID-19 has exacerbated existing vulnerabilities of asylum-seekers, refugees, and undocumented migrants in South Africa

An estimated 2 million foreign-born migrants of working age (15-64) were living in South Africa (SA) in 2017. Structural and practical xenophobia has driven asylum-seekers, refugees, and undocumented migrants in SA to abject poverty and misery. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) containment measures adopted by the SA government through the lockdown of the nation have tremendously deepened the unequal treatment of asylum-seekers and refugees in SA. This can be seen through the South African government's lack of consideration of this marginalized population in economic, poverty, and hunger alleviation schemes. Leaving this category of our society out of the national response safety nets may lead to negative coping strategies causing mental health issues and secondary health concerns. An effective response to the socioeconomic challenges imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic should consider the economic and health impact of the pandemic on asylum-seekers, refugees, and undocumented migrants