In March 2020, the government introduced a set of restrictions to ‘lockdown’ the UK in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020; The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) Regulations 2020; The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2020). These lockdown restrictions form the central plank of a wide range of government interventions, which to date include the 359-page Coronavirus Act 2020, 61 statutory instruments (emerging from 46 different parent acts), and an even greater amount of policy and guidance. The central purpose of the lockdown restrictions is to protect public health, by both containing the rate of infection and protecting NHS capacity to treat the influx of COVID-19 patients. There has been a lively legal debate about the restrictions—described as ‘almost certainly the most severe restrictions on liberty ever imposed.’ In addition to the legal debate, however, we also need a socio-legal analysis. An examination of how the public understand and experience the lockdown, and the significance of these perceptions for compliance, is essential to developing a clear picture of how the lockdown restrictions are working. Understanding the role of law in society, and not only in strict ‘legal’ terms, has rarely been so important.

As part of our wider research on Law and Compliance during COVID-19, we have undertaken a representative national survey to better understand public attitudes to the lockdown. We want to understand more about how people understand the rules, if they see themselves as compliant, what drives compliance, and how the rules relate to ordinary perceptions of rights. The survey was carried out online by YouGov on 27th-29th April 2020. The total sample size was 1,695. The figures were then weighted to be representative of all GB adults (aged 18+).In this post, we report some key preliminary findings from our first survey. In the longer term, we will conduct a more detailed statistical analysis that explores the drivers of compliance. We publish our preliminary findings now, however, as we see them as valuable to current debates. Our survey data will be supplemented by ongoing qualitative work (interviews and focus groups), and an analysis of the government’s interventions more generally. We will report on these in due course.

Initial key findings

Most respondents (99%) claim to know, mostly or exactly, what activities are permitted under the lockdown restrictions. Most (85%) also said it was easy to follow any changes made. However, there was fairly extensive disagreement on what is and is not allowed in relation to specific rules. There was particular confusion regarding some of the more complex exceptions to general prohibitions. For instance, only 68% of respondents knew that it is permitted to move to another address because of a fear of violence at home.

To what extent do you think you understand, if at all, what activities you are and are not allowed to do under lockdown?
I know exactly what activities I am and am not allowed to do during lockdown	76%
I know mostly what activities I am and am not allowed to do during lockdown, but there are a few I am unclear on	23%
I am unclear on whether I am and am not allowed to do most activities during lockdown	1%

To what extent do you think it has been easy or difficult to follow changes made to lockdown rules and to know how to comply?
Very easy	23%
Fairly easy	62%
Fairly difficult	13%
Very difficult	2%

As far as you know, which of the following activities are allowed and not allowed during the lockdown?
Driving to the park or the countryside to do exercise
Is allowed	36%
Is not allowed	56%
Don’t know	8%
Going for a recreational drive
Is allowed	4%
Is not allowed	89%
Don’t know	7%
Going to the shops more than once a day
Is allowed	15%
Is not allowed	76%
Don’t know	9%
Going to the shops solely to buy non-essential items
Is allowed	10%
Is not allowed	85%
Don’t know	5%
Buying non-essential items while at the shops for basic necessities
Is allowed	71%
Is not allowed	20%
Don’t know	9%
Arranging to meet up socially with someone outside who is not a member of your household
Is allowed	1%
Is not allowed	97%
Don’t know	2%
Making a social visit to the home of a family member for whom you are not providing care
Is allowed	1%
Is not allowed	96%
Don’t know	3%
Making a social visit to the home of a friend or neighbour for whom you are not providing care
Is allowed	2%
Is not allowed	96%
Don’t know	2%
Visiting your second home or holiday accommodation
Is allowed	2%
Is not allowed	95%
Don’t know	4%
Moving to a friend’s address for several days to allow a ‘cooling-off’ period following arguments at home
Is allowed	33%
Is not allowed	53%
Don’t know	14%
Moving to another address because of a fear of violence at home
Is allowed	68%
Is not allowed	12%
Don’t know	20%
Where child custody is shared, taking the child to and from their other parent’s home
Is allowed	66%
Is not allowed	17%
Don’t know	17%
Non-essential travelling
Is allowed	1%
Is not allowed	98%
Don’t know	1%
Intentionally coming within 2 metres of anyone outside who is not a member of your household
Is allowed	4%
Is not allowed	94%
Don’t know	2%

Although most respondents are following the lockdown rules, a sizeable proportion of them reported failing to observe strict compliance (we asked about their experience in the week before the survey). Some respondents reported breaking a rule, while others, although not regarding themselves as breaking rules, reported ‘bending’ rules. 31.8% of respondents have broken or bent a restriction at least once during the 7-day period preceding the survey.

Compliant with all restrictions	61%
Bent at least one restriction	6%
Breached at least one restriction	26%
N/A	8%

Most respondents predicted they will continue to follow or try to follow the rules if the lockdown continues. Approximately half of our respondents (48%) predicted that they will find it harder to follow the lockdown rules the longer it continues. Equally, approximately half (52%) predicted they will find it harder to comply should the lockdown rules become stricter. A smaller proportion (38%) predicted difficulty in the event of a second lockdown being introduced after the current restrictions are lifted.

Thinking about the length of the lockdown, which of the following comes closest to your viewpoint:
The longer the lockdown continues, the less likely it is that I’ll follow the rules	6%
The longer the lockdown continues, the more difficult I will find it to follow the rules, but I will still try to	42%
The longer the lockdown continues won’t affect how likely it is that I’ll follow the rules	52%

Thinking about the strictness of the lockdown rules, which of the following comes closest to your viewpoint?
If the rules of the lockdown become stricter, it is less likely that I’d follow them	8%
If the rules of the lockdown become stricter, I will find it harder to follow them, but I will still try to	44%
If the rules of the lockdown become stricter, I will follow them	48%

Thinking about the possibility of a second lockdown after the current restrictions have been lifted, which of the following comes closest to your viewpoint?
If a second lockdown is introduced, it is less likely that I’d follow the rules	6%
If a second lockdown is introduced, I will find it difficult to follow the rules, but I will still try to	32%
If a second lockdown is introduced, I will follow the rules	62%

Much has been made of social solidarity, of various kinds, as a factor driving adherence to the lockdown. We examined the extent to which people felt they owed a duty to others to comply with the restrictions. Perhaps unsurprisingly, our findings confirm that most people feel a strong sense of owing an obligation to their families to comply with the lockdown (76%)–more so than in relation to neighbours (53%) or the country more generally (55%). Strikingly, however, our findings suggest that even more people feel this strong sense of compliance obligation in relation to NHS workers (78%).

To what extent, if at all, do you feel you owe it to the following people to comply with the lockdown rules?
Your household
A great deal	73%
A fair amount	14%
Not very much	3%
Not at all	2%
Your family
A great deal	76%
A fair amount	15%
Not very much	3%
Not at all	2%
Your neighbours
A great deal	53%
A fair amount	30%
Not very much	9%
Not at all	5%
People in your village / town / city
A great deal	53%
A fair amount	33%
Not very much	7%
Not at all	4%
People in your country
A great deal	55%
A fair amount	32%
Not very much	8%
Not at all	3%
NHS workers
A great deal	78%
A fair amount	13%
Not very much	4%
Not at all	3%

The converse of a felt duty to comply with the lockdown rules is a sense of the lockdown violating ordinary perceptions of one’s ‘rights’. Most people saw the lockdown as violating various ‘rights’ but felt that the violation was acceptable in the circumstances of the current pandemic. However, a significant minority of respondents reported that the violation of various ‘rights’ was unacceptable, notwithstanding the current circumstances. The strongest sense of an unacceptable rights violation related to the notion of people having a ‘right’ to fully support those who need them.

Please state whether you think that the current lockdown does or does not violate your right to do each of the following, or whether you think it’s acceptable given the current coronavirus pandemic:
My right to earn a living
It does violate my rights	9%
It violates my rights but, given the circumstances, is acceptable	54%
It does not violate my rights to do this	37%
My right to spend time with family and friends
It does violate my rights	7%
It violates my rights but, given the circumstances, is acceptable	75%
It does not violate my rights to do this	18%
My right to worship as I please
It does violate my rights	6%
It violates my rights but, given the circumstances, is acceptable	50%
It does not violate my rights to do this	44%
My right to enjoy the outdoors as I please
It does violate my rights	9%
It violates my rights but, given the circumstances, is acceptable	70%
It does not violate my rights to do this	20%
My right to live life as I choose
It does violate my rights	8%
It violates my rights but, given the circumstances, is acceptable	70%
It does not violate my rights to do this	22%
My right to fully support those who need me
It does violate my rights	12%
It violates my rights but, given the circumstances, is acceptable	57%
It does not violate my rights to do this	31%

Although the lockdown is centrally focused on containing the spread of infection and protecting the NHS’s capacity to cope, it is clear that such a radical and widespread change to society will have significant negative effects on people’s lives. We asked respondents to indicate whether they had experienced a significant problem or dispute in relation to key aspects of life. Our findings suggest that problems with mental health, loneliness and money are most prevalent. But of concern also is the 1% of respondents who reported problems of violence or abuse within the home, particularly in light of the earlier finding (above) that only 68% of respondents knew that it is permitted to move to another address because of a fear of violence at home.

Have you experienced a significant problem or dispute in relation to any of the following aspects of life as a result of the coronavirus pandemic? Please tick all the options that apply to you.
Mental health	21%
Loneliness	17%
Money	15%
Relationships with wider family or friends	11%
Employment	10%
Physical health	10%
Relationships within the home	7%
Looking after children	6%
Housing / accommodation	3%
Bereavement	3%
Violence or abuse within the home	1%
Treatment from the Police	0%
Other	3%
None of the above	50%
Prefer not to say	4%

Contact tracing is a technique used to reduce the spread of infections, commonly used in the sexual health context. The Government is rolling out contact tracing to help understand and limit the spread of COVID-19. As a result, there have been concerns that this approach represents a worrying invasion of privacy. Our findings suggest that there is a slight lean towards willingness to trade privacy to shorten the length of the lockdown (54% are willing to sacrifice some of their privacy and 39% are not).

How willing would you be to give up some of your privacy (such as mobile phone data) in order to shorten the length of the lockdown?
Very willing	23%
Quite willing	31%
Not very willing	21%
Not willing at all	18%
Prefer not to say	7%

Preliminary conclusions

Overall, our initial findings suggest that people think they know the rules and are generally willing to comply. They view the interference with their sense of ‘rights’ as broadly justified and, though it might prove difficult, would try to continue to comply with future restrictions, should they be extended or tightened further. However, there is a striking lack of agreement on what is understood as permitted in relation to particular activities. Many also report breaking or bending the rules.

Professor Simon Halliday is Professor of Socio-Legal Studies at the University of York  

Dr. Jed Meers is Lecturer in Law at the University of York   

Dr. Joe Tomlinson is Senior Lecturer in Public Law at the University of York  

We are grateful to Dr. Mark Wilberforce for his support with this research. This research was kindly funded by the Nuffield Foundation (Grant Reference JUS /FR-000022588). The project has been funded by the Nuffield Foundation, but the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily the Foundation.

(Suggested citation: S. Halliday, J. Meers and J. Tomlinson, ‘Public Attitudes on Compliance with COVID-19 Lockdown Restrictions’, U.K. Const. L. Blog (8th May 2020) (available at https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/))