Hand washing.
Mask wearing.
Social distancing. The three pillars of protection from
Covid-19 which we have memorised like the back of our hands. However, it is the
hygiene mask which has become the global poster boy for the pandemic. Rightfully so, since it is the most fundamental in curbing the spread of the virus, an understanding that has been underscored by a spate of online and offline public-service messaging.
With the right kind of communication made public, coupled with the product becoming more easily accessible, all that remains is the successful adoption of the hygiene mask by Indians. Indeed, it has now become common in our cities to see most people wearing masks. But the question remains: Will we adopt it? And for how long?
While it is tough to find a clear-cut answer, calculated assumptions can be offered by studying how such situations have played out in the past. The closest cultural precursor we have is of the experience of the SARS-affected Asian countries, including Japan and South Korea, where wearing a mask has now become an established cultural practice. Examining the assimilation of mask-wearing in their context can help us gain a broader perspective on how Indians may end up doing the same in the near future.
Here’s what we have found.The Three Codes: Choice, Compliance and Culture Research has revealed that masks get adopted due to three codes, or governing norms. First is the Code of Individual Choice, where citizens are under no obligation to wear the mask. They are judged to be capable of taking the right decision without policing from the state. What makes them put on a mask is a high-threat perception, or recognition of personal vulnerability. Which is why the code of individual choice manifests through the medical mask, a choice known for its protective efficacy. Wearers could, however, be deterred from wearing the mask if they find it uncomfortable, not worth the expenditure, or not conveniently accessible.
Second is the Code of Compliance, a state-imposed mandate that fines and/or punishes for failure to keep within the rule. This curbing of individual freedom is justified in the name of the greater good. As long as people wear whichever mask they can afford, they are considered to be following the guidelines. This code either results in passive submission to authority or an awakening in civic consciousness to together fight the epidemic.
Third is the Code of Culture, which sees people wear masks out of a sense of social responsibility for adopting higher standards of inter-personal hygiene, and not because they are following a law. They wear it to protect themselves from seasonal allergies and infections as well as to stop their colds and coughs from spreading to others. Surgical masks and their like are seen as ideal to fulfil this requirement.
Regular usage of masks can potentially lead to a spin-off effect where, apart from being worn for health reasons, it also helps address a host of other motivations – a desire to dodge recognition by cameras, evade interaction with strangers on trains and buses, avoid unpleasant smells on the subway, keep one’s face warm in winter, or even to cover your face when attacked by a bout of acne.
Of course, these codes can’t just be blindly applied to India. They need to be compared against our localised challenges and culture-specific habits. For example, how do tendencies of peer policing, careless adoption of safety gear like helmets and seatbelts, and herd mentality tie into these three fundamental principles?
Understanding the realities of implementation further, the relevance of masks can best be judged in the context of the other two hygiene and safety pillars –
hand washing and social distancing. Because the socio-economically disadvantaged may not be able to afford either of those two privileges, the mask, especially in its homemade avatar, will always ensure that the people have a suraksha-kavach to safeguard themselves with.
(By Hamsini Shivakumar, Co-founder & Director, Leapfrog Strategy Consulting)