Why the ‘Leave Home Safe’ app won’t leave Hong Kong safer

Those with job security concerns are less likely to adopt or pay heed to the contact-tracing app, which unfairly disadvantages the poor
Not everyone has a Bluetooth-enabled smartphone or stable internet connection to keep the app running smoothly

Adam Au

Published: 6:45am, 2 Mar 2021

Why you can trust SCMP

The arrival of multiple vaccines has brought cheer to Hong Kong, as it seemingly heralds the beginning of the end of the pandemic. But, in the grand scheme, vaccinations are but a fig leaf as many scientists say this is unlikely to be the last pandemic in our lifetime.

Before this pandemic ends, the question of how to conduct effective contact tracing remains. In Hong Kong, the “Leave Home Safe” app is a government-endorsed solution to the problem.

Putting aside privacy concerns, the overall efficacy of the app must be questioned. Despite their intuitive appeal, such large-scale technological and social experiments can fail to accurately detect infected individuals while placing an added burden on marginalised segments of society.

As with other contact-tracing tools, the efficacy of the platform is highly correlated with users’ buy-in. Citizens can opt out of Leave Home Safe even if they own a smartphone. If people boycott the app because of a distrust of law enforcement, any contact-tracing operation by health authorities could be stymied due to a lack of data. Moreover, access to devices that can run the app smoothly might differ vastly.

The effectiveness of Leave Home Safe also depends on users’ self-discipline. The app might send electronic nudges to remind users of potential Covid-19 exposure. But it cannot force the recipient to seek medical help and report symptoms truthfully. At a time of high volatility in the employment market, people fear losing income or even their job if they call in sick. A positive Covid-19 test still carries a stigma in Hong Kong.

04:41

Hong Kong eases Covid-19 curbs, tells customers to use contact-tracing app at reopened premises

Further, compliance with social expectations about responsible behaviour is not a given, since the application only alerts the user privately. It’s doubtful that all users will show the requisite discipline.

Moreover, contact-tracing technology threatens to create a false sense of security, especially when the government promotes its use alongside a relaxing of social distancing measures. Logging entries to public places does not protect individual users, who will only be notified that they may have been exposed to the coronavirus after the fact.

While the use of technology does have its benefits, it can also result in unwelcome results. Some users may be emboldened to relax their vigilance. And if the pandemic has taught us anything, it is that a coronavirus wave recurs whenever the public lets down its guard.

A digital tracing tool also risks creating more inequality. Recent research in the US found that the ability to work from home differs substantially across industries, and those with lower salaries and precarious work arrangements are least likely to work from home.

We should expect a similar job landscape in Hong Kong. People in lower socioeconomic groups are more likely to be in frontline jobs, delivering groceries or stocking shelves, for example.

They are also more likely to live in crowded quarters or subdivided flats, use public transport and have underlying health conditions. Some, including the elderly, may have difficulty understanding the app. Manual or low-income workers who are less likely to be working from home are at higher risk of infection.

For the most socioeconomically vulnerable, a positive test result could spiral into income loss, job insecurity and worse. There is also a danger that false positives may result in costly action being undertaken, based on inaccurate warnings.

Thus, it is reasonable to expect a lower adoption rate of the app in poorer communities. This would not only affect the overall effectiveness of contact tracing, but also mean the app may be least useful to those communities who need it most. For one thing, Leave Home Safe relies on technology that people from lower social groups are less likely to have, such as Bluetooth-enabled phones and a stable internet connection.

Thus, the app can be seen to benefit the more affluent members of society, while others may be left behind.

05:39

Covid-19: Hong Kong’s needy pupils sidelined by online learning one year since class suspension

Someone who has the flexibility of working from home can also benefit from the contact tracing app which enables them to enjoy the more relaxed social distancing rules. This negative consequence is not unique to Leave Home Safe, but can result from any preventive measure applied indiscriminately across the population.

Hong Kong must address this issue, given that we are relying on this digital platform to help fight the pandemic. Policymakers should seek to avoid measures that might perpetuate societal inequality. Jobs that cannot be done from home are unequally distributed across society, a reality that has its roots in the overall construct of a capitalist society like Hong Kong.

The fact that digital solutions are hastily adopted betrays our overreliance on technology sometimes. Digital tracing is not a cure-all; it can only be one valuable component among a host of precautionary measures.

The presence of risk necessitates a well-thought-out approach. Hong Kong’s pandemic policies have been met with deep scepticism among some sectors of society. Any new strategies must therefore be agile and justifiable.

To gain the public’s trust, social complexities must be taken into account, and there must be transparency about the trade-offs. If the Leave Home Safe app is to be widely used, people must first want to use it.

Adam Au is the head of legal at a Hong Kong-based health care group