Exposure science perspective on disaster preparedness and resilience

Paul T. J. Scheepers,Shoji F. Nakayama

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-021-00381-x

2021-09-01

Abstract:Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology, Published online: 11 September 2021; doi:10.1038/s41370-021-00381-xExposure science perspective on disaster preparedness and resilience

public, environmental & occupational health,toxicology,environmental sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

ISEA2007 panel: integration of better exposure characterizations into disaster preparedness for responders and the public

Charles E Rodes,Edo D Pellizzari,Michael J Dellarco,Mitchell D Erickson,Daniel A Vallero,Dori B Reissman,Paul J Lioy,Morton Lippmann,Thomas A Burke,Bernard D Goldstein

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jes.2008.42

Abstract:An expert panel was convened in October 2007 at the International Society for Exposure Analysis Annual Meeting in Durham, NC, entitled "The Path Forward in Disaster Preparedness Since WTC-Exposure Characterization and Mitigation: Substantial Unfinished Business!" The panel prospectively discussed the critical exposure issues being overlooked during disaster responses and highlighted the needs for an optimal blending of exposure characterizations and hazard controls within disaster settings. The cases were made that effective and timely exposure characterizations must be applied during responses to any disaster, whether terrorist, manmade, or natural in origin. The consistent application of exposure sciences across acute and chronic disaster timelines will assure that the most effective strategies are applied to collect the needed information to guide risk characterization and management approaches. Exposure sciences must be effectively applied across all phases of a disaster (defined as rescue, reentry, recovery, and rehabitation-the four Rs) to appropriately characterize risks and guide risk-mitigation approaches. Failure to adequately characterize and control hazardous exposures increases the likelihood of excess morbidity and mortality. Advancing the infrastructure and the technologies to collect the right exposure information before, during, and immediately after disasters would advance our ability to define risks and protect responders and the public better. The panel provided conclusions, recommendations, and next steps toward effective and timely integration of better exposure science into disaster preparedness, including the need for a subsequent workshop to facilitate this integration. All panel presentations and a summary were uploaded to the ISES(1) website (http://www.iseaweb.org/Disaster_Preparedness/index.php).
Disaster exposure and patterns of disaster preparedness: A multilevel social vulnerability and engagement perspective

Zhen Cong,Guanggang Feng,Zhirui Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117798

2023-08-01

Abstract:This study examined how community vulnerabilities contextualized the impact of exposure to five major disasters in 2017 on individuals' disaster preparedness. We pooled two panels of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)'s National Household Survey in 2017 (pre-disaster) and 2018 (post-disaster) and further merged the data with 15 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index factors to examine the moderating impact of county-level vulnerabilities. Latent class analysis was used to identify patterns of disaster preparedness based on six preparedness items defined by FEMA with a total of 10,045 individuals. Three groups were identified and named basic preparedness (BP) group, high preparedness: socially engaged (HP-SE) group, and high preparedness: advanced socially engaged (HP-ASE) group. A working sample with a smaller sample size was constructed to include 2,179 individuals from 92 counties with disaster declarations of Hurricane Harvey, Hurricane Irma, Hurricane Maria, Hurricane Nate, and California Wildfires in 2017. Multinomial logistic regression indicated that post-disaster respondents were more likely to be in the HP-SE relative to the BP group. Two-level multinomial logistic regression showed that post-disaster respondents in communities with higher percentages of single-parent households and those of no vehicles were less likely to be in the HP-SE vs. the BP group. Post-disaster respondents in communities with higher percentages of unemployment, no high school diploma, and occupied housing units with more people than rooms were less likely to be in the HP-ASE vs. the BP group. Post-disaster respondents in communities with higher percentages of older adults and mobile homes were more likely to be in the HP-SE vs. the BP group. The findings also highlighted the importance of social engagement in disaster preparedness disparities and the need for community-level intervention to promote individuals' disaster preparedness.
Exposure science in an age of rapidly changing climate: challenges and opportunities

Judy S LaKind,Jonathan Overpeck,Patrick N Breysse,Lorrie Backer,Susan D Richardson,Jon Sobus,Amir Sapkota,Crystal R Upperman,Chengsheng Jiang,C Ben Beard,J M Brunkard,Jesse E Bell,Ryan Harris,Jean-Paul Chretien,Richard E Peltier,Ginger L Chew,Benjamin C Blount

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jes.2016.35

Abstract:Climate change is anticipated to alter the production, use, release, and fate of environmental chemicals, likely leading to increased uncertainty in exposure and human health risk predictions. Exposure science provides a key connection between changes in climate and associated health outcomes. The theme of the 2015 Annual Meeting of the International Society of Exposure Science-Exposures in an Evolving Environment-brought this issue to the fore. By directing attention to questions that may affect society in profound ways, exposure scientists have an opportunity to conduct "consequential science"-doing science that matters, using our tools for the greater good and to answer key policy questions, and identifying causes leading to implementation of solutions. Understanding the implications of changing exposures on public health may be one of the most consequential areas of study in which exposure scientists could currently be engaged. In this paper, we use a series of case studies to identify exposure data gaps and research paths that will enable us to capture the information necessary for understanding climate change-related human exposures and consequent health impacts. We hope that paper will focus attention on under-developed areas of exposure science that will likely have broad implications for public health.
A comparative assessment of major international disasters: the need for exposure assessment, systematic emergency preparedness, and lifetime health care

Roberto G Lucchini,Dana Hashim,Sushma Acquilla,Angela Basanets,Pier Alberto Bertazzi,Andrey Bushmanov,Michael Crane,Denise J Harrison,William Holden,Philip J Landrigan,Benjamin J Luft,Paolo Mocarelli,Nailya Mazitova,James Melius,Jacqueline M Moline,Koji Mori,David Prezant,Joan Reibman,Dori B Reissman,Alexander Stazharau,Ken Takahashi,Iris G Udasin,Andrew C Todd

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3939-3

IF: 4.5

2017-01-07

BMC Public Health

Abstract:Background: The disasters at Seveso, Three Mile Island, Bhopal, Chernobyl, the World Trade Center (WTC) and Fukushima had historic health and economic sequelae for large populations of workers, responders and community members. Methods: Comparative data from these events were collected to derive indications for future preparedness. Information from the primary sources and a literature review addressed: i) exposure assessment; ii) exposed populations; iii) health surveillance; iv) follow-up and research outputs; v) observed physical and mental health effects; vi) treatment and benefits; and vii) outreach activities. Results: Exposure assessment was conducted in Seveso, Chernobyl and Fukushima, although none benefited from a timely or systematic strategy, yielding immediate and sequential measurements after the disaster. Identification of exposed subjects was overall underestimated. Health surveillance, treatment and follow-up research were implemented in Seveso, Chernobyl, Fukushima, and at the WTC, mostly focusing on the workers and responders, and to a lesser extent on residents. Exposure-related physical and mental health consequences were identified, indicating the need for a long-term health care of the affected populations. Fukushima has generated the largest scientific output so far, followed by the WTCHP and Chernobyl. Benefits programs and active outreach figured prominently in only the WTC Health Program. The analysis of these programs yielded the following lessons: 1) Know who was there; 2) Have public health input to the disaster response; 3) Collect health and needs data rapidly; 4) Take care of the affected; 5) Emergency preparedness; 6) Data driven, needs assessment, advocacy. Conclusions: Given the long-lasting health consequences of natural and man-made disasters, health surveillance and treatment programs are critical for management of health conditions, and emergency preparedness plans are needed to prevent or minimize the impact of future threats.
A Perspective towards Multi-Hazard Resilient Systems: Natural Hazards and Pandemics

Mohammad Amin Hariri-Ardebili,Siamak Sattar,Katherine Johnson,Christopher Clavin,Juan Fung,Luis Ceferino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084508

IF: 3.9

2022-04-10

Sustainability

Abstract:The concept of resilience has been used extensively across the sciences in engineering and the humanities. It is applied to ecology, medicine, economics, and psychology. The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has posed an extraordinary challenge to the resilience of healthcare systems, communities, and nations and has profoundly altered our previous day-to-day operations. This paper presents a discussion of the definitions and characteristics of resilient systems. Scenarios are utilized to qualitatively explore key relationships, responses, and paths for recovery across different system types. The purpose is to develop an integrated approach that can accommodate simultaneous threats to system resilience, in particular, impacts from a natural hazard in conjunction with COVID-19. This manuscript is the first to advocate for more in-depth and quantitative research utilizing transdisciplinary approaches that can accommodate considerations across our built environment and healthcare system infrastructures in pursuit of designing systems that are resilient to both natural hazards and pandemic impacts.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,green & sustainable science & technology
Disasters, community vulnerability, and poverty: The intersection between economics and emergency management

Erik Wood,Tim Frazier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5055/jem.0563

Abstract:Climate change will create more intense and frequent disasters, resulting in the increased exposure of the most vulnerable populations. It is debatable whether the vulnerability research that follows major disasters, like Hurricane Katrina, has resulted in increased resiliency of those who were the most vulnerable during that disaster. It may even be plausible to suggest that research that exposes countless vulnerabilities within a population is guilty of helping none. Through support from a focused review of the related literature, research findings include the following: (1) post-disaster research analysis tends not to present an actionable hierarchy for public agencies and community organizations to prioritize efforts, (2) the most common thread that runs through societal vulnerability in daily life, and opposite the force multiplying effects of climate change, is poverty; and (3) climate change is likely to facilitate more post-disaster windows of opportunity characterized by increased public consonance that can galvanize transformative change at a local level.
Building human resilience: the role of public health preparedness and response as an adaptation to climate change

Mark E Keim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.08.022

Abstract:Global climate change will increase the probability of extreme weather events, including heatwaves, drought, wildfire, cyclones, and heavy precipitation that could cause floods and landslides. Such events create significant public health needs that can exceed local capacity to respond, resulting in excess morbidity or mortality and in the declaration of disasters. Human vulnerability to any disaster is a complex phenomenon with social, economic, health, and cultural dimensions. Vulnerability to natural disasters has two sides: the degree of exposure to dangerous hazards (susceptibility) and the capacity to cope with or recover from disaster consequences (resilience). Vulnerability reduction programs reduce susceptibility and increase resilience. Susceptibility to disasters is reduced largely by prevention and mitigation of emergencies. Emergency preparedness and response and recovery activities--including those that address climate change--increase disaster resilience. Because adaptation must occur at the community level, local public health agencies are uniquely placed to build human resilience to climate-related disasters. This article discusses the role of public health in reducing human vulnerability to climate change within the context of select examples for emergency preparedness and response.
Environmental public health research at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: A blueprint for exposure science in a connected world

Lindsay W. Stanek,Wayne E. Cascio,Timothy M. Barzyk,Michael S. Breen,Nicole M. DeLuca,Shannon M. Griffin,Lisa Jo Melnyk,Jeffrey M. Minucci,Kent W. Thomas,Nicolle S. Tulve,Christopher P. Weaver,Elaine A. Cohen Hubal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-024-00720-8

2024-11-23

Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology

Abstract:Exposure science plays an essential role in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA) mission to protect human health and the environment. The U.S. EPA's Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment (CPHEA) within the Office of Research and Development (ORD) provides the exposure science needed to characterize the multifaceted relationships between people and their surroundings in support of national, regional, local and individual-level actions. Furthermore, exposure science research must position its enterprise to tackle the most pressing public health challenges in an ever-changing environment. These challenges include understanding and confronting complex human disease etiologies, disparities in the social environment, and system-level changes in the physical environment. Solutions will sustainably balance and optimize the health of people, animals, and ecosystems. Our objectives for this paper are to review the role of CPHEA exposure science research in various recent decision-making contexts, to present current challenges facing U.S. EPA and the larger exposure science field, and to provide illustrative case examples where CPHEA exposure science is demonstrating the latest methodologies at the intersection of these two motivations. This blueprint provides a foundation for applying exposomic tools and approaches to holistically understand real-world exposures so optimal environmental public health protective actions can be realized within the broader context of a One Health framework.

public, environmental & occupational health,toxicology,environmental sciences
Invited Perspective: Leveraging Research and Resources to Mitigate Health Impacts of Environmental Disasters-Insights from a South Korean Tire Factory Fire

Richard K. Kwok,Aubrey K. Miller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp15463

IF: 11.035

2024-08-31

Environmental Health Perspectives

Abstract:Environ Health Perspect . 2024 Aug;132(8):81302. doi: 10.1289/EHP15463. Epub 2024 Aug 28. NO

environmental sciences,public, environmental & occupational health,toxicology
Exposure Ecology Drives a Unified Understanding of the Nexus of (Urban) Natural Ecosystem, Ecological Exposure, and Health

Zhaowu Yu,Gaoyuan Yang,Tao Lin,Bin Zhao,Yaoyang Xu,Xihan Yao,Weiyuan Ma,Henrik Vejre,Bin Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34133/ehs.0165

2024-02-20

Ecosystem Health and Sustainability

Abstract:The intersection of ecology and exposure science with health concerns has led to a gradual infiltration of these disciplines. Exposure to (urban) natural ecosystems, defined as ecological exposure, has proven to be substantially beneficial to health, providing more effective and preventive measures than dealing with downstream consequences of the disease. Besides, the eco-environment & health field have shifted its paradigm from focusing on negative environmental exposure to exploring the positive health benefits of ecological exposure. However, a unified framework that integrates the nexus of natural ecosystem, ecological exposure, and health is still lacking. To address these challenges, here, we propose a new framework (discipline), exposure ecology (EE), and reviewed relevant studies. We suggest that the domain and scope of EE include subject-reality, object-reality, subject-virtual, and object-virtual dimensions and that all previous studies can be covered within this coordinate frame. We analyze the trends and shortcomings of each domain and explain the pathways of ecological exposure to health, including reduction, restoration, promotion capacity, and potential harm. Furthermore, we discuss the theoretical basis for the formation of the theoretical framework of EE, as well as the EE-derived hypotheses, implications, and connections to other related fields. In short, the EE-driven holistic critical review enhances our understanding of this frontier topic substantially, and it can serve as a unified framework for understanding the nexus of natural ecosystems, ecological exposure, and health and realizing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

environmental sciences,ecology
The Mental Health Impacts of Successive Disasters: Examining the Roles of Individual and Community Resilience Following a Tornado and COVID-19

Jennifer M. First,J. Brian Houston

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-021-00830-y

2022-01-13

Clinical Social Work Journal

Abstract:Prior research has found that exposure to natural hazards and infectious disease are associated with adverse mental health outcomes. Less studied are the ways that individual-level and community-level resilience can protect against problematic mental health outcomes following exposure to successive disaster events. In the current study, we examine the role of individual and community resilience on mental health outcomes among 412 adults in Nashville, Tennessee exposed to an EF-3 tornado followed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Results found the cumulative impact of exposure to the tornado and COVID-19 was related to higher levels of PTS and depression symptoms. Individual resilience had a protective, inverse relationship with PTS and depression symptoms and mediated the relationship between community resilience and adverse mental health outcomes. Findings support the development of a multi-system disaster resilience framework that links individual resilience capacities to broader community resilience capacities to activate and sustain healthy adaptation following exposure to successive disasters.

social work
Progress and landscape of disaster science: Insights from computational analyses

Maziar Yazdani,Martin Loosemore,Mohammad Mojtahedi,David Sanderson,Milad Haghani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104536

IF: 4.842

2024-05-11

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

Abstract:This study identifies trends in disaster science research as well as knowledge gaps at a broad scale in order to help underpin and inform future research in the area. A numerical analysis of 58,106 peer-reviewed articles over four decades reveals key research themes and clusters, their temporal variation of activity as well as the influential studies that have played a key role in their development. Results indicate that what we recognize as contemporary disaster science has only shown discernible patterns of activity and knowledge foundation formation since the 1990s. Disaster research currently constitutes approximately 0.23% of all academic papers published per year. The initial and intermediate phases of the development of the field have been unsystematic and fragmented, with the focus of the field fluctuating for almost two decades until recently when research clusters have shown signs of stabilizing. It is observable that, over the last few years, more attention has been allocated to mitigation, response and recovery by focusing on issues such as the psychological impacts of disasters, reducing exposure to disasters and building community resilience to cope and recover from disasters. This is in contrast with earlier years where the focus was predominantly on preparedness and prevention. Research in different countries has been highly correlated with the types of disasters that occur in their regions, highlighting the relevance of the local situatedness and context in disaster research. The recent emergence and explosive growth of a research cluster linked to flood detection, flood mapping and flood hazard assessment is particularly notable, marking the sharpest growth of a single research cluster ever recorded in this field. A similar trend, though of a smaller magnitude, is observable in relation to research on wildfire hazard. Overall, flood-related research has proven one of the dominant themes, with multiple clusters detectable on the topic, each with their own distinguishable knowledge foundation (i.e., set of references). The pattern of collaboration among disaster researchers is shifting from predominantly domestic research towards international collaborations (currently reaching about 1/3 of all disaster-related papers each year), a sign of recognition to the value of cross-cultural and interdisciplinary perspectives in disaster research.

geosciences, multidisciplinary,meteorology & atmospheric sciences,water resources
An Ecological Approach to Disaster Mitigation: A Literature Review

Rebecca Pratiti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.45500

2023-09-18

Cureus

Abstract:Disasters, whether natural or manmade, disrupt the functioning of communities, significantly impacting people's lives and health. To build community resilience, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends community preparedness, where multiple stakeholders work together. Disaster Preparedness Science Research (DPSR) similarly encourages the improvement of disaster relief outcomes. This literature review assesses the vulnerability of communities for prioritized intervention, summarizes disaster effects, and suggests the scope for improvement in disaster preparedness (DP). Twenty-one articles were reviewed based on disaster mitigation and economic factors from 90 studies identified through a PubMed search till September 2021. Vulnerable communities with higher hazard risks are identified by vulnerability indices (VI), including the Climate Risk Index, Environmental VI, and Socio-Economic VI. However, VI predicting one disaster may not predict another. Disaster behavioral response involves five phases. Disaster effects include medical, mental, environmental, and economic effects, as well as the unique recovery time from each domain effect. Medical effects include malnutrition, malaria, diarrhea, heat stress, exacerbations of chronic conditions, infectious disease outbreaks, trauma, and death. Mental effects are post-traumatic stress disorders, depression, anxiety, somatic complaints, psychological distress, sleep problems, and suicides. Environmental effects include isolation, migration, injury to family members, life threats, and property damage. Loss of livelihood and property are associated with worse outcomes. Disaster recovery, which is seldom measured and not clearly defined, affects measurement and comparison across settings. A uniform validated VI, including multiple indicators assessing vulnerability to various disasters, is required. Livelihood restoration is integral to mental health recovery in some disaster types. Fund diversification, prioritized to the vulnerable and to each domain effect of disaster in the immediate post-disaster phase, expedites recovery. Later recovery investments focused on helping people rebuild their community enhance psychological outcomes. Promoting job insurance in highly vulnerable labor-based communities with high VI, wherein willing-to-pay is high, could facilitate faster recovery. DPSR should be encouraged.
What lies beyond social capital? The role of social psychology in building community resilience to climate change.

Evangelos Ntontis,John Drury,Richard Amlôt,Gideon James Rubin,Richard Williams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/trm0000221

IF: 3.2

2020-09-01

Traumatology

Abstract:Climate change is increasing the prevalence and impact of extreme events, which may have severe psychosocial aftereffects for the people and communities who are affected. To mitigate their impact, governments advocate developing community resilience. Most approaches to community resilience employ the concept of social capital, suggesting that communities with more dense preexisting networks of trust and reciprocity are more likely to prepare for, respond to, and recover more effectively from disasters. Notwithstanding its benefits, we argue that social capital cannot account for microprocesses of disaster behavior such as groups that emerge in absence of any preexisting ties and provide social support. We propose a new conceptualization of aspects of community resilience based on the social identity approach in social psychology and grounded upon the principles of collective psychosocial resilience—the way that shared identification allows groups to emerge, coordinate, express solidarity, and provide social support. We argue that our approach overcomes the limitations of social capital, because it can explain the processes of group behavior in disasters, acknowledges people's propensity to organize collectively, promotes bottom-up approaches to community resilience, recognizes emergent communities, and suggests evidence-based recommendations for policy and practice. Finally, we propose an agenda for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)
Perceptions of Resilience and Physical Health Symptom Improvement Following Post Disaster Integrated Health Services

Howard J. Osofsky,Carl F. Weems,Rebecca A. Graham,Joy D. Osofsky,Tonya C. Hansel,Lucy S. King

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2018.35

IF: 5.556

2018-06-19

Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness

Abstract:Abstract Objective Theorists and researchers have linked resilience with a host of positive psychological and physical health outcomes. This paper examines perceptions of resilience and physical health symptoms in a sample of individuals exposed to multiple community disasters following involvement in integrated mental health services. Methods A multiwave naturalistic design was used to follow 762 adult clinic patients (72% female; 28% minority status), ages 18-92 years (mean age=40 years), who were evaluated for resilience and physical health symptoms prior to receiving services and at 1, 3, and 6 months’ follow-up. Results Data indicated increases in perceptions of resilience and decreased physical health symptoms reported over time. Results also indicated that resilience predicted physical health symptoms, such that resilience and physical health symptoms were negatively associated (ie, improved resilience was associated with decreases in physical health symptoms). These effects were primarily observed for those individuals with previous exposure to natural disasters. Conclusions Findings provide correlational evidence for behavioral health treatment provided as part of a stepped-care, collaborative model in reducing physical health symptoms and increasing resilience post-disaster. Controlled trials are warranted. ( Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness . 2019;13:223–229)

public, environmental & occupational health
Disasters collide at the intersection of extreme weather and infectious diseases

John M Drake,Éric Marty,Kamal J K Gandhi,Meredith Welch-Devine,Brian Bledsoe,Marshall Shepherd,Lynne Seymour,Christine C Fortuin,Cristian Montes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.14188

Abstract:Natural disasters interact to affect the resilience and prosperity of communities and disproportionately affect low income families and communities of colour. However, due to lack of a common theoretical framework, these are rarely quantified. Observing severe weather events (e.g. hurricanes and tornadoes) and epidemics (e.g. COVID-19) unfolding in southeastern US communities led us to conjecture that interactions among catastrophic disturbances might be much more considerable than previously recognized. For instance, hurricane evacuations increase human aggregation, a factor that affects the transmission of acute infections like SARS-CoV-2. Similarly, weather damage to health infrastructure can reduce a community's ability to provide services to people who are ill. As globalization and human population and movement continue to increase and weather events are becoming more intense, such complex interactions are expected to magnify and significantly impact environmental and human health.
Introduction to the Special Issue: International Responses to Prevention Intervention Research During Human Ecosystem Disruptions

Pablo Montero-Zamora,Flavio Marsiglia,Amanda Nguyen,John Toumbourou,Elizabeth B. Robertson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-024-01650-5

2024-01-25

Prevention Science

Abstract:For decades, human ecosystem disruptions (HEDs), including pandemics, natural disasters, and socio-economic crises, have shaped national and international responses affecting everyday life. These disruptions present challenges and opportunities for prevention science to address emerging behavioral and mental health research questions, intervention strategies, methodologies, analyses, and research collaboration. This paper introduces a special issue that aims to document examples of how prevention science research teams had (1) globally improved health and well-being through swift, scientifically based responses during HED events and (2) advanced our understanding of the conduct and outcomes of prevention intervention research during crises such as pandemics, natural disasters, and socio-economic crises. The issue presents six research studies conducted in over ten different countries (e.g., Australia, Mexico, China). This issue includes original empirical and descriptive work that addressed HED implications for preventive interventions at within-country and cross-national levels. The findings hold potential applications for responses during current and future pandemics and natural disasters. Participants reflected on methodological and contextual considerations during HEDs, such as navigating travel restrictions, adapting ongoing research efforts to accommodate scientific learning during disruptions, and assessing the impact of policies redistributing preventive resources during and after a HED.

public, environmental & occupational health
Multisystem Resilience for Children and Youth in Disaster: Reflections in the Context of COVID-19

Ann S. Masten,Frosso Motti-Stefanidi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42844-020-00010-w

2020-06-01

Adversity and Resilience Science

Abstract:In the context of rising disasters worldwide and the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, this commentary considers the implications of findings in resilience science on children and youth for disaster preparation and response. The multisystem challenges posed by disasters are illustrated by the COVID-19 pandemic. We discuss the significance of disasters in the history of resilience science and the emergence of a unifying systems definition of resilience. Principles of a multisystem perspective on resilience and major findings on what matters for young people in disasters are delineated with reference to the pandemic. Striking parallels are noted in the psychosocial resilience factors identified at the level of individual children, families, schools, and communities. These parallels suggest that adaptive capacities associated with resilience in these interacting systems reflect interconnected networks and processes that co-evolved and may operate in concert. As resilience science moves toward integrated theory, knowledge, and applications in practice, particularly in disaster risk reduction and resilience promotion, more focus will be needed on multisystem and multidisciplinary research, communication, training, and planning.
Familiar ethical issues amplified: how members of research ethics committees describe ethical distinctions between disaster and non-disaster research

Catherine M Tansey,James Anderson,Renaud F Boulanger,Lisa Eckenwiler,John Pringle,Lisa Schwartz,Matthew Hunt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0203-z

2017-06-28

Abstract:Background: The conduct of research in settings affected by disasters such as hurricanes, floods and earthquakes is challenging, particularly when infrastructures and resources were already limited pre-disaster. However, since post-disaster research is essential to the improvement of the humanitarian response, it is important that adequate research ethics oversight be available. Methods: We aim to answer the following questions: 1) what do research ethics committee (REC) members who have reviewed research protocols to be conducted following disasters in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) perceive as the key ethical concerns associated with disaster research?, and 2) in what ways do REC members understand these concerns to be distinct from those arising in research conducted in non-crisis situations? This qualitative study was developed using interpretative description methodology; 15 interviews were conducted with REC members. Results: Four key ethical issues were identified as presenting distinctive considerations for disaster research to be implemented in LMICs, and were described by participants as familiar research ethics issues that were amplified in these contexts. First, REC members viewed disaster research as having strong social value due to its potential for improving disaster response, but also as requiring a higher level of justification compared to other research settings. Second, they identified vulnerability as an overarching concern for disaster research ethics, and a feature that required careful and critical appraisal when assessing protocols. They noted that research participants' vulnerabilities frequently change in the aftermath of a disaster and often in unpredictable ways. Third, they identified concerns related to promoting and maintaining safety, confidentiality and data security in insecure or austere environments. Lastly, though REC members endorsed the need and usefulness of community engagement, they noted that there are significant challenges in a disaster setting over and above those typically encountered in global health research to achieve meaningful community engagement. Conclusion: Disaster research presents distinctive ethical considerations that require attention to ensure that participants are protected. As RECs review disaster research protocols, they should address these concerns and consider how justification, vulnerability, security and confidentially, and community engagement are shaped by the realities of conducting research in a disaster.
The Public Health Consequences of Disasters

Eric K. Noji

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049023x00025255

2000-12-01

Prehospital and Disaster Medicine

Abstract:Abstract Although disasters have exacted a heavy toll of death and suffering, the future seems more frightening. Good disaster management must link data collection and analysis to the decision-making process. The overall objectives of disaster management from the viewpoint of public health are: 1) needs assessments; 2) matching available resources with defined needs; 3) prevention of further adverse health effects; 4) implementation of disease-control strategies; 5) evaluation of the effectiveness of the application of these strategies; and 6) improvement in contingency planning for future disasters. The effects of sudden-onset, natural disasters on humans are quantifiable. Knowledge of the epidemiology of deaths, injuries, and illnesses is essential to determine effective responses; provide public education; establish priorities, planning, and training. In addition, the temporal patterns for the medical care required must be established so that the needs in future disasters can be anticipated. This article discusses: 1) the nature of disasters due to sudden-onset, natural events; 2) the medical and health needs associated with such events and disasters; 3) practical issues of disaster responses; and 4) the advance organization and management of disasters. The discussion also includes: 1) discussions of past problems in disaster management including non-congruence between available supplies and the actual needs of the affected population; 2) information management; 3) needs assessments; 4) public health surveillance; and 5) linking information with decision-making. This discussion is followed by an analysis of what currently is known about the health-care needs during some specific types of sudden-onset, natural disasters: 1) floods; 2) tropical cyclones; 3) tornadoes; 4) volcanic eruptions; and 5) earthquakes. The article concludes with descriptions of some specific public-health problems associated with disasters including epidemics and disposition of corpses. All natural disasters are unique in that the regions affected have different social, economic, and health backgrounds. But, many similarities exist, and knowledge about these can ensure that the health and emergency medical relief and limited resources are well-managed.

emergency medicine

Exposure science perspective on disaster preparedness and resilience

ISEA2007 panel: integration of better exposure characterizations into disaster preparedness for responders and the public

Disaster exposure and patterns of disaster preparedness: A multilevel social vulnerability and engagement perspective

Exposure science in an age of rapidly changing climate: challenges and opportunities

A comparative assessment of major international disasters: the need for exposure assessment, systematic emergency preparedness, and lifetime health care

A Perspective towards Multi-Hazard Resilient Systems: Natural Hazards and Pandemics

Disasters, community vulnerability, and poverty: The intersection between economics and emergency management

Building human resilience: the role of public health preparedness and response as an adaptation to climate change

Environmental public health research at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: A blueprint for exposure science in a connected world

Invited Perspective: Leveraging Research and Resources to Mitigate Health Impacts of Environmental Disasters-Insights from a South Korean Tire Factory Fire

Exposure Ecology Drives a Unified Understanding of the Nexus of (Urban) Natural Ecosystem, Ecological Exposure, and Health

The Mental Health Impacts of Successive Disasters: Examining the Roles of Individual and Community Resilience Following a Tornado and COVID-19

Progress and landscape of disaster science: Insights from computational analyses

An Ecological Approach to Disaster Mitigation: A Literature Review

What lies beyond social capital? The role of social psychology in building community resilience to climate change.

Perceptions of Resilience and Physical Health Symptom Improvement Following Post Disaster Integrated Health Services

Disasters collide at the intersection of extreme weather and infectious diseases

Introduction to the Special Issue: International Responses to Prevention Intervention Research During Human Ecosystem Disruptions

Multisystem Resilience for Children and Youth in Disaster: Reflections in the Context of COVID-19

Familiar ethical issues amplified: how members of research ethics committees describe ethical distinctions between disaster and non-disaster research

The Public Health Consequences of Disasters