Premium
A disaster by any other name?: COVID‐19 and support for an All‐Hazards approach
Author(s) -
Penta Samantha,
Kendra James,
Marlowe Valerie,
Gill Kimberly
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
risk, hazards and crisis in public policy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.634
H-Index - 8
ISSN - 1944-4079
DOI - 10.1002/rhc3.12213
Subject(s) - hazard , emergency management , pandemic , crisis management , covid-19 , public health , criticism , disaster planning , business , public relations , environmental planning , political science , medical emergency , suicide prevention , poison control , medicine , nursing , geography , law , chemistry , disease , organic chemistry , pathology , infectious disease (medical specialty)
Disasters are among the crises that can test the decision making skill of elected and appointed public officials from planning through response and recovery. The COVID‐19 crisis, a public health emergency rather than one with immediate damage to the built environment, has affected many aspects of community life. Experiences in responding to the pandemic will likely stimulate fresh planning initiatives for public health emergencies. How then should emergency planners approach planning and response tasks? The All‐Hazards approach has been a mainstay of both research and policymaking for over 40 years, but it has come under recent criticism. In this paper, we consider if the All‐Hazards approach to disaster management is still viable. Comparing the management needs that emerged in the pandemic with those of disasters from more familiar hazard agents, we conclude that the All‐Hazards approach is valid and can continue to guide policymakers in their hazard and disaster management activities.