Analyze

AK COVID-Development Studies Intersections

Aalok Khandekar
Annotation of
In response to

I am currently in the process of transitioning my M.A. level course on Science, Technology, and Development with 11 students to virtual instruction. One of my interests in engaging with COVID-19 is to examine how it (should) informs development ideologies and practices. How should students of development studies retool -- conceptually, methodologically, practically -- in wake of the pandemic?

pece_annotation_1474515346

josh.correira
Annotation of
In response to

One major point outlined in the article is the way that disease outbreaks have been viewed and prepared for has changed over the past few centuries. It started out in the view of public health where social factors like sanitation and clean water were valued but then shifted towards preparedness after outbreaks of various influenza viruses seemed to not fit the paradigm of public health.

pece_annotation_1475597865

josh.correira
Annotation of
In response to

The organization has the infrastructure of the Federal government, however they operate in areas that are more rural, including Alaska and the Southwest where environmental issues such as clean drinking water can be present, which they address in their community health approach. All members also are allowed access to the internet, which I'm assuming is available at each of their locations.

pece_annotation_1473104682

josh.correira
Annotation of
In response to

One argument presented is that public engagement in technical decisions can lead to great vigilance and confidence in emergency preparedness and that decisions governing technologies should not be left to the scientist. There is benefit in including lay people and STS scholars. This also includes public awareness about emergency response instead of one elite governing body controlling what is best for the public. Nuclear emergency responses must be transparent.

pece_annotation_1474822146

josh.correira
Annotation of
In response to

The article addresses the inequities in public health by showing how millions of tons of dust from concrete and asbestos were kicked up into the air after the tower collapses of 9/11 and was then determined to be safe per the EPA. A lawsuit was filed against the EPA on behalf of schoolchildren required to attend school in buildings near the site of the collapse and forced to breathe in so-called safe air. Emergency response is not directly addressed however plans of mandating that the EPA pay for the cleanup process are mentioned.