Analyze

Emergency response is the main idea in this article, but specifically that related to nuclear emergencies. An interesting point was made about the confidentiality of the plants and their "trade secrets" of sorts. While being transparent is helpful for safety reasons, it also reduced the profitability of the company, since other companies would be able to use their ideas. EMS knows a lot about respecting privacy through HIPPA, however it is also important to know the layout of important or potentially hazardous buildings within a response district. This would be a necessary compromise to make between the nuclear emergency response team and the nuclear leaders.

Emergency response is the primary concern of this article. The article is about the challenges faced in forming and maintaining an effective international response system for nuclear emergency response.

The article focuses on the inherent necessity for emergency response to include community education, risk assessment, and premade policies that designate decision making authority in the event of a disaster, while also acknowledging the inherent unpredictability of emergencies that require flexible response plans. Emphasis is placed on the need for rapid response, and the importance of safeguarding expertise through training and records. 

Emergency response is discussed in the article through being prepared for nuclear disasters. An international response team responds to nuclear disasters, how to be prepared, what to be prepared for, having it be in all different languages,etc.

The way that countries and the world address nuclear emergencies is addressed in this article. Currently there is no central international response resources or authority. Because of the rarity of nuclear catastrophic nuclear emergencies, there are few pockets of professionals with field experience with dealing with these types of emergencies. Japan greatly lacked the assistance of these people during this disaster. These things all contribute to a less optimal emergency response. By addressing these issues the quality of response to nuclear emergencies can be greatly increased.

Emergency response is discussed in the context of a world post- Fukushima and the lessons learned from the incident. The article brings to discussion the pros and cons of an international nuclear emergency response team, which currently is non-existent. The paradigm has long been to focus on accident avoidance and regulation to prevent such disasters. The author cites several existing agencies (internationally) and the Nuclear Regulatory Comission as possible sources of knowledge and resources for the development of an internationally united response team, specializing in nuclear disaster relief.

They also emphasize the need for an interdisciplinary effort in creating and maintaining such a team. Researchers, operators, and policy-makers alike have a stake in the success of relief efforts, and thus should all be involved in creating the team. And not only does the effort have to be multidiscplinary, but international, which brings about questions of funding, protocols, and jurisdiction. Also, who will join, and where will they receive the necessary training needed for specific response? These are all challenges that need to be addressed prior to the creation of the team. 

Emergency response is addressed in this report. Responses from various outlets to the Fukushima nuclear disaster are outlined and critiqued to prove the end point of Schmid, which is that an international nuclear emergency response plan is necessary. 

The author addresses emergency response by analyzing the responses different nations had to nuclear plant disasters and compared those emergency responses to each other as well as the fallout in Japan. She then analyzed the areas where there was apparent needs that had to be addressed in terms of emergency response. She shows exactly why a nuclear emergency response plan is necessary. The author analyzes the effect that post nuclear disaster had on the people, leaders and areas surrounding Chernobyl and Three Mile Island as well as Fukushima. She also addresses not only the importance of having an international emergency response team, but also the need for integration between the public and scientists/elite that decide protocol. 

In this article emergency response was looked at in a very broad way, with planning for having teams, organization, and training. Logistics weren't fleshed out, but the call for a team was there. It was also potentially difficult due to internationalization of the team.

Emergency response is addressed in a broad sense of the major risk factors associated with a natural disaster and epidemics. The main points they make are that preparedness, with a focus on availability of safe water and primary healthcare services, along with surveillance for the beginnings of an epidemic, are necessessay for a strong response to a disaster situation