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?
I looked up how emergency responders deal with mental health, since the method that was described in this article is no longer recommended. I also investigated the types of disaster that people around the world face each year, besides for weather disasters. Furthermore, I looked at a map of the types of disasters across the globe.
That is a very good question, I have seen reviews of it, but never about it actually being used for the intended purpose. Thats not surprising given the subject content. As a college student, I personally would be offended and more or less turned off if my partner decided to pull out their phone and record consent on it while we were going for it. Thats probably why its hard to find any good reviews...
The pdf did not include the bibliography, however I would assume that a lot of the scientific information came from other, more medical/chemical rather than sociological, Chernobyl research.
Users submit photos with text explanatios attached. You can also hashtag posts.
The article does not directly address emergency response, however it did address medical stories as being helpful to the public to feel supported and reach out when they realized they had a psychological condition. This is important in society, because if someone can get treated for something, or at least know they have it an take precautions, then they help themselves feel more comfortable and be more successful, they reduce the strain on those around them, and they make it easier for healthcare providers, if there is ever a related issue.
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.
The author states a background in STS studies, futher work with organization, disasters, and sociocultural risk studies.
Participants receive a PhD upon successful completion of the program.
They started in 1987, and since then have been helping with one crisis after the other. Tuberculosis in 1989, womens health, HIV, and many others. They expanded and learned with each project.