The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) published this report on the “Environmental Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident and their Remediation: Twenty Years of Experience”.
The article includes multiple in-person interviews, including with Canadian officials (such as the Nunavut Premier), a professor of psychiatry at the University of Saskatchewan, and several prominent figures in the Native community.
The IAEA is an international organization that seeks to promote the peaceful use of atomic technology and serve as an international regulator to promote safety and eliminate proliferation of nuclear weapon technology. According to the IAEA’s mission statement: “The International Atomic Energy Agency: is an independent intergovernmental, science and technology-based organization, in the United Nations family, that serves as the global focal point for nuclear cooperation; assists its Member States, in the context of social and economic goals, in planning for and using nuclear science and technology for various peaceful purposes, including the generation of electricity, and facilitates the transfer of such technology and knowledge in a sustainable manner to developing Member States; develops nuclear safety standards and, based on these standards, promotes the achievement and maintenance of high levels of safety in applications of nuclear energy, as well as the protection of human health and the environment against ionizing radiation; verifies through its inspection system that States comply with their commitments, under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and other non-proliferation agreements, to use nuclear material and facilities only for peaceful purposes.” (iaea.org)
This article seek to find out why treatable conditions are untreated or under-treated in third world countries despite the plethora of known treatments. The importance of anthropology is emphasized in solving these types of problems.
The article centers on how social and political factors effected access to care for citizens in the wake of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. Additionally, the author discusses how "at-risk" populations emerge; far too often, these populations are only noted after a disaster occurs, and are often ignored until that point. This creates a dependence on healthcare and illness for these populations, something that can be highly effected based on economic and social status. The author also discusses how technologies and government involvement dictated the situation post-disaster, and includes extensive information from resettled families and workers exposed to radiation
The article seeks to broaden the vision of the current medical system and structures by acknowledging and delivering care with the knowledge of biosocial effects.
1) Gender violence against humanitarian workers.
2) Gender violence that exists within the humanitarian organizations themselves.
3) How gender violence is interpreted and perceived by different cultures.
The bibliography is not included in the PDF uploaded, most likely because this a chapter excerpt from a larger work. However, there are several citations within the article, most of which are elaborated on. These descriptions indicate the works follow similar lines of thought and provide similar information to supplement Dr. Good's assertions. This includes his description of Dr. Evelyn A. Early's works (discussed earlier--ha), and several other prominent medical anthropologists.
Emergency response is addressed in a variety of different ways in this article. Effectiveness of global response and policy is addressed in modularity. Long-term response vs disaster responses are considered. Effectiveness of global policy is reviewed, such as cases of culling animals and controlling disease in different countries.
Emergency response is literally the main focus of the entire article. While it seems to be only a short chapter in a much larger collection of similar essays, the report fully analyzes past and present responses to nuclear emergencies. Moreover, Dr. Schmid builds a case for how future emergencies should be handled by an international team built on expertise. This includes expertise of nuclear energy, disaster response, and nuclear policy/regulation. While she refrains from commenting fully on whether the response mounted for Fukushima can be classified as "good" or "bad", her assertions indicates a need to shift focus from preventing emergencies to how nations respond to nuclear emergencies.