Search

The program is situated in Hiroshima and is based on the benefits and disasters of radiation to humans, including the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is also based on the Fukushima disaster and the University's response to it, realizing that there is a need for global leaders in the field of emergency response.

The “PIH Model of Care,” research in Rwanda, and work in Haiti were followed up on

The policy addresses how healthcare workers should respond to a suspected ebola incident. This is directly to public health because it affects how the public will receive medical care in the event of an ebola incident.

Representatives of the Indian Health Service have made numerous congressional testimonies and numerous pieces of legislation have been passes to support the IHS, however, it does not appear that any relate to emergency response or disaster.

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.

The students who complete the program receive a PhD after either 4 or 5 years, as described above

The report consists of the main article followed by a response from Andrea Binder of the Global Public Policy Institute.

The authors are Stephen J. Collier and Andrew Lakoff. They both have PhDs in anthropology and are professors are educational institutions. Collier is a professor of International Affairs at The New School and Lakoff is a professor of sociology at USC. They are professionally situated to discuss emergency response as they have done research in biosecurity and biothreats.