Search

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) drafted the policy. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

The main findings are about gender based violence in armed conflicts and the political implications of addressing gender based violence (separating and giving special treatment versus treating everyone as neutral) in humanitarian aid efforts.

Sexual violence has a place in humanitarianism; when it comes to getting treatment in humanitarian aid efforts gender-based violence is recognized as a "crime against humanity" that needs to be addressed as they are common in armed conflicts. 

Gender-based violence is approached as both a medical and health issue; the immediate wounds as the result of gender based violence (usually sexual violence) is focused on for treatment in emergencies but the deeper issue of the "rape epidemic" resulting from the system/ culture is not "treated".

Three quotes that support this are

“Numerous case studies have document that meaningfully engaging lay communities in decisions traditionally made by scientific and technical elites can enable greater vigilance and raise confidence about individual emergency prepardeness.” (Schmid 196)

“So far, the nuclear industry has almost exclusively focused on accident prevention.” … “nuclear emergency preparedness and response has hardly gained traction.” (Schmid 200)

“They created an organization, Spetsatom” … “and with defining generalizable strategies about how to respond to a possible future nuclear emergency” (Schmid 200)

One of the main arguments in this publication is that the spread of illness is often determined by social forces. For example, impoverished individuals may be more susceptible to illness because they cannot afford the proper treatment, not because they are more likely to contract the illness. This is described as structural violence: socio-structural factors that prevent people from achieving their full potential, e.g. receiving medical care.