ABSTRACT
Conventional wisdom holds that pre-event planning is a key factor in effective disaster response. In assessing the response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, it is necessary to evaluate the extent to which emergency management agencies were prepared to respond to a pandemic, particularly given the unusual nature of this event, ie, scope, scale, and length of response. While emergency management agencies at every level of government have been involved in the COVID-19 response, state-level governments have taken on a prominent and atypical lead-ership role. This study assesses the extent and role that emergency management agencies planned for a pandemic scenario. Understanding the extent to which state-level emergency management agencies planned for an event like the COVID-19 pandemic and what they anticipated their roles to provide insight for future revisions in pandemic planning. This study addresses two related research questions: RQ 1: To what extent did state-level emergency management agencies account for a pandemic in emergency management response plans prior to COVID-19? RQ 2: What was the planned role of state-level emergency management agencies in the response to a pandemic? An analysis of state-level emergency management plans found that, although all states with available emergency management response plans included pandemics, there was significant variation in the extent of the inclusion, and the role prescribed for emergency management. Public health and emergency management response plans were congruent with respect to the planned role of emergency management.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disaster Planning , Disasters , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Public HealthABSTRACT
This case study explores Florida's emergency management response during the COVID-19 pandemic. Utilizing the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework and transboundary crisis literature, this article identifies how state attributes, institutions, multi-sector stakeholders, and their interactions may have influenced the state's response to the pandemic. Findings from the content analyses of government policies, documents, and news reports indicate that some aspects of Florida's response were politically motivated, inflexible, and driven by a small circle of advisors, often ignoring expert opinions and the needs of uniquely vulnerable populations. Furthermore, the findings indicate that public health departments had sidelined locally-controlled emergency management departments. This research offers insight into effective decision-making practices during the response phase of a pandemic and contributes knowledge to the literature in emergency management and public administration focusing on transboundary crises.
ABSTRACT
Protective policies have been unequally and inconsistently applied in the United States throughout the Covid-19 pandemic. This study investigates the relationship between state and local policies and Covid-19 deaths, combining three datasets: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Social Vulnerability Index; local laws and regulations from the COVID Analysis and Mapping of Policies (AMP) database; and Covid-19 deaths by county reported by The New York Times. It examines, using propensity score matching, local policies and regulations as treatments during the crisis, and assesses how, inter alia, face mask requirements, gathering restrictions, stay-at-home orders, and social distancing mandates enacted at the county level altered Covid-19 deaths. The results indicate that the first three variables reduced average Covid-19 deaths in high-vulnerability communities. Despite clear gaps in federal policy guidance and coordinated policies, some efforts led by local and state governments promoted safer behaviour and lessened the impact of Covid-19 in communities, especially those with higher social vulnerability rates.