ABSTRACT
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.4102/jamba.v13i1.1115.].
ABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) brought on several social, economic, political, and environmental challenges. What was mostly questioned was the efficacy of the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 (As Amended 16 of 2015) (DMA), which was used to declare COVID-19 a disaster. The concern was whether the DMA is able to deal with pandemics when its focus is mostly on climate-related disasters. Most public health emergencies experience the spread of overwhelming information, some of which may be true and others may be false information. This article discusses the home remedies and myths related to COVID-19, that could impede pandemic response efforts. Subsequently, this study raises a question regarding the effectiveness of DMA to deal with such types of compounding risks. In doing so, this research is exploratory where the DMA and the media articles on COVID-19 home remedies and myths are systematically reviewed. Coronavirus disease 2019 home remedies and myths were found to be hazardous and the DMA was found unprepared to deal with such types of compounding risks. 'Infodemic management' needs to be considered in the DMA in order to prepare for effective disaster response.
ABSTRACT
The South African disaster response activities surpass risk reduction since the implementation of the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 (DMA) and the National Disaster Management Framework of 2005 (NDMF). Risk reduction, in particular risk communication, remained unexploited until the occurrence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The legislation and policy mandate a proactive approach for disaster management, requiring a focus on disaster risk reduction. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the significance of risk communication as a critical prevention and mitigatory strategy in disaster risk management, focusing on the COVID-19 pandemic. Key to risk communication success is ensuring adequate comprehension, accurate perception of the disseminated information, and compliance with regulations. Questions of trustworthiness, acceptability, effectiveness, and usefulness of messages and strategies communicated sought answers from the Bloemfontein population. Furthermore, the Agenda-setting Theory provided the grounding for the study. The study sample was picked in a stratified random sampling manner, using the confidence level and margin of error equation. A questionnaire survey was used to collect the data required to achieve the research objectives. Risk communication as a disaster risk reduction strategy implemented concurrently with imposed regulations was found to have played a vital role in mitigating the virus spread. However, the respondents were not aware of the local disaster management centre, which is supposed to be engaged in COVID-19 disaster management activities.
ABSTRACT
For the first time in the history of the Disaster Management Act, 57 of 2002, South Africa declared COVID-19 an epidemiological disaster. Section 3 and 27(1) of this Act activated the responsible Minister in consultation with other Ministers to issue regulations in response to the disaster. The declaration exposed the already criticised Act to scrutiny by the public. Therefore, this study investigated the Metropolitan Disaster Management Centres that coordinate local events and support the provincial and national disaster management centres, their perceptions concerning the disaster management legislation that mandates them. The study recognised a gap in this regard and saw it imperative to give the disaster managers a voice and a platform to express their opinion concerning the heavily criticised legislation. A model of the policy implementation process guided the study investigation. This model argues that implementation of policies tends to generate tensions, which result in a disruption of the policy formulators' expectations. The research uses some of the model's variables to measure the perceptions of disaster managers. Using an interview guide, the researchers conducted virtual interviews with the disaster managers. Scholarly and media articles review concerning the Act formed part of the data collection. The study finds that the disaster managers perceive the disaster management legislation as a very useful guide, an excellent piece of legislation and trust it regardless of the criticism it received. The gaps the critics identified in the legislation became evident and had negative effects on the COVID-19 disaster response.