Collecting and communicating perishable data in a post-disaster context: rapid research and rapid dissemination.

Context: Puerto Rico experienced four natural disasters in 4 years (2017-2021): Hurricanes Irma and Maria, thousands of earthquakes reaching 6.4 magnitude, and the COVID-19 pandemic. In this context, our team sought to understand the impact of disaster aid distribution on poverty and economic inequality, and their relationship to the spread of COVID-19 across Puerto Rico. Rapid research was required to ensure we could collect perishable data within this ever-changing context. Challenges: Our mixed methods design relied on both secondary and primary data. Because analyses of the former were to inform where and how to collect the latter, timing was of the essence. The data sources identified were not readily available to the public, and thus required gaining access through direct requests to government agencies. The requests coincided with a transition between administrations after an election. This resulted in unexpected delays. Once in the field, the team had to balance the rapid nature of the research with the mindful work to avoid compounding traumas experienced by participants, heightened risk for re-traumatization and fatigue, the risk of COVID-19, the digital divide, and intermittent electrical and telecommunication services. Adaptations: In response to the delayed access to secondary data, we adjusted our research question. We continued to collect data as they became available, incorporating some immediately into analyses, and cleaning and storing others for future research opportunities. To overcome ongoing trauma challenges and prevent fatigue, we recruited and hired a large temporary team, including members of communities where we collected data. By recruiting participants and co-researchers at the same time and place, we both collapsed time between these activities and increased our team's contextual competency. To adapt to challenges presented by the pandemic, we created hybrid data collection procedures where some data were collected online, and some in person, while maintaining COVID-19 protections. We used similar adaptations for dissemination. Lessons: Rapid research needs to be agile. Working within a convergence framework to investigate wicked problems had the unexpected added benefit of providing our team with a variety of disciplinary approaches which proved helpful in adapting to the changing conditions in the field. In addition to the resourcefulness of a transdisciplinary team, it is important to be willing to pivot in response to changes and to collect data where and when you can. To increase participation, opportunities need to be designed with flexibility, mindful of competing demands faced by individuals willing to collaborate. Collecting and analyzing data iteratively and utilizing local resources can enable rapid research that is rigorous and yields rich data. Contributions: Our team applied the lessons learned to structure a rapid and iterative dissemination plan. We combined member-checking with community-level dissemination, enabling us to hone findings further before presenting to policy makers and media. Rapid research creates opportunities to make data-informed program and policy adjustments when they can be most impactful. Both the media and policy makers pay closer attention to research on current events. Hence, our recommendation is to do more rapid research! The more we do, the better we will get at it, and the more accustomed community leaders, policy makers, and program designers will become to using data to inform decisions.

Developing a Concept of Operations Template to Guide Collaborative Disaster Research Response Between Academic Public Health and Public Health Agencies.

Research conducted in the context of a disaster or public health emergency is essential to improve knowledge about its short- and long-term health consequences, as well as the implementation and effectiveness of response and recovery strategies. Integrated approaches to conducting Disaster Research Response (DR2) can answer scientific questions, while also providing attendant value for operational response and recovery. Here, we propose a Concept of Operations (CONOPS) template to guide the collaborative development and implementation of DR2 among academic public health and public health agencies, informed by previous literature, semi-structured interviews with disaster researchers from academic public health across the United States, and discussion groups with public health practitioners. The proposed CONOPS outlines actionable strategies to address DR2 issues before, during, and after disasters for public health scholars and practitioners who seek to operationalize or enhance their DR2 programs. Additional financial and human resources will be necessary to promote widespread implementation of collaborative DR2 programs.

Pandemic publishing: A bibliometric review of COVID-19 research in the crisis and disaster literature.

Iconic events have traditionally instigated progression in the fields of crisis and disaster science. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the pressing question is how this global health emergency impacted the research agendas of our field. We reviewed contributions in ten important crisis and disaster journals in the two and a half years following the COVID-19 outbreak from 1 January 2020 to 30 June 2022. Specifically, we conducted a bibliometric review using thematic mapping analysis to distill the major themes covered by the emerging COVID-19 literature within crisis and disaster science (N = 239 articles). Our results indicate that several well-known topics are applied to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as risk, crisis communication, governance, resilience and vulnerability. The pandemic also gave rise to new topics, such as citizen behavior, state power, and the business and mental health impact of crisis measures. Several studies are already looking ahead by identifying lessons for preparedness and mitigation of future pandemics. By taking stock of the surge of COVID-19 studies while this academic literature is still taking shape, this review sets the stage for future contributions to the crisis and disaster literatures. It provides valuable lessons for what topics are studied and what themes need more attention. The COVID-19 pandemic is destined to become an iconic event for our literature that not only strengthens and deepens existing debates, but also clearly offers the opportunity to draw in new perspectives and broaden the horizon of crisis and disaster science.

Los eventos icónicos han instigado tradicionalmente la progresión en los campos de la ciencia de crisis y desastres. A raíz de la pandemia de COVID­19, la pregunta apremiante es cómo esta emergencia de salud global impactó las agendas de investigación de nuestro campo. Revisamos las contribuciones en diez revistas importantes sobre crisis y desastres en los dos años y medio posteriores al brote de COVID­19, desde el 1 de enero de 2020 hasta el 30 de junio de 2022. Específicamente, realizamos una revisión bibliométrica utilizando un análisis de mapeo temático para destilar los principales temas cubiertos por la literatura emergente sobre COVID­19 dentro de la ciencia de crisis y desastres (N = 239 artículos). Nuestros resultados indican que varios temas bien conocidos se aplican a la pandemia de COVID­19, como el riesgo, la comunicación de crisis, la gobernanza, la resiliencia y la vulnerabilidad. La pandemia también dio lugar a nuevos temas, como el comportamiento ciudadano, el poder estatal y el impacto comercial y de salud mental de las medidas de crisis. Varios estudios ya están mirando hacia el futuro identificando lecciones para la preparación y mitigación de futuras pandemias. Al hacer un balance del aumento de los estudios de COVID­19 mientras esta literatura académica aún está tomando forma, esta revisión sienta las bases para futuras contribuciones a la literatura sobre crisis y desastres. Proporciona lecciones valiosas sobre qué temas se estudian y qué temas necesitan más atención. La pandemia de COVID­19 está destinada a convertirse en un evento icónico para nuestra literatura que no solo fortalece y profundiza los debates existentes, sino que claramente ofrece la oportunidad de dibujar nuevas perspectivas y ampliar el horizonte de la ciencia de crisis y desastres.

To Conduct Research or Not? What Kind of Research? And How? Research Strategies of Social and Humanities Researchers During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic

The aim of this paper is to describe the research strategies carried out by female and male researchers in the social sciences and humanities during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The empirical research which the article is based on was conducted in April and May 2020 using an online qualitative survey. As a result of the qualitative content analysis of our research participants' statements, we characterized four research strategies: resignation, suspension, continuation, and research (re)construction. We describe the results of the analyses in relation to the characteristics of disaster research. We indicate that research in a pandemic is relatable to the slow disaster research perspective more than to the disaster research perspective. © by the author, licensee University of Lodz, Poland.

Critical Perspectives on Disaster and Crisis Research: Revealing and Responding to Vulnerability

Natural disasters and other crises present methodological challenges to organizational researchers. While these challenges are well canvassed in the literature, less attention has been paid to understanding how distinct crisis events may present, not only unique challenges, but also important opportunities for research. In this chapter, we draw on our collective experience of conducting post-earthquake research and compare this with the COVID-19 pandemic context in order to identify and discuss the inherent vulnerabilities associated with disaster studies and the subsequent methodological challenges and opportunities that researchers might encounter. Adopting a critical perspective, the chapter grapples with some of the more contentious issues associated with research in a disaster and crisis context including aspects of stakeholder engagement, ethics, reciprocity, inequality, and vulnerability.

Research fatigue in COVID-19 pandemic and post-disaster research: Causes, consequences and recommendations.

PURPOSE: Research fatigue occurs when an individual or population of interest tires of engaging with research, consequently avoiding further participation. This paper considers research fatigue in the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic, to identify contributory factors and possible solutions for future post-disaster research. METHODOLOGY: We draw on examples from the literature and our own observations from the recruitment and data collection phases of qualitative and quantitative studies, to provide an overview of possible research fatigue in the current COVID-19 pandemic, with implications for future post-disaster research. FINDINGS: People affected by disasters sometimes receive multiple requests for study participation by separate teams who may not necessarily be coordinating their work. Not keeping participants informed of the research process or outcomes can lead to disillusionment. Being overburdened with too many research requests and failing to see any subsequent changes following participation may cause individuals to experience research fatigue. ORIGINALITY: Guidelines for researchers wishing to reduce the occurrence of research fatigue include ensuring greater transparency within research; sharing of results; and using oversight or gatekeeper bodies to aid coordination. Failure to restrict the number of times that people are asked to participate in studies risks poor participation rates. This can subsequently affect the quality of information with which to inform policy-makers and protect the health of the public during the COVID-19 pandemic or other public health disasters/emergencies.

[COVID-19, and the History of Social Science Disaster Research]. / COVID-19 und die Geschichte der sozialwissenschaftlichen Katastrophenforschung.

This paper is part of Forum COVID-19: Perspectives in the Humanities and Social Sciences.The article connects and juxtaposes current day (social scientific) discussions on the social effects of the COVID-crisis with the history of social science disaster research during the Cold War. It elaborates on statements regarding the role of social inequalities in disaster, the idea of the "revealing" nature of disaster and crisis, and the relationship between disaster science, public and politics.