Cultural Considerations in Emergency Management - Free Essay

The world is currently battling a health emergency of a magnitude not seen in the last century. Since its outbreak in Wuhan, China, in late 2019, COVID-19 has spread to almost all countries in the world. Thousands of people have died, and economies have been greatly hurt. People’s culture has also been largely affected. For instance, cultural norms such as handshakes and hugs have been abandoned in an attempt to contain the virus. Similarly, culture has played a significant role in the outcomes of the measures developed to contain the virus. Therefore, cultural considerations have been an important aspect of emergency management in regard to this pandemic. Emergency management refers to the response to humanitarian emergencies consisting of preparedness, mitigation, and recovery. Different countries around the world have employed different emergency management strategies in response to the pandemic with varying degrees of success. The United States is one of the most culturally diverse communities in the world. As such, the strategies adopted to fight the pandemic had to speak to this diversity. This paper seeks to discuss the emergency management strategies employed in the United States, the influence of culture on those strategies, as well as recommend solutions that could be used to improve response and management of emergencies in the future.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Influence of Culture on Emergency Management

As mentioned earlier, culture is an integral part of the response to emergencies. In a guideline released by the United Nations Educational. Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in partnership with the World Bank Group in 2018, culture was identified as one of the critical factors that enhance resilience and recovery during disasters, particularly in cities where approximately 55% of the global population lives (Meyer, 2019). The guideline further advances that elements of culture such as traditions, local practices, places of worship and relics affect the resiliency of communities during emergencies.

Culture and risk perception are also closely related. Studies have shown that people’s behavior affects their risk perception, which, in turn, impacts their preparedness, response and recovery (Appleby-Arnold et al., 2018). For example, high trust in authorities leads to lower risk perception in communities, while distrust in authorities has been shown to lead to fatalistic attitudes, which also hinder disaster preparedness (Appleby-Arnold et al., 2018). A high level of solidarity between families and individuals in a community is also a cultural trait that significantly affects response and recovery efforts during emergencies.

Regarding COVID-19, aspects of culture are present in all phases of the pandemic, from exposure to early screening and treatment. For instance, widely accepted means of greetings in different cultures such as kissing on the face and shaking hands are some of the ways in which the viruses and bacteria are spread. In light of this, recommendations against shaking hands and other conventional forms of greetings have been developed in an attempt to stop the spread of COVID-19. Ways of promoting such alterations and adjustments to people’s customary cultural practices, therefore, must be incorporated in emergency management (Bruns et al., 2020). Close proximity is also another way in which the virus spreads. Public gatherings characterize various cultural events, and hence changes have had to be done to contain the spread. For instance, religious gatherings have either been cancelled, or the number of people involved restricted. Understanding the various cultures is essential in developing strategies aimed at reducing the spread of COVID-19, considering that such gatherings and events are an integral part of people’s culture.

Over the years, studies have proven that the relationship between health and culture is complex. For instance, different cultures have different beliefs and explanations for sickness and health (Kahissay et al., 2017). Thus, there is a need to consider culture perceptions and how they affect the recognition of symptoms, access to care and treatment, as well as response to stigmatization. The interventions developed during health emergencies, therefore, should consider the beliefs and assumptions of the people. The interventions should be targeted at the local level as a way of encouraging education and participation and also ensure that the strategies adopted are culturally appropriate for the specific communities. In the management of health emergencies, the correlation of disease with particular cultural causations should be avoided to prevent blaming specific communities for high prevalence rates.

Throughout history, infectious diseases have always been associated with stigmatization. Stigma adversely affects communities since people may keep off from seeking medical care, a factor that may lead to a rise of infections in these populations. Emergency management strategies, therefore, should strive to mitigate stigmatization. For instance, in naming the virus, the World Health Organization (WHO) picked a name that did not refer to any individual, community, or geographical location, in an attempt to prevent stigmatization (Bruns et al., 2020). Likewise, public health officers and emergency managers have made efforts not to link the disease to any group of people to prevent stigmatization within communities.

Evolution of Emergency Management

While emergency management has traditionally been a reactive science, it has witnessed a drastic evolution in recent years, driven by the occurrence of calamities, catastrophes, as well as heightened risks and emerging threats. Various social and political advances have also supported the evolution. Following Hurricane Katrina, more focus was placed on the response and recovery aspects of emergency management (Farazmand, 2016). Though emergency management was entirely a function of the government, both federal and state, the involvement of nonprofit organizations has been on the rise recently. Today, emergency management has been incorporated into people’s daily lives, and more effective and responsive strategies have been developed.

As seen in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, all levels of government, as well as other players in the community, are now involved in emergency management. Cognizant of the growing diversity in the country, cultural competence has also been incorporated into emergency management (Betancourt et al., 2016). Moreover, the integration of technology into emergency management has helped enhance preparedness, response and recovery. However, just as it was in the past, the response to the COVID-19 has been hampered by various political, social, and cultural factors, as will be discussed later in this paper.

Reactions of Local Communities and Agencies to the Pandemic

Different communities respond differently to emergencies. Their risk perception, as well as their response, is also significantly affected by their culture (Appleby-Arnold et al., 2018). For instance, previous experience of disaster affects disaster risk perception, though it does not necessarily lead to an increase in preparedness for future risks. In this light, the casual behavior witnessed at the start of the pandemic can be attributed to the fact that such an emergency has not been witnessed in a long time. Besides, the comparison of the disease with the seasonal flu in its early stages also led to this behavior. Studies have also shown that ethnic minorities, women, and people from low socio-economic backgrounds have a higher disaster risk perception. All these factors should be integrated into emergency management to ensure that response, recovery, as well as preparedness for future emergencies, is enhanced.

Generally, as the seriousness of the disease became apparent, communities reacted to it with fear and anxiety. These emotions are responsible for the compliance of the guidelines set to control the spread of the disease in its early phases. The most vulnerable groups, including the elderly and those pre-existing conditions, were the most affected since the spotlight was placed on them (Koff & Williams, 2020). It would later be realized that even the young and healthy were not wholly safe, leading to a general sense of fear and anxiety in society. However, as the measures developed to counter the virus, such as social distancing and quarantine, began having an economic and social toll on the people, their response changed. Noncompliance to the guidelines rose, and even protests against the closure of the economy were witnessed in various parts of the country, despite an increase in the number of deaths.

People from low socio-economic backgrounds were the most affected since the disruptions caused affected their flow of income, and hence threatened their livelihoods. Owing to their low socio-economic status, higher incidence of lifestyle diseases, and historical health disparities, minority groups such as the African Americans, were the most affected by the disease. Healthcare providers are another vulnerable group that has been greatly affected by the pandemic (Yancy, 2020). Being a novel virus, the healthcare providers had to learn on the go, even amid a shortage of personal protective equipment. Regardless of this, they developed ingenious ways of overcoming the challenge and have been repeatedly cited as the real heroes in the fight against the pandemic (Wingfield & Taegtmeyer, 2020). It is also important to note that the fear and worry that the disease caused in communities resulted in discrimination, a factor that threatened to hamper the containment measures developed (Lin, 2020).

On its side, the government reacted by restricting international travel. Various state agencies also imposed restrictions on movements and gatherings. Schools and parks were also closed as various agencies worked to flatten the curve (Corley, 2020). Efforts were also directed towards finding a vaccine and cure for the disease. In preparation for the recovery phase, the government rolled out various stimulus packages for both individuals and businesses.

Reactions of the Media to the Pandemic

Over the years, media, both traditional and social media, have grown to become important elements of people’s culture. As such, the behavior and perceptions of the people are greatly affected by the content they consume. Resultantly, there exists a link between the amount of media coverage that a particular event receives and public response. Just like in other emergencies in the past, the COVID-19 outbreak was characterized by misinformation, especially in the early days. Misinformation leads to anxiety, panic, as well as other mental health issues among communities. Chan et al. (2018) used the outbreak of Zika virus in 2016 to study how media affects both the health information and behaviors of the public during emergencies. The study established that social media had a massive impact on the public’s risk perception attitude, while traditional media affected their perceptions of protective behaviors (Chan et al., 2018). It was also established that the less educated populations were more impacted by the information passed via various media. Various social media tools have also been largely used to create awareness of the disease and also contain its spread.

As mentioned earlier in this paper, the country’s response to the disease was quite slow. Fuelled by the alarming reports emerging from other countries around the world, the mainstream media amplified the slow response by the government, a factor that led to conflicts and confusion.