在 COVID-19 期间揭示南非灾害管理立法的利弊。

IF 1.3 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies Pub Date : 2024-10-31 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.4102/jamba.v16i1.1689
Livhuwani D Nemakonde, Olivia Kunguma
{"title":"在 COVID-19 期间揭示南非灾害管理立法的利弊。","authors":"Livhuwani D Nemakonde, Olivia Kunguma","doi":"10.4102/jamba.v16i1.1689","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Legislation provides a framework for effective and coordinated disaster preparedness and response. This article evaluates the strengths and shortcomings of South Africa's disaster risk management (DRM) legislation in guiding the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since its promulgation in 2002, South Africa's DRM legislation has been hailed as one of the most progressive legislations globally. However, the severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, commonly known as the COVID-19 pandemic, exposed inadequacies in most existing DRM legislation worldwide, including in South Africa. This led to an inadequate response to the pandemic. A content-based literature review was conducted. Forty-nine peer-reviewed articles, reports, op-eds and newspaper articles were included in the review. The review highlighted significant inadequacies of South African DRM legislation, including the placement of the National Disaster Management Centre and the establishment of new structures for COVID-19 response. Based on the findings of this study, disaster managers, as the primary implementers of the disaster management legislation, must motivate the constant review of the disaster management legislation as a way of mitigating social, economic, political and environmental impacts of disasters, which emanate from the inadequacies existing in the disaster legislation.</p><p><strong>Contribution: </strong>The study's findings contribute to the effective management of the disaster management fraternity by suggesting amendment of the legislation based on the experience during the pandemic. The recommendations made to disaster managers will assist with responding appropriately to future pandemics and other disasters.</p>","PeriodicalId":51823,"journal":{"name":"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538313/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revealing the boon and bane of South Africa's disaster management legislation during COVID-19.\",\"authors\":\"Livhuwani D Nemakonde, Olivia Kunguma\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/jamba.v16i1.1689\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Legislation provides a framework for effective and coordinated disaster preparedness and response. This article evaluates the strengths and shortcomings of South Africa's disaster risk management (DRM) legislation in guiding the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since its promulgation in 2002, South Africa's DRM legislation has been hailed as one of the most progressive legislations globally. However, the severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, commonly known as the COVID-19 pandemic, exposed inadequacies in most existing DRM legislation worldwide, including in South Africa. This led to an inadequate response to the pandemic. A content-based literature review was conducted. Forty-nine peer-reviewed articles, reports, op-eds and newspaper articles were included in the review. The review highlighted significant inadequacies of South African DRM legislation, including the placement of the National Disaster Management Centre and the establishment of new structures for COVID-19 response. Based on the findings of this study, disaster managers, as the primary implementers of the disaster management legislation, must motivate the constant review of the disaster management legislation as a way of mitigating social, economic, political and environmental impacts of disasters, which emanate from the inadequacies existing in the disaster legislation.</p><p><strong>Contribution: </strong>The study's findings contribute to the effective management of the disaster management fraternity by suggesting amendment of the legislation based on the experience during the pandemic. The recommendations made to disaster managers will assist with responding appropriately to future pandemics and other disasters.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538313/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v16i1.1689\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v16i1.1689","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

立法为有效、协调的备灾和救灾工作提供了一个框架。本文评估了南非灾害风险管理(DRM)立法在指导应对 COVID-19 大流行方面的优势和不足。自 2002 年颁布以来,南非的灾难风险管理立法一直被誉为全球最先进的立法之一。然而,严重呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2(俗称 COVID-19 大流行病)暴露了包括南非在内的全球大多数现有 DRM 立法的不足之处。这导致对大流行病的应对不力。我们进行了基于内容的文献综述。其中包括 49 篇经同行评审的文章、报告、专栏文章和报纸文章。综述强调了南非灾害风险管理立法的重大不足,包括国家灾害管理中心的设置和 COVID-19 应对措施新结构的建立。根据本研究的结果,灾害管理者作为灾害管理立法的主要执行者,必须推动对灾害管理立法的不断审查,以此来减轻灾害对社会、经济、政治和环境造成的影响,这些影响源于灾害立法中存在的不足:研究结果有助于灾害管理机构的有效管理,根据大流行病期间的经验提出了修订立法的建议。向灾害管理者提出的建议将有助于对未来的大流行病和其他灾害做出适当的反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Revealing the boon and bane of South Africa's disaster management legislation during COVID-19.

Legislation provides a framework for effective and coordinated disaster preparedness and response. This article evaluates the strengths and shortcomings of South Africa's disaster risk management (DRM) legislation in guiding the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since its promulgation in 2002, South Africa's DRM legislation has been hailed as one of the most progressive legislations globally. However, the severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, commonly known as the COVID-19 pandemic, exposed inadequacies in most existing DRM legislation worldwide, including in South Africa. This led to an inadequate response to the pandemic. A content-based literature review was conducted. Forty-nine peer-reviewed articles, reports, op-eds and newspaper articles were included in the review. The review highlighted significant inadequacies of South African DRM legislation, including the placement of the National Disaster Management Centre and the establishment of new structures for COVID-19 response. Based on the findings of this study, disaster managers, as the primary implementers of the disaster management legislation, must motivate the constant review of the disaster management legislation as a way of mitigating social, economic, political and environmental impacts of disasters, which emanate from the inadequacies existing in the disaster legislation.

Contribution: The study's findings contribute to the effective management of the disaster management fraternity by suggesting amendment of the legislation based on the experience during the pandemic. The recommendations made to disaster managers will assist with responding appropriately to future pandemics and other disasters.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies
Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
37 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信