Search

Copyright of Disasters is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper explores and analyses the activities of Swedish organised crisis volunteers during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Based on a questionnaire and interviews, it sets out to answer two research questions on what characterised organised volunteerism during the pandemic, how organised volunteers experienced cooperation with local public actors, and how they viewed political steering. The paper contributes to a growing literature on the role of volunteers and links that role to views on political steering, something that is rarely done in disaster research. Sweden is a useful case study because of how COVID‐19 was managed, as well as because there are organised crisis volunteers and a debate is occurring on how the national system is steered. The paper shows how organised volunteers adapted to changing needs and adopted new roles, that experiences of cooperation with local authorities varied, and that calls were made for a stronger national leadership and for more explicit central political steering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Covid‐19 crises in the United Kingdom and the United States show how democracies may struggle to confront disasters that are increasingly impinging on the Global North. This paper highlights the extent to which disasters are now 'coming home' to Western democracies and it looks at some of the principal reasons why democracy has not been especially protective, at least in the case of the UK and the US. These include: reconceptualising disaster as a good thing (via 'herd immunity'); the influence of neoliberalism; and the limitations in the circulation of information. A key pandemic‐related danger is the conclusion that democracy itself is discredited. Disasters, though, call for a reinvigoration of democracy, not a knee‐jerk invocation of autocratic 'emergency' rule. A fundamental problem in the UK and US is that these countries were not democratic enough. The paper underlines the risk of a move towards a disaster‐producing system that is self‐reinforcing rather than self‐correcting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The response to the Covid‐19 pandemic in 2020–21 was dominated by the Westphalian primacy of national territory and sovereignty, significantly worsening and prolonging this crisis. Global platforms for cross‐border coordination and cooperation were constrained by national self‐interest. Arguably, the lack of a worldwide supranational (or post‐Westphalian) authority in health governance is one important structural reason for the fragmented, chaotic, and ineffective response to Covid‐19. The failure of Westphalian governance responses to the pandemic provides a unique opportunity for post‐Westphalian governance structures to be established and contribute to reforming international pandemic preparedness. While this is unlikely to happen soon at the global level, a comprehensive framework is emerging at the European Union level in the form of a European Health Union. Through a combined conceptualisation of supranational governance and the securitisation process of international health crises, Covid‐19 has opened the door to post‐Westphalian health governance coordinated by the European Commission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]