At first glance, there appear to be significant differences between mass death from disasters and catastrophes and mass death from pandemics. In a disaster or catastrophe the major problem is identifying the dead and, sometimes, determining cause of death. This can be very frustrating for next of kin. In a pandemic, the identity of the dead is usually known as is the cause of their death. There is an immediate certainty in pandemic death. Despite these major differences there are many similarities. Because it takes time to identify the dead after a disaster or catastrophe, there is a steady release of bodies for cremation or burial, just as in a pandemic. In both types of incidents, there tends to be a shortage of supplies and personnel and, therefore, a need for use of volunteers. There are also massive amounts of paper work. This would suggest a need in both cases for stockpiling and for training of volunteers. And, although this does not always happen, both types of incidents tend to strike harder among the poorer elements in cities yet both create serious economic problems. Despite these many similarities, planning for the first tends to be done by emergency agencies, especially the police; planning for the second by health agencies. Given the many similarities this separation makes no sense. Since both types of mass death incidents lead to similar problems, it would make sense to take an all-hazards approach to planning for dealing with mass death.
In his book, Organized Behavior in Disaster, Russell Dynes classifies organizations that respond to emergencies four ways – regular, expanding, extending and emergency. He bases this on an analysis of research done mainly in the United States. This article examines whether these typologies fit a 1998 ice storm that left about one‐fifth of Canadians without power. The conclusion is that the typologies do fit. However, in the case of the ice storm the ‘emergent’ groups were formed from within rather than outside the established response structure. As a result, there was none of the expected conflict between existing and emergent organizations. The lesson for planners is that if they adapt rapidly to changing circumstances and are ready to sponsor or include emergent groups in their existing structure they can reduce or eliminate conflict.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.