Effective communication is pivotal to successful emergency management and response operations. However, recent events demonstrate that malicious actors are increasingly exploiting emerging technologies to hinder these efforts. This manuscript provides an overview of how deliberate misuse of these technologies, including generative artificial intelligence, has negatively impacted disaster response. This manuscript provides an exploratory narrative review of the deliberate misuse of these technologies by examining selected incidents. We outline the rapidly evolving information environment and assess the role of misinformation and cybercrime in shaping response outcomes. In addition, we review current emerging technologies and analyze how they may be deployed to disrupt emergency management response processes. Finally, we propose recommendations for integrating preparedness training into the emergency management workforce to modernize programs that strengthen resilience against threats posed by emerging technologies.
The purpose of this study was to examine how leader–member exchange (LMX), role conflict and ambiguity (RC&A), and employee engagement (EE) influence a first responder’s job satisfaction (JS). Nonprobability convenience sampling was used to obtain participants from the coastal states of the Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions 4 and 6 in the United States, using surveys collected via Qualtrics and Prolific (N = 312). This study used PROCESS Model 58 to test a moderated mediation, examining whether EE moderated the LMX to RC&A and RC&A to JS relationships. It was found that higher-quality LMX is linked to higher JS and lower RC&A, while higher RC&A, conversely, lowers JS. Additionally, RC&A partially mediated the relationship between LMX and JS, demonstrating that leadership is associated with higher JS both directly and indirectly by clarifying roles and reducing ambiguity. Also, EE modestly moderates the relationship between LMX and RC&A. In contrast, EE did not significantly moderate the relationship between RC&A and JS. The conditional indirect effects (LMX → RC&A → JS) were significant at low, median, and high levels of EE. These results suggest that high-quality leadership and EE together play a critical, nuanced role, even indirectly, by simultaneously reducing RC&A and improving JS among first responders.
Introduction: This study examines disaster risk governance across the Group of Twenty (G20) nations, the European Union, and the African Union, focusing on how countries are adapting their systems to address the challenges of an evolving, increasingly complex risk environment. Disaster management frameworks have traditionally focused on environmental and physical hazards, but the emergence of new risks—such as cyber incidents, artificial intelligence system failures, biosecurity and health-sector cyber threats, space-weather impacts, and large-scale misinformation or disinformation poses additional challenges for national governance systems. This study evaluates how countries are preparing to manage both traditional natural hazards and these emerging threats.Methods: In this study, national legislation, institutional arrangements, and coordination mechanisms were examined to assess how effectively countries are prepared to manage both traditional natural hazards and emerging risks. The analysis draws on three internationally recognized frameworks: the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015-2030), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Framework for the Governance of Critical Risks, and the International Organization for Standardization 22300-22301 standards on Security and Resilience (updated 2023) to evaluate governance structures, policy alignment, and response capability. Results: The findings show that all G20 members have established disaster management frameworks that provide strong capability for managing conventional hazards such as floods, earthquakes, and hurricanes. These systems demonstrate substantial progress in institutional preparedness and intergovernmental coordination. However, most were designed during a period when disaster governance focused primarily on environmental and physical events, so the ability to address emerging risks differs significantly across nations.Discussion: The United States (US)’ experience provides a relevant example of how institutional reform can strengthen this transition. The proposed Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Reform Act of 2025 expands the focus to include systemic and digital risks. It introduces measures to make FEMA an independent agency, improve interagency coordination, and establish an office dedicated to systemic risk preparedness. The reform also integrates digital and information-related threats into disaster planning and enhances transparency in resource allocation and recovery monitoring. This evolution illustrates how updating institutional mandates can expand national preparedness to encompass emerging challenges and strengthen readiness for complex, interdependent risks.Conclusion: Overall, G20 countries have achieved a high degree of preparedness for traditional hazards but differ in how they are addressing the new dimensions of risk. As the nature of disasters becomes increasingly interconnected and rapidly evolving, regular review and modernization of disaster governance will be essential. The US, European Union, and Australia examples demonstrate how adaptive reform and integrated legislation can bridge the gap between preparedness and readiness, offering a model for other nations seeking to align disaster governance with the realities of the modern risk landscape.
Background: Hospitals are critical components of health systems, providing essential services and serving as the first line of defense during crises. Evaluating hospital resilience is crucial to understand their capacity to withstand, adapt to, and recover from complex emergencies, particularly in conflict-affected settings. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the resilience of Al-Shifa Medical Complex in the Gaza Strip by examining the influence of external and internal factors using integrated Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, and Environmental (PESTEL) and Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analyses. Methods: An exploratory qualitative case study approach was employed. Data came from two sources: semistructured interviews with eight senior administrators and emergency managers at Al-Shifa Medical Complex and a review of relevant documents including the hospital’s approved emergency plans, Ministry of Health reports, and national disaster management policies. The authors applied both PESTEL and SWOT frameworks to guide data collection and analysis. To ensure the findings were well-grounded, the authors triangulated information across the different data sources. Thematic analysis was carried out in stages—starting with open coding, then axial coding, and finally selective coding—with four researchers involved in the process to minimize individual bias and reach consensus on the emerging themes. Results: External factors, particularly political instability and economic constraints, significantly impacted hospital resilience. Recurrent hostilities, prolonged blockades, and resource scarcity undermined infrastructure, disrupted service delivery, and threatened the continuity of care. Social, technological, legal, and environmental factors also influenced resilience, highlighting the importance of community engagement, advanced health information systems, legally approved emergency plans, and robust medical waste management. SWOT analysis revealed that while the hospital benefits from strong emergency planning and technological capabilities, it faces challenges related to resource limitations, staff shortages, and procedural delays. Opportunities include strengthening stakeholder coordination, enhancing community participation, and leveraging external support to reinforce preparedness. Conclusion: Integrating PESTEL and SWOT analyses into strategic and operational planning provides a structured approach to identify risks, gaps, and opportunities, thereby enhancing hospital resilience. Evidence-based recommendations include improving coordination with authorities, securing dedicated emergency budgets, expanding technological capacities, fostering community engagement, ensuring legal approval of emergency plans, and implementing environmental safety protocols. These measures can sustain essential healthcare services and reinforce the resilience of health systems in fragile and conflict-affected contexts.
Climate change is increasing the frequency, severity, and complexity of hazards, challenging emergency management (EM) systems that prioritize crisis response and recovery over long-term risk reduction. This paper examines how EM can incorporate climate adaptation and nature-based solutions (NBS) to strengthen hazard mitigation and resilience across the EM cycle. Drawing on interdisciplinary literature and policy frameworks, the study synthesizes evidence on ecosystem-based strategies—including wetland restoration, green infrastructure, and coastal systems—and evaluates their effectiveness in reducing the impacts of hazards. The analysis identifies persistent gaps in climate data integration, land-use policy, interagency coordination, and mitigation investment that constrain the adoption of climate-informed practices. Findings indicate that integrating climate projections, NBS, and cross-sector governance into EM planning reduces disaster losses and improves community resilience. The paper proposes a Climate Adaptation Governance Framework to support implementation by aligning science, policy, finance, and community engagement. Results suggest that emergency managers should expand their role beyond operational crisis response to include climate-informed risk reduction, adaptation planning, and resilience governance.
