From Science to Policy and Practice: A Critical Assessment of Knowledge Management Before, During, and After Environmental Public Health Disasters

Abstract

Introduction:Canada, like many countries, increasingly faces environmental public health (EPH) disasters. Such disasters often require both short- and long-term responses, necessitate evacuation and relocation, cause major environmental impacts, and generate the need for specific knowledge and expertise (chemistry, epidemiology, risk assessment, mental health, etc.).Aim:Given the importance of evidence-based, risk-informed decision making, we aimed to critically assess the integration of EPH expertise and research into each phase of disaster risk management in several Canadian and other jurisdictions.Methods:In-depth interviews were conducted with 23 leaders in disaster risk management from Canada, United States, United Kingdom, and Australia, and were complemented by other methods (i.e. participant observation, information gathered from participation in scientific events, and document review). Three criteria were explored: governance, knowledge creation and translation, and related needs and barriers. An interview guide was developed based on a standardized toolkit from the World Health Organization. Data were analyzed through a four-step content analysis.Results:Six cross-cutting themes emerged from the analysis. These themes are identified as critical factors in successful disaster knowledge management: 1) blending the best of traditional and modern approaches, 2) fostering community engagement; 3) cultivating relationships, 4) investing in preparedness and recovery, 5) putting knowledge into practice, and 6) ensuring sufficient human and financial resources. A wide range of promising knowledge-to-action strategies was also identified, including mentorship programs, communities of practice, advisory groups, systematized learning, and comprehensive repositories of tools and resources.Discussion:There is no single roadmap to incorporate EPH knowledge and expertise into disaster risk management. Our findings suggest that beyond structures and plans, it is necessary to cultivate relationships and share responsibility for ensuring the safety, health, and wellbeing of affected communities while respecting the local culture, capacity, and autonomy. Any such considerations should be incorporated into disaster risk management planning.