Emergency and Disaster management Collaboration and Leadership for Effective Emergency Management (provided)

Custom Subject: Emergency and Disaster management

To ensure you become familiar with assigned readings this week you will have to submit your reactions to the readings assigned which are:

1- Papers

1- Collaboration and Leadership for Effective Emergency Management (provided)
2- Logistics in disaster relief operations.(provided)
3- Pre-Positioning of Emergency Items for CARE. (provided)
4- Investing in disaster management capabilities versus pre-positioning inventory: A new approach to disaster preparedness. (provided)

2- Case study – Yemen Current

1- https://www.unocha.org/yemen (Links to an external site.)
2- YEMEN LESSONS LEARNED REPORT April 2017.
https://logcluster.org/document/yemen-humanitarian-imports-overview-january-2018 (Links to an external site.)
3- https://logcluster.org/ops/yem10a (Links to an external site.)

* Other

http://www.sphereproject.org/blog/what-will-2017-bring-for-humanitarian-standards/ (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
http://www.sphereproject.org/handbook/ (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

This allows you to gain experience and familiarity with learning how to evaluate published articles; ask questions regarding the methods, results, and conclusions; voice disagreement or agreement with the authors; and provide opportunities for you to voice your perspectives on topics in this course.

Your reaction notes should run between 1 to 2 pages (at least 1 full page but no more than 2), and will be submitted to the corresponding assignment submission page in Canvas. The reaction notes must be in paragraph form and complete sentences with proper capitalization and punctuation.

The reaction notes are not a summary of the readings but novel thoughts and questions on the readings. You need to include a minimum of three required readings in the weekly submission.

Some of the questions you should be asking yourself as you read the articles throughout the course:

1) Did the authors find a relationship, show a trend, or demonstrate a new method?

2) Did they synthesize literature around a topic in a review?

3) Did they put forward a new conceptual framework?

4) Did they make any unsubstantial claims or conclusions?

5) Were the methods appropriate or did they use flawed assumptions about data or approaches?

6) Did the authors convince you of their interpretation of the results? Or do you disagree with their interpretation?

7) Were the figures and tables easily understandable, or were they confusing or inappropriate for what they were trying to visualize?

8) Do you agree with their implications, applications, and/or conclusions?

9) What would you have done differently, if you were conducting the experiment?

10) How do the week’s readings relate to each other? Do they differ on terminology, methodological approaches, or conclusions? Do they offer complementary knowledge?

11) Can you apply this to your prior education or career experiences (and vice versa)?

12) Who are the authors, and what are their backgrounds? Are they well known in the field, do they work at an established and well-regarded institution (e.g., university), do they have many related publications? Or are the authors new blood?