Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36969098›Full record

ReviewAnnals of global health2023

"Socialization for Scarcity" in Emergency Management: Rethinking Assumptions of Resource Scarcity in Humanitarian Crises.

Zoe Fanning

Full text readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Zoe FanningLondon School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3463-3151

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Physician-anthropologist Paul Farmer theorizes a process of "socialization for scarcity" (SfS), which assumes permanent and unchangeable resource scarcity for the world's poor. International health and poverty decisions that are based off of this premise are therefore used to justify inadequate care for vulnerable populations. Objectives: The theory of SfS has predominantly been applied to the context of global health and development. This paper aims to apply SfS to the field of emergency management, asking, "How does SfS function in the context of humanitarian crises, and what implications does this have for emergency management?" Methods: This paper reviewed Farmer's own descriptions of SfS as well as articles by colleagues and other scholars who elaborated on his theory, analyzing their contributions to issues relevant in emergency management. Findings: This review finds that SfS is both applicable to and amplified within emergency management because of the uncertain, competitive, and urgent nature of humanitarian crises. The paper then describes potential approaches to combating SfS in emergency contexts. Conclusions: SfS is the result of deficient effort toward discovering approaches to managing emergencies that do not presume scarcity. The assumption of permanent resource scarcity, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), is a matter of inequity and injustice and stands opposed to imperative systemic change. Emergency managers must work to eradicate dangerous presumptions that leave already suffering individuals even further from the dignified, appropriate and adequate care they require and deserve.

Indexed as

Relief WorkGlobal HealthHumansSocializationemergency managementglobal healthhumanitarian crisesresource scarcitysocialization for scarcity

Identifiers

PMID36969098
PMCPMC10038112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.