Recent epidemics have prompted large-scale international interventions, aimed at mitigating the spread of disease in a globalized world. During a crisis, however, global health actions - including planning and organizing, communicating about risk, and cost-benefit evaluations - aren't usually part of a single, integrated global response. Arguing that an uncoordinated approach can be challenged by local conditions and expectations, generating a wide range of resistance and difficulties, this volume provides important insights for future outbreak management and global health governance. Drawing on experiences with A(H1N1) and Ebola virus disease, the book is divided into three parts looking at how responses to global health crises have developed, lessons learned from particular pandemics and the ethical implications of our management of them. Individual chapters focus on, among other issues, financing, cost-benefit analysis, matrix management, risk communication and organizational strategies. Taking a social science perspective, this valuable book outlines the current state of global health emergency responses and explores ways in which they can be improved. It is a useful read for academics and practitioners interested in global health, the sociology of health and illness, health economics and emergency management.

Rules and procedures are key features for a modern organization to function. It is no surprise to see them to be paramount in safety management. As some sociologists argue, routine and rule following is not always socially resented. It can bring people comfort and reduce anxieties of newness and uncertainty. Facing constant unexpected events entails fatigue and exhaustion. There is also no doubt that proceduralization and documented activities have brought progress, avoided recurrent mistakes and allowed for 'best practices' to be adopted. However, it seems that the exclusive and intensive use of procedures today is in fact a threat to new progress in safety. There is an urgent need to consider this issue because there is doubt that the path chosen by many hazardous industries and activities is the most effective, safety wise, considering the safety level achieved today. As soon as safety is involved, there seems to be an irresistible push towards a wider scope of norms, procedures and processes, whatever the context implied. This book is not a plea against proceduralization, but it does take the view that it is time to reassess how far it can still go and to what benefit. Underlying these questions, there is a growing suspicion that the path taken might in fact lead to a dead end, unless the concept of procedure and the conditions under which these procedures are developed are revisited.

The conventional approach to risk communication, based on a centralized and controlled model, has led to blatant failures in the management of recent safety related events. In parallel, several cases have proved that actors not thought of as risk governance or safety management contributors may play a positive role regarding safety. Building on these two observations and bridging the gap between risk communication and safety practices leads to a new, more societal perspective on risk communication, that allows for smart risk governance and safety management. This book is Open Access under a CC-BY licence.

This book addresses the issues and methods involved in governing risks posed by genetically modified (GM) agriculture. It examines the evolution of policies intended to ensure the safety of GM crops and food products in the United States and Europe and the regulatory approaches and other social controls employed to protect human health, the environment, conventional farming and foods, and the interests and rights of consumers. Discussion encompasses the cultural, political, and economic forces that shape the design and application of the methods of risk governance, as well as other contextual features such as the influence of multinational companies seeking acceptance of their GM ventures. This discussion also examines the influence of the dynamic public discourse fostered by progressive concepts of risk governance and the approaches taken to meet its demands for transparency, public participation, and appropriate consideration of public perceptions and values despite conflicting views of experts.