Public health response to disasters and crises: setting the agenda for effective action

Disasters and large-scale emergencies, once seen as episodic disruptions, are now a persistent and escalating feature of the global landscape [1]. From the prolonged consequences of pandemics to the accelerating impacts of climate-related events and armed conflict, the burden on public health systems has reached a scale and complexity that traditional models of emergency response are no longer sufficient to absorb [2]. What was once exceptional is now endemic, and public health must adapt.

Recent years have made it impossible to ignore the structural and systemic nature of the health consequences associated with crises. Whether dealing with direct trauma, the collapse of routine services, or the cascading effects on mental health and chronic disease management, health systems are being asked to deliver more, faster, with fewer resources, and under increasingly unpredictable conditions [3]. These challenges expose longstanding inequalities in health access and outcomes, and test the ability of institutions to coordinate, scale, and adapt in real time.

A critical but often overlooked challenge is what might be termed the implementation fallacy, the assumption that the mere existence of policy frameworks, protocols, or strategic plans guarantees operational readiness. Too often, readiness is measured by the presence of plans rather than by tested capacity or the ability to adapt in the face of systemic disruption [4, 5]. In practice, it is the mismatch between formal preparedness and actual performance under pressure that determines outcomes. Understanding and addressing this gap requires not only technical solutions but also organizational learning, adaptive governance, and context-specific knowledge, all of which are underrepresented in current empirical literature.

Too often, crisis response is assessed retrospectively, through narrow metrics of efficiency or mortality, without accounting for the dynamic context in which decisions are made [6]. Yet emergencies are rarely linear or predictable. They unfold in complex, rapidly evolving environments where uncertainty, competing priorities, and political constraints are the norm [7]. In such settings, the capacity to act adaptively, to modify protocols, redistribute resources, and revise priorities in real time, may be as important as the formal design of the intervention itself. Rigid models, however evidence-based, can falter when divorced from context. The future of public health crisis response lies not only in better plans, but in better adaptability.

Despite significant advances in theoretical frameworks, tools, and international guidelines, the literature remains thin on independently evaluated, context-sensitive interventions that have been deployed and tested in real-world emergencies. A disconnect persists between high-level planning and on-the-ground execution [8]. Moreover, lessons identified are not always lessons learned: while case studies abound, many remain siloed by geography, sector, or academic discipline. There is an urgent need to bridge these divides, particularly by fostering interdisciplinary work that links public health, emergency medicine, disaster risk reduction, and health systems research [9, 10].

This Collection in the International Journal of Emergency Medicine aims to address that gap. Our intention is not merely to document crisis response, but to critically examine what works, and under what conditions. We are especially interested in contributions that assess the effectiveness of interventions during and after emergencies, using robust methodologies and clear criteria of impact. We welcome original research as well as systematic reviews, provided they are analytical, grounded in evidence, and relevant across contexts.

Themes of interest include, but are not limited to, health system surge capacity and resilience, risk communication strategies, coordination across sectors, community-based interventions, and the integration of emergency response with longer-term public health goals. Contributions that address the health consequences of protracted crises, such as conflict or displacement, are particularly welcome. We also encourage work from underrepresented regions and voices, especially those that reflect innovation in resource-constrained settings.

We envision this Collection as a resource for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers seeking actionable insights grounded in real-world complexity. The focus is on what can be learned from implemented interventions, not only in terms of outcomes, but in terms of feasibility, transferability, and sustainability under pressure. We are particularly interested in work that moves beyond description and engages with the mechanisms behind success, or failure.

This is not a theoretical exercise. We welcome research that is methodologically sound but also problem-driven, offering concrete guidance for those tasked with preparing for and responding to disasters. Submissions should be relevant not only to academics but to those working in ministries of health, emergency operations centers, humanitarian organizations, and local governments.

The Collection is open to contributions from all regions and settings. We especially encourage voices from areas most affected by complex emergencies and from disciplines that are often underrepresented in disaster discourse. Such contributions, grounded in empirical depth and oriented toward practical relevance, are critical to shaping more effective responses. Our aim is to foster a genuinely interdisciplinary dialogue that informs both immediate action and long-term planning.

Ultimately, we hope to provide a platform for the kind of knowledge that is needed most: grounded, critical, and directly applicable. The evidence generated through this Collection should support more coherent, coordinated, and equitable public health responses to crises, wherever and whenever they occur.

The accelerating pace and complexity of today’s emergencies demand more than reactive responses. They require systems that are prepared, populations that are engaged, and interventions that are grounded in evidence and capable of adaptation. This Collection aims to contribute to that effort by assembling insights that are not only rigorous, but relevant, rooted in lived experience and directed toward practical change. By drawing on diverse contexts, disciplines, and voices, we hope to sharpen the collective understanding of what it takes to protect public health in times of profound disruption, and how to do it better.

In the broader context of global health and development, the challenges addressed in this Collection clearly resonate with the ambitions of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The realities of disaster response, whether shaped by poverty, conflict, urban vulnerability, climate disruption, or institutional fragility, transcend traditional policy silos. By spotlighting interventions that are not only effective but also inclusive, adaptable, and equity-oriented, we seek to contribute to a more coherent and integrated path toward resilient health systems and stronger communities.

Author’s contributions

Conceptualization: K.G. Writing—review and editing: K.G.

Funding

Not applicable for this publication.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

KG is the Guest Editor of the collection Public health response to disasters and crises: effective interventions during and after emergencies.