Defining social equity in emergency management: A critical first step in the nexus

Abstract

The conceptualization of social equity in public administration and emergency management has been subjective to the user of the term. While the vagueness of the concept provides fertile grounds for intellectual debate, the failure to arrive at a single and formal definition leads to confusion and an inability to measure it as a programmatic or policy goal. For emergency management, how scholars define social equity within research is profoundly important for assessing and making recommendations related to governmental practices that have social equity as its guiding principle. To address this detrimental definitional situation, this research analyzes 15 years of social equity related peer‐reviewed articles in highly ranked emergency management journals. This manuscript concludes with a proposed working definition of social equity, recommendations to measure the concept, and a discussion of its implications for future research and practice.

Blockchains for emergency and crisis management

“…Blockchains through a social equity lens Rivera and Knox (2023) define social equity as "The active, culturally competent, and equal provision of services to every social group across all phases of emergency management and the continuing reduction of all groups' social vulnerability that contributes to desperate physical and social damages associated with natural, technological, and na-tech hazards" (10). They consider social equity in six dimensions: procedural fairness, access, quality of service, inclusivity, diversity, and outcomes, each of which is conceptualized as varying on a continuum.…”

Social equity in the data era: A systematic literature review of data‐driven public service research

“…Process equity (quality) involves the level of consistency in the quality of public services delivered to a group. Outcome equity refers to whether services and policies have the same impact for all groups and individuals served (Gooden, 2014; Johnson & Svara, 2011; Rivera & Knox, 2022). Together, these dimensions of social equity offer a framework for scholars and practitioners to think about the form social equity takes at different points in the delivery of public services.…”

Introduction to the special issue on Inclusion and E-Government: Progress and Questions for Scholars of Social Equity

“…Social equity is widely accepted as a pillar of public administration and refers to fairness and justice in the provision of governmental policies and services (Cepiku & Mastradascio, 2021;Frederickson, 2015;Gooden, 2015;Guy & McCandless, 2012;Riccucci, 2009). Scholars differentiate equity in terms of access to public services, whether citizens of different groups receive the same treatment, the same quality of public services and whether they experience similar outcomes (Cepiku & Mastrodascio, 2021;Johnson & Svara, 2015;Rivera & Knox, 2022). Equity research is concerned with the characterization, measurement, and achievement of fairness in the provision of government services (Gooden & Portillo, 2011 p. 65).…”

“…According to Rivera and Knox (2022), inclusion refers to the extent to which diverse groups of the public such as ethnic minorities, people with special needs (i.e., individuals with disabilities, the elderly, children, immigrants, the homeless, etc. ), and individuals of different genders, sexual identities, religious groups, and cultures are integrated into management processes.…”