Making Sense of 'Public' Emergencies

Abstract

The paper seeks to clarify the notion of 'public emergency' and to address various theoretical misconceptions surrounding it. Public emergencies, I contend, are emergencies which interfere with the performance of a government's role and which, as a result, tend to have distinctive moral implications. Since their salient characteristics often vary markedly, I argue that one must pay close attention to them when assessing what responses they warrant. I use as my foil three leading theoretical approaches which I challenge and seek to reconstruct: (1) Tom Sorell's focus on worst-case scenarios and conflation of distinctively salient 'public' emergencies; (2) Michael Walzer's 'supreme emergencies' and their alleged ability to make some governmental immoralities moral; and (3) Giorgio Agamben's insistence on a declaration of emergency as the salient moral and legal mark of a public emergency. Overall, I aim to set the stage for further discussion of the specific implications of public emergencies for the law.

COVID and the Common Good

“…Dealing with previous public emergencies such as Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans in 2005 was traditionally by disaster and crisis management (John 2009 ; Tanguay-Renaud 2009 ; Zack 2009 ). It is now suggested that an alternate route of inquiry which could be undertaken towards COVID is through existentialist philosophy (Vandekerckhove 2020 ).…”

COVID, Existentialism and Crisis Philosophy

“…regard to the first route, a bunch of papers on disaster management, published in 2009 in this journal, can form a useful scholarly basis to philosophically inquire into COVID-19 management. Tanguay-Renaud (2009) discusses public emergencies and asks what it is about an emergency that justifies 'emergency powers'. Reading that paper again I found it fascinating how, 11 years later, the framework and analysis set out by Tanguay-Renaud (2009) keeps its relevance effortlessly.…”

“…Tanguay-Renaud (2009) discusses public emergencies and asks what it is about an emergency that justifies 'emergency powers'. Reading that paper again I found it fascinating how, 11 years later, the framework and analysis set out by Tanguay-Renaud (2009) keeps its relevance effortlessly. The author uses Hurricane Katrinaand its wrecking of New Orleans in 2005as a concrete example.…”

“…an emergency is presented as public (rather than private) to call-in duties a government has to intervene. Scale of the emergency can be a valid reason, although that remains contingent on the government's capacity, argues Tanguay-Renaud (2009). There are also role-inherent duties the government has with regard to emergencies.…”

“…Roles come with duties, and promises made create responsibilities and roles. Tanguay-Renaud (2009) asks what the government's inherent duty is, beyond a general duty to protect? A duty is stronger if previous actions have caused inadequate infrastructure to prevent harm.…”