Roman Tandlich: [00:00:00] Be in my understanding that you need to understand as much of the ethical landscape as possible, as many cultures, as many norms of conduct, and try to at the end, come up with a combination of them so that you provide or make the best decision on the particular conditions of a crisis that might arise.
And you're involved in managing it.
Kyle King: Welcome to another episode of the Crisis Lab podcast. I'm your host, Kyle. And today we're diving into the complex and also a crucial topic. of ethics during a crisis. We'll explore the moral principles that guide actions and decisions during emergencies. And crisis ethics offers practical guidance for professionals like medical practitioners and military personnel, helping them to make decisions that uphold really about justice, equity, and humanity, even in the toughest of scenarios.
So this field balances societal norms, professional responsibilities, and the challenging circumstances faced in crisis. So in this episode, we'll cover some key themes such as universal [00:01:00] ethical principles, deontological codes of conduct, resource allocation, and military ethics during a crisis, and we'll discuss how to apply these principles to ensure fair and just actions during emergencies, the complexities of distributing resources in disaster stricken areas, and also the moral responsibilities of military personnel during humanitarian interventions.
And so joining us today is Dr. Roman Tanlich, a seasoned expert in public health, water and sanitation, and disaster ethics. So Roman, He has been working in emergency and disaster management since 2011. He's currently the regional director of the International Emergency Management Society in Africa and an associate professor at the Faculty of Pharmacy at Rhodes University in South Africa.
So, Roman, good to see you again and welcome to the show. Thank you. So, just to get started on this topic, I thought let's start from the beginning here. And so, how would you introduce the idea of ethics during crisis? to people that are say, maybe new to the topic or just haven't thought about this in a specific perspective.
Roman Tandlich: Thank you. It is a really good [00:02:00] question, but as many of us have now gone through the COVID 19 pandemic, we have seen that situations under which we live or the conditions under which we live in the situations that we face in everyday life can be quite complex. There's a lot of factors that contribute to the, should we say, fluidity of human existence and the conditions under which we live.
For example, there is a lot of historical and cumulative challenges such as climate change, which creates knock on effects onto human wellbeing and also wider implications for the environment. In addition to that, what is important is also to remember that under crises and disasters, the normalcy of human existence is disrupted, which means what the kind of things we can fall back on, for example, Uh, the comforts of civilizations might not, no longer be available.
And in the context of these, it is important to consider that there are still people and systems that are held up in place to help us. For example, the disaster response, crisis management and things like that. And, um, because the resources are [00:03:00] concentrated under the, A jurisdiction of a few individuals, not the whole population that needs to be assisted.
There is a potential for challenges to arise and challenges would now be, what is the right thing to do? What is the wrong thing to do? Who to assist first? If you have to choose between various populations of people that might've been, for example, impacted by a hurricane. So that's where I would start.
And crisis itself is, we know a situation where things can change. Um, things escalate, conditions under which you can contact each other, for example, populations and. Uh, people that are providing relief, that also is not a constant. It may break down, you may bring it back up, things like that. So under these challenging conditions, it is important to consider what is right and wrong and what are the ethically correct decisions to make or the best
Kyle King: ethical decisions to make.
I think that's, it's an interesting perspective because we can't just dismiss everything that we have in society when a crisis occurs. Like you're saying, we still have these norms, these behaviors, laws and regulations that we have to follow. And so One of the challenges and one of the things that we have to talk [00:04:00] about at Crisis Lab is that the world is getting more complex and that with that complexity introduces new elements or new situations that we're not used to and we haven't seen before and really disrupts our planning and disrupts the way that we think about our systems that we live in, our neighborhoods and our communities.
So considering the increasing complexity that we're facing and these different crises that we're facing on the horizon on a global or even local scale, And the ethical challenges that they can bring with trying to match these new complex scenarios with our sort of foundational ethics. So how can we explain what ethics during a crisis means in these sort of complex scenarios?
Again,
Roman Tandlich: that's a really good point to make because the complexity itself is going to be with us for years to come. So you could look at it from a basic perspective. It could be that it is, it is both a challenge and also an advantage, because a challenge can arise from the fact that it is very difficult, for example, to foresee what all the impacts might be of an action that you take.
For [00:05:00] example, if you deliver drinking water to the people that are closest to your base, it's That might deplete resources you might need later on. If, for example, there is a complete breakdown in supply chain and you may run out of resources to assist an impacted community, on the other hand, you can see it as a, as an advantage because in the current situations under which, for example, crisis managers operate, it is also easier to, for example, track certain events.
You have a lot of social media information that is available. So if you, for example. implement something like the incident crisis management or integrated crisis management system, ICS, you can see that you can have someone looking at open intelligence. So they could be looking at sources like social media progress of, let's say, pictures being uploaded about how a particular community can, for example, The level of degradation can be progressing or the community has managed to stabilize their situation.
So it's a, both a kind of a challenge and also an advantage. In addition [00:06:00] to that, what is important to consider is that cultural diversity is now more apparent. So we see a lot more migration and movement of people across international borders. So a lot of cultures that would normally be in slightly different geographical location can mix, which can impact the way that, for example, certain acts might be perceived, certain behaviors can change in context.
And in addition to that, we need to now see that all of this, even if everything is equal, can be changed. And everything functions normally, you can still have underlying and novel threats occur, for example, from something like artificial intelligence, where people might be looking at, for example, using it for good, which is great for solving complex problems like climate change, but might also use it for detrimental effects.
And that is something that we need to just basically balance. So the short answer would be in my understanding that you need to understand as much of the ethical side of things. landscape as possible, as many cultures, as many norms of conduct and try to, at the end, come up with a [00:07:00] combination of them so that you provide or make the best decision on the particular conditions of a crisis that might arise and you're involved in managing it.
Kyle King: This is really interesting because, and I'm framing it my own way, there's an interesting perspective here is what I'm trying to get to because this is almost in a pre decision discussion that we have to balance the ethics of the decisions that we're going to make. Understanding that sort of the terrain, the landscape, the cultures, the societal norms and rule of law and everything else, norms and standards that goes with that and how that informs our decisions and our behaviors.
And then we have another course in Crisis Lab called Consequence Management with, with Aaron Marks, and that's really the effects of the decisions that you've already made. And so in many ways, this is like you were talking about giving water to one population and then taking it from another or what are the effects of that decision actions you've taken.
And so this is actually a nice counterbalance that because it's also about considering the ethics of the decision making process. So where are you getting your information and how are you coming to the conclusion that you have? And [00:08:00] so with that and shifting gears a little bit, there's obviously some.
But there's a role for ethical theories and how they can help in making some tough decisions, especially during a crisis, during sort of these high stakes situations. So can you tell us a little bit about the role of ethical theories and how they can help us in making tough decisions? That brings me to a comment that
Roman Tandlich: I heard in my undergraduate studies in Slovakia, which is that imagine that everything that you can come up with as novel, check first, whether it might've already been done because so that you don't repeat, but you rather build on what has existed.
Ethical theories are something a little bit like that. There's a lot of people on the planet at the moment. So you have 8 billion people. Statistically, if you just look at what is the probability of two people at the same time coming up with exactly the same thought. It could be said that it is maybe one to four billion or one in four billion.
Now that's a massive number, very small, but it can happen in real life. That being said, ethical theories have been developed for a really long [00:09:00] time. There's a really extensive, comprehensive, and very diverse set of theories that exist all across the globe. We tend to focus in the course more on the Western tradition.
So that means more from the European space of thinking, but that doesn't mean that these principles cannot be applied more universally. Now, ethical theories are driven by several factors from my understanding. One of them is the person that actually derives a theory. So their background, their way of looking at things, their mental assessing of certain concepts is important.
What is also important is of course, the context in which that theory is developed. And, uh, what we also need to then realize is that if a theory has been developed, for example, um, in the 18th or the 19th century, we. now still use them today, but it is not the same theory that we might have originally seen.
For example, if someone comes up with one of the theories, which is utilitarianism, it came out of a certain background [00:10:00] in England. And we today use it in a slightly different context and we apply it a much more diverse set of conditions. For example, how do you provide healthcare to underprivileged populations?
How do you assess and manage the distribution of vaccines during COVID 19? That was a good example that the perspective from the utilitarian would tell you that the outcome of an action determines whether it is right or wrong. The, uh, logical reaction. Should have been that you get and vaccinate as many people across as much, many countries as possible.
That didn't exactly happen rather on the other hand, there was the, there were certain market forces at play. So I'm going to leave that aside because that is, I think, beyond my area of expertise. But what was clear was that some countries with more economic power were able to procure vaccines faster.
And then they acted, I think, based on two main principles. The duty to protect mainly their citizens, because that is what the government, for example, the United States, New Zealand and so [00:11:00] on is responsible for. But then in the, in the later stages of the pandemic, you would have seen that the vaccines that were stockpiled by developed countries started being shared, however, slowly and however, in a delayed fashion, but they did start getting shared, which means that the idea of Duty and doing the right thing, regardless of circumstances, protecting your population was balanced against connecting much larger number of people so that you achieve the biggest benefit of the vaccination for the largest number of people.
So the theories themselves, I think, are important as starting points. They define certain principles and frameworks in which we can see a decision as either right or wrong, but they are also evolving over time. And they combine with novel discoveries, novel ways of thinking, new theories that have come up in the last just 20 years alone, there have been very many that have, and what we see now today more is more and more is the moral and right and wrong decisions being mostly seen, not just [00:12:00] in the relationship to humans, but we're also extending the considerations of any action towards The wider consideration, so socioecological systems, so humans, animals, the environment and things like that.
So that's where I would start and
Kyle King: we can take from there. Thanks for that background, that overview. I think raising the issue of the vaccines and the pandemic, regardless of what anybody's thoughts are about it, it does raise an interesting discussion that you brought up, which is, do you take care of yourself first, or do you help underdeveloped nations?
And that really is an ethical discussion that had to be had across the globe. And then, so I think that's really something, and it doesn't go away. And it's topically relevant to the pandemic, but it goes to everything else that could come in the future in terms of any other sort of crisis or disaster that might happen.
But when you, I listened to you speaking about these things, it's really, to me, it's like, these discussions have to be happening before an event. We have to come up with our position, discuss these, have time, space to be able to deliberate, to have these discussions, to understand, and then What, what information we have, what's missing [00:13:00] and things like that.
But during a crisis itself, quick decisions are often necessary. So how do we balance that sort of need of urgency and speed along with the ethical principles that we're talking about? And so we can treat everybody, treat our communities and the ways that they need to be treated and come up with a balanced approach to the response.
I think what was
Roman Tandlich: really interesting once I've completed working with you guys on the cause was that it is actually not an easy. way to make decisions under the conditions of a crisis or a disaster. And there is always a lot of burden that the crisis or disaster manager often carries in the aftermath of a particular decisions that they have made or a response that they have completed or any kind of involvement in the crisis or disaster management system.
What I think is quite a nice and unique about a crisis and disaster management is that. You always have, before a crisis strike, if the, even if any rudimentary system is in place, whether it's legislative or whether it is based on NGOs and things like that, there is [00:14:00] generally multitude of stakeholders that kind of know of each other, communicate with each other, for example, control.
Joint operations command centers are often established during a crisis or a disaster, but they are always mobilized based on particular stakeholders coming to the table. There are always, for example, certain structures that in a disaster management system of a country that meet on a regular basis and plan for certain things, distribution of resources, pre pre positioning them close to where a particular, for example, Uh, Hurricane, Maestrog and things like that.
So I think what is important is that you have open lines of communication, sharing of data and any kind of updates that come your way. And at the same time, what needs to be understood is that these working relationships, which are put in place before a crisis develops or a disaster strikes. Can then be mobilized quickly as a source of, um, either carrying out a particular function, for example, responding to a standard type of disaster, should we say, [00:15:00] maybe a tornado or something like that.
But also, as you see during COVID 19, there have also been local structures that have formed like that, and they have been repurposed to respond to, for example, COVID 19. There was a lot of exchange of information about, for example, monitoring where which variant of COVID 19 or SARS CoV 2 virus was actually present in the world.
And sharing of that information was often based on pre existing WHO structures. And laboratories that would normally, for example, carry out monitoring of the flu could have quickly been repurposed to respond to COVID 19 by monitoring, collecting data, performing track and trace functions, and stuff like that.
So I think to sum it up, What is important is that you have a broad range of stakeholders. You have mapped the stakeholder capacities and capabilities and who they are in a particular area. You maintain exchange of information and communication. And then if by any chance you need to respond to [00:16:00] a crisis or a disaster, speed is often of the essence.
So making decisions based on activities of networks like that can actually be, I think, in my opinion, the best way to manage complexity. And the nature of crisis and disasters that we are facing in the 21st century.
Kyle King: Hey there, just a quick break in our show. Did you know that many of our guests on the Crisis Lab podcast also offer courses with us? So if you're enjoying these conversations or they spark your curiosity, why not dive just a little bit deeper, head over to crisislab. io for more information. Our courses, webinars, and resources are designed to give you the knowledge you need to navigate complex and ever changing environments.
We know your time is valuable. We'll So everything we offer is accredited and don't forget to subscribe and join our community of over 18, 000 professionals who follow crisis lab. And we're all about enhancing preparedness and strategic thinking because at crisis lab, we believe in empowering you with the knowledge you need to better serve your community.
Now let's get back to the show.[00:17:00]
And I think one of the things that we often do in the emergency management communities week. Conflate or confuse to a certain extent, or maybe just presume that when we talk about stakeholders, talking about national, regional, or local authorities, right? And so it's the response agencies or the legal authorities that are responsible for a certain element of response, whether that's police, fire, medical systems, whatever the case is, or the city administration, mayor, governor, whatever the case is.
And so we, we think in terms of response stakeholders, but we can sometimes just conflate that with. Authority and legal authority and more of that governance structure. But stakeholders are often, as we do say in emergency management, all disasters are local. So stakeholders really drive down to the community.
And so when you say nonprofit NGO organizations, that makes me think that also we have to really understand our local communities because not every stakeholder has an authority, but they are engaged in their community. And that's where you start to bring in things like cultural differences and understanding the communities that they serve.
And, and [00:18:00] so. balancing the cultural differences with the ethical decision making processes that we're discussing and how that can be a little bit more complicated, especially when it comes to the different cultural aspects. For instance, modesty is shown differently across different cultures from east to west and everywhere else, north to south.
And so it's across the globe is slightly different and there's variations of this across the communities that we serve. And so how can these cultural variations, especially at a community level, how do those really impact our decision making, especially when we're looking from, say, okay, we are serving multiple communities, they all have their own unique aspect and their own culture, uh, and their own sort of, I mean, if you go to New York or San Francisco, I mean, you have these Chinatown areas, you have different areas and different cultures that have naturally populated these areas.
So how do these variations of culture across communities impact the way that we make decisions considering the ethics that we're discussing?
Roman Tandlich: Yeah, that is actually, I think if one could answer that, and there are [00:19:00] much smarter people in the world than me that have tried to engage with this, it is an ongoing area of research from what I know, but also what is important to know is this, the three theories that we talked about in the course, when it comes to the most fundamental theories for ethical decision making was utilitarianism, deontology, and the idea that the most fundamental theories for ethical decision making are utilitarianism, deontology, and deontology.
So making decisions in utilitarianism to maximize the good that you achieve with an action. For example, you would take an action and it would be right if as a result of that action, the well being of the largest number of people would improve, okay? Or you would protect the lives of the largest number of people.
Deontology would be a sense of duty, which means that you would have a certain set of codes. A set of, uh, behaviors or code of conduct that, for example, an organization like a government agency that you are a part of subscribes to and you need to follow it. And on the other side would be the virtue ethics.
So the, the nature of the character of the human being that is actually taking the [00:20:00] decision. Now, all three of those have a place or a role to play in line also, and in compliment to other Ethical theories that have recently been developing. So feminist perspectives, things like deep ecology and things like that.
But I think what they all have in common. Is that if you have a disaster management and you see it or a crisis, if you see the management of that crisis, is that not one man's job or one woman's job or one person's job, but you see it as a multiple stakeholders need to be involved because they either provide multiple functions that they carry out, but also.
They can also contribute in different ways. And considering something local, such as culture is critical, which is why NGOs are, for example, very important because they know what the immediate situation on the ground might be. Who is at risk, who is vulnerable, who might need, for example, the fastest aid.
Delivered to them because they might be most impacted by a particular crisis or disaster. [00:21:00] And what is often known is that because the NGOs or similar stakeholders, for example, traditional leaders is one example that we talked about in the course. If you have working relationship between disaster or crisis managers and these kinds of stakeholders, that will allow you to address and navigate the cultural Landscape in a particular area where you're providing assistance, carrying out a crisis or disaster management response, and so on.
Finally, what I would also say, it is necessary to choose people that are of good character. So they would be based on their leaning towards working, for example, in the humanitarian field. Uh, if you recruit them, they will have a certain inherent degree of understanding what is right and what is wrong.
And by providing assistance and guiding them on the culture of the community where you're going to assist, that can then provide a really effective basis for making right decisions. And also if you make a decision, updating it as new data becomes available.
Kyle King: So [00:22:00] previously you mentioned the issue of sort of proximity, and we gave an example of delivering water to the local residents, but maybe those that are in your immediate proximity, but maybe not in the most immediate need of having those sort of resources and supplies.
So we've covered that just as a real quick example. I'd like to shift over to something else you mentioned, which is really the ethical considerations, which were also a crucial aspect of animals during the pandemic. Disasters. And so can you discuss how the welfare of animals ties into public health and, and I guess overall in a larger picture, the economic stability of a community as well.
Roman Tandlich: Thank you. That is a really good point. It's not a new topic. It has been studied and also faced as a challenge in crisis and during disasters by the wider practitioner community, but what has become and what is becoming more and more obvious, for example, due to climate change and the fact that humans have basically reached now.
Um, every corner of the planet, every time that there is an action that a human takes, there are knock on effects on things like biodiversity. Which then in [00:23:00] turn has impacts on both human welfare. For example, if an ecosystem is healthy, it provides certain services to the community, it can be a source of income, subsistence, provision of, for example, fuel for heating homes and things like that.
And if there is a human action that detrimentally impacts that ecosystem, degradation can lead to those services no longer being available. In addition to that, we know that biodiversity has a negative impact on many. Aspects of ecosystem stability. And also ultimately what is often quite important is that when biodiversity goes down, diversity in ecosystems and things like predator prey relationships are negatively impacted, which can in turn then impact indirectly on humans.
On the other hand, what is also important is that considering animals during disasters, One needs to look at many times, humans and animals are basically a family. So if you have a, maybe a owner and a pet, they can become [00:24:00] quite a in They cannot be separated easily. And if that happens during a crisis or disaster, that can have negative impacts on the wellbeing of humans and also wellbeing or welfare of animals.
Many times, and we talk about this in the course, is that some countries like the United States have put in place mandatory requirements that preparedness and evacuation plans for a particular area often include considerations for Companion animals, so dogs, cats, whatever house pets people might have, which is important because then also increases the likelihood that if you issue an evacuation order because a flood is coming, then people might be more prone to evacuate if they know that their pets will be safe.
What is however also critical to consider is that besides companion animals, you often have Especially rural areas in developing countries, agriculture and subsistence farming are still the backbone of the economic activity and the survival, food security of the, uh, population. So looking after husbandry animals like cattle, [00:25:00] cows, so sheep, goats, and things like that becomes very important.
So isolating them from the impacts of a crisis or a disaster is also important. And that's why there are some guiding documents that have been provided. The bad set in the United States is one, the legs guidelines that were put together and that are also promoted in collaboration with the sphere. Um, handbook team are also good examples of this.
So it is definitely something that is important and maybe final point to make. COVID 19 has made it important for us to understand that zoonotic diseases are going to be probably the major challenge that we will face as disasters or epidemics or pandemics in the future. And thus understanding the transmission of these viruses and other zoonotic diseases from animals to humans.
And potentially in reverse direction as well is important. And the more we respect biodiversity and habitat protection, and also we decrease cruelty to animals during, for example, sale of live animals or [00:26:00] animal products that can also have an impact on decreasing the threats that we might, or will likely face from infectious diseases of zoonotic nature in the future.
Kyle King: Thanks for that explanation. I think that's going to be a growing field that we look at. And as you already mentioned, there's a lot of work done in that area already. I think it's going to continue to grow and develop and become part of the conversation that we're having. Again, shifting gears slightly, but when we were talking about, and before you mentioned humanitarian relief and mentions or the military aspect and especially delivering aid, we have these, in a practical perspective, there's the Oslo Guidelines and the Responsibility to Protect that are out there that sort of inform or the role is to inform the ethical responsibilities of military personnel during humanitarian interventions.
And so How much do these documents or these guidelines, how much do they inform that role of the ethical sort of responsibilities and decision making process for military personnel?
Roman Tandlich: The two documents are separate, but they fulfill slightly different functions. One thing that is important to understand for the OSLO guidelines, this is [00:27:00] a widely broadcasted document.
So a lot of the practitioners are already aware of this, is that. If you have to bring in military assets to assist a community during, for example, disaster response or recovery, it is often driven by the fact that military can be deployed quickly. They generally have the equipment that is necessary if a civilian disaster response team is needed.
or recovery effort lacks it. What is important to know is that the humanitarian principles that guide the actions in disaster zones, humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and autonomy of decision making require that, um, when a military asset is deployed to assist the civilian disaster relief or recovery effort, it is done in such a way that the civilians often must have the final say, so that means the military is there as a supporting role and there is.
As much as possible, it must be avoided that the military is perceived as being used as a tool of power. And what is critical in this instance [00:28:00] is the fact that You try to prohibit further decrease or damage to the human well being that has already been maybe compromised by this disaster or crisis event.
And secondly, what you also have to remember is that military has the ability to basically make irreversible changes to the landscape of human existence. In other words, if you're going to deploy them, it must be done under clear conditions and guidelines, and that's what the OSLO guidelines provide. On the other hand, the responsibility to protect.
Which we talk about in the course due to, through the example of the intervention of NATO in Kosovo in the late 1990s and the bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia back then. Is that for a long time it was said that the nation sovereignty is pretty much not absolutely but close to, and that means that what happens inside the borders of a state, for example, how a government, uh, interacts or were, interacts with their population or the citizens was often [00:29:00] left up to the autonomy of that government.
But we have seen in the 1990s, in former Yugoslavia and also in in many other conflicts across the globe, we can see now in former. Burma now, Myanmar, we can see it now in the Middle East, in many instances, we can see it in many other conflict areas around the world, where the government often starts abusing its population, but the abuses become so systemic and so horrific that it is necessary to protect the population.
And that's where the responsibility to protect. Kicks in because the level of suffering needs to be decreased. And if the state cannot provide it, then the international community has the responsibility to act. And the best way to do that would be under the United Nations Security Council authorization to give it legal backing and then making the decision to intervene must be driven by clear more aims, which means that there must be a clear case to make why morally it is right to take the military action.
That's what we talk about in the course. [00:30:00]
Kyle King: Thanks for that overview and that clarification. I think that's very helpful. And I'm glad you raised the international sort of aspect, international organizations, because there's also the aspect of international humanitarian law. But one, one quick topic that we haven't touched on yet really is the effects of disaster and or conflict.
And so what does that mean in terms of recovery and recovery from these events? And especially, for example, the ethical management of fatalities, right? And so during a crisis, see whether that's a disaster or armed conflict, we understand that those are distinctly different. But what are the potential consequences legal and or humanitarian if we're not really following these guidelines and aspects of international humanitarian law and how we recover from a crisis or a disaster?
So handling
Roman Tandlich: of deceased and dead bodies is quite a, should we say, ethical minefield almost. There are two recent examples that we talk about in the course, which one of them was the Ebola epidemic in Western Central Africa between 2014 and 2016, where. Um, the level of, or the scale of the [00:31:00] epidemic was much larger than, uh, in previous occurrences of Ebola, which have been occurring in what is today the Democratic Republic of Congo and adjacent countries since about the mid 1970s.
But the sheer scale of the number of cases required that new practices be put in place, which means that normally where there would be close proximity between the, um, the deceased and the family during last rites or during the burial. That had to be prohibited. So in other words, there would have to be a separation and distance between the deceased who still contained potentially infectious virus and then the deceased.
So in other words, the guidelines that were put in place were to minimize the spread of disease, um, which would normally happen through close personal contacts and through contact with bodily fluids from the infected individual. And, um, so it was slightly a, um, international. Consideration to prevent the outbreak of Ebola and the epidemic from spreading worldwide, because [00:32:00] if it did, that would have been catastrophic given the fact that mortalities from Ebola are normally somewhere between 50 and 90 percent of the infected populations that spread throughout the world.
You can imagine the disastrous consequences. Uh, they, the public health concern for the wellbeing of the larger community, the entire population of the Plymouth, almost we can say. required that novel burial strategies be put in place to prevent the outbreak or the epidemic from escalating further. Now, the other thing that we talk about are the cultural handling of deceased in Madagascar.
We talking about the handling and reburial of people after they have deceased. So many times the corpses are. Removed from the grave, cleaned and reburied several times, and procedures must be put in place to maintain and prevent a spread of pneumonic plague, which is endemic to the island. And even though the chances of transmission is lower than with many other [00:33:00] diseases, reburial and increased contact between the deceased and their family might result in a death.
outbreak or an epidemic. And that's why focusing on culturally appropriate, but also biosecure management
Kyle King: of the disease is important. Yeah. There's really just, there's a lot to unpack and a lot to think about when we discuss the, the role of ethics and responding to preparing for responding to and recovering from a crisis.
And I think it's going to be an evolving field and I think it's going to continue to come up. But how do you personally, how do you see the field of ethics and crisis management evolving? You've already mentioned AI, there's some new technology aspects, right? And then, so what does this future look like from your perspective?
A lot of reading
Roman Tandlich: because the amount of information that's available out there is, I think what is important is there's going to be a lot more specialization inside the ethics, professional ethics and similar fields because there is quite a lot that's going on. AI is very important. You mentioned that it has major [00:34:00] implications to probably define, redefine human existence in the next decade, maybe even faster.
If it hasn't already, but what is also important is we will need to pay a lot more attention to the ethics of handling of social media information. So data management, things like that are becoming more academically and also professionally important. I think, uh, the ethics of considering the ecosystem that humans are parts of a socio ecological system in which any action we take has repercussions and potential feedback as well.
Feedback loops onto our wellbeing that needs to be considered. Uh, but personally, what I think mostly will be, um, one of the things that I will, I'm currently focusing on with my students is the ethics of, um, how human existence is actually changing in the fluid nature of what we experiencing every day and the complexity that you mentioned, the complexity of human existence, and that I think will be, and it's actually now being explored from many different [00:35:00] angles.
The interlinks between what used to be normally a philosophical, um, subject, ethics, it is still very much, uh, in the realm of philosophy, but it is more and more overlapping with areas of expertise like the one I've got, which is background in biological and chemical sciences and trying to, um, see how the concepts from one can be applied to another and how the mutual interaction between various academic and practical fields change what we consider right and wrong.
Going forward. So that's
Kyle King: where I would leave it. Thanks for that. That was a really great overview of the topic. And it was really, it's quite an interesting discussion for me personally, and I'm sure for many others. So if somebody wanted to reach out to you or get in touch with you or, or follow up with any questions that they might have about this topic, what's the best way to reach you?
Roman Tandlich: I think the best thing would be, you can reach out through LinkedIn. I've got a profile. I think I could be more active, but, um, I definitely respond to any messages I receive. Email is always a good way to do it. But [00:36:00] then the other thing I would maybe, um, if I can check out the crisis lab and the team's websites and platforms that you can engage with, because there's a lot of important developments taking place.
And I really would like to thank. Uh, the crisis lab team for allowing me to work with you guys, because I think it wasn't a one sided discussion. It was a nice learning experience and I think it encouraged me to do more and I also, um, see it as a nice growth opportunity for
Kyle King: myself. Thank you. Great.
Thanks a lot. Thanks for joining us. And we'll see you inside the course next time. So, Roman, thanks a lot for joining us. Appreciate you being here. And thanks for sharing all your insights and knowledge. Thank you. Cheers. That's all the time we have for today. And a big thank you to our guest, Dr. Roman Danlich, for sharing his valuable insights on the topic of ethics during crisis.
And to our listeners, Thank you for turning into the crisis lab podcast. We hope today's episode has given you a new perspective and tools to tackle the challenges you need in your field. Remember each episode is a step towards building [00:37:00] perspective and ultimately mastering your field. And we're here to support you along the way.
If you haven't subscribed yet, head over to your favorite platform, hit that subscribe button and stay updated with our latest podcast episodes. And for more resources and to join our community of over 18, 000 professionals, visit crisislab. io and follow us on LinkedIn. And YouTube. And lastly, have you heard about our all access pass?
So it's your chance to lock in pricing for 2024. So you'll get access to 20 accredited courses, which are going to be released throughout the year and at least 10 CEUs and a NATO certificate. If you do happen to attend our NATO crisis management disaster response course, so lock in your costs now as prices will increase every year.
Until next time, stay prepared, stay resilient, and let's continue making a difference together. Thanks for listening.
