The Prioritization of Island Nations as Refuges from Extreme Pandemics

In this conceptual article with illustrative data, we suggest that it is useful to rank island nations as potential refuges for ensuring long‐term human survival in the face of catastrophic pandemics (or other relevant existential threats). Prioritization could identify the several island nations th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Risk Analysis
Main Authors: Matt Boyd, Nick Wilson
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13398
id ftrepec:oai:RePEc:wly:riskan:v:40:y:2020:i:2:p:227-239
record_format openpolar
spelling ftrepec:oai:RePEc:wly:riskan:v:40:y:2020:i:2:p:227-239 2023-05-15T16:51:30+02:00 The Prioritization of Island Nations as Refuges from Extreme Pandemics Matt Boyd Nick Wilson https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13398 unknown https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13398 article ftrepec https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13398 2020-12-04T13:31:40Z In this conceptual article with illustrative data, we suggest that it is useful to rank island nations as potential refuges for ensuring long‐term human survival in the face of catastrophic pandemics (or other relevant existential threats). Prioritization could identify the several island nations that are most suitable for targeting social and political preparations and further investment in resiliency. We outline a prioritization methodology and as an initial demonstration, we then provide example rankings by considering 20 sovereign island states (all with populations greater than 250,000 and no land borders). Results describe each nation in nine resilience‐relevant domains covering location, population, resources, and society according to published data. The results indicate that the most suitable island nations for refuge status are Australia, followed closely by New Zealand, and then Iceland, with other nations all well behind (including the relatively high‐income ones of Malta and Japan). Nevertheless, some key contextual factors remain relatively unexplored. These include the capacity of the jurisdiction to rapidly close its borders when the emerging threat was first detected elsewhere, and whether or not large subnational islands should be the preferred focus for refuge design (e.g., the Australian state of Tasmania, the island of Hokkaido in Japan, or the South Island of New Zealand). Overall, this work provides conceptual thinking with some initial example analysis. Further research could refine the selection of metrics, how best to weight the relevant domains, and how the populations of prioritized island nations view their nation's selection as a potential refuge for human survival. Article in Journal/Newspaper Iceland RePEc (Research Papers in Economics) New Zealand Risk Analysis 40 2 227 239
institution Open Polar
collection RePEc (Research Papers in Economics)
op_collection_id ftrepec
language unknown
description In this conceptual article with illustrative data, we suggest that it is useful to rank island nations as potential refuges for ensuring long‐term human survival in the face of catastrophic pandemics (or other relevant existential threats). Prioritization could identify the several island nations that are most suitable for targeting social and political preparations and further investment in resiliency. We outline a prioritization methodology and as an initial demonstration, we then provide example rankings by considering 20 sovereign island states (all with populations greater than 250,000 and no land borders). Results describe each nation in nine resilience‐relevant domains covering location, population, resources, and society according to published data. The results indicate that the most suitable island nations for refuge status are Australia, followed closely by New Zealand, and then Iceland, with other nations all well behind (including the relatively high‐income ones of Malta and Japan). Nevertheless, some key contextual factors remain relatively unexplored. These include the capacity of the jurisdiction to rapidly close its borders when the emerging threat was first detected elsewhere, and whether or not large subnational islands should be the preferred focus for refuge design (e.g., the Australian state of Tasmania, the island of Hokkaido in Japan, or the South Island of New Zealand). Overall, this work provides conceptual thinking with some initial example analysis. Further research could refine the selection of metrics, how best to weight the relevant domains, and how the populations of prioritized island nations view their nation's selection as a potential refuge for human survival.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Matt Boyd
Nick Wilson
spellingShingle Matt Boyd
Nick Wilson
The Prioritization of Island Nations as Refuges from Extreme Pandemics
author_facet Matt Boyd
Nick Wilson
author_sort Matt Boyd
title The Prioritization of Island Nations as Refuges from Extreme Pandemics
title_short The Prioritization of Island Nations as Refuges from Extreme Pandemics
title_full The Prioritization of Island Nations as Refuges from Extreme Pandemics
title_fullStr The Prioritization of Island Nations as Refuges from Extreme Pandemics
title_full_unstemmed The Prioritization of Island Nations as Refuges from Extreme Pandemics
title_sort prioritization of island nations as refuges from extreme pandemics
url https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13398
geographic New Zealand
geographic_facet New Zealand
genre Iceland
genre_facet Iceland
op_relation https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13398
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13398
container_title Risk Analysis
container_volume 40
container_issue 2
container_start_page 227
op_container_end_page 239
_version_ 1766041624358420480