IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i17p10925-d904191.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emergency Decision Making: A Literature Review and Future Directions

Author

Listed:
  • Wenxin Su

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Linyan Chen

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
    Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR 999077, China)

  • Xin Gao

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

Abstract

In recent decades, various types of emergencies have started to occur more frequently. Their impact and complexity have increased significantly, bringing serious challenges to the sustainable development of the economy, society and the environment. Emergency decision making (EDM) for emergencies is vital for successfully handling crisis events and achieving sustainable development goals. It has attracted widespread academic attention. The purpose of this study is to summarize the progress made so far in research and identify future directions through a literature review. First, a two-stage literature search was conducted to identify a sample of studies. Then, the literature was analyzed econometrically and coded for content. Finally, a theoretical framework based on stakeholder theory was developed to identify current insights and to uncover what needs to be further researched. The article suggests that future in-depth research should be conducted in four areas: analysis of social media information related to emergencies, improvement in computer-aided tools, the influence of decision makers’ characteristics on decision outcomes, and efficient linkage of multiple subjects in the organization and implementation phase of emergency projects. This study hopes to draw the attention of more scholars to conduct research related to EDM to promote theoretical progress and contribute knowledge on the sustainable development of the practice of EDM.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenxin Su & Linyan Chen & Xin Gao, 2022. "Emergency Decision Making: A Literature Review and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-25, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:17:p:10925-:d:904191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/17/10925/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/17/10925/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Langer & Martin Weber, 2001. "Prospect Theory, Mental Accounting, and Differences in Aggregated and Segregated Evaluation of Lottery Portfolios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 716-733, May.
    2. Xia, Bingqing & Qiang, Maoshan & Chen, Wenchao & Fan, Qixiang & Jiang, Hanchen & An, Nan, 2018. "A benefit-sharing model for hydropower projects based on stakeholder input-output analysis: A case study of the Xiluodu Project in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 341-352.
    3. D. Warner North, 2020. "Risk Analysis, Decision Analysis, Causal Analysis, and Economics: A Personal Perspective from More Than 40 years Experience," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2178-2190, November.
    4. Argyris, Nikolaos & French, Simon, 2017. "Nuclear emergency decision support: A behavioural OR perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(1), pages 180-193.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Howard Kunreuther & Erwann Michel-Kerjan, 2015. "Demand for fixed-price multi-year contracts: Experimental evidence from insurance decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 171-194, October.
    2. Sarah Jacobson & Ragan Petrie, 2009. "Learning from mistakes: What do inconsistent choices over risk tell us?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 143-158, April.
    3. Steul, Martina, 2006. "Does the framing of investment portfolios influence risk-taking behavior? Some experimental results," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 557-570, August.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:361-379 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Chan, Nathan W. & Wolk, Leonard, 2020. "Cost-effective giving with multiple public goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 130-145.
    6. Hopfensitz, Astrid & Wranik, Tanja, 2008. "Psychological and environmental determinants of myopic loss aversion," MPRA Paper 9305, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Holzmeister, Felix, 2017. "oTree: Ready-made apps for risk preference elicitation methods," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 33-38.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:5:p:617-629 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Xiaojiao Qiao & Dan Shi, 2019. "Risk Analysis of Emergency Based on Fuzzy Evidential Reasoning," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-10, November.
    10. Chivers, David, 2017. "Success, survive or escape? Aspirations and poverty traps," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 116-132.
    11. Daniel McFadden, 2014. "The new science of pleasure: consumer choice behavior and the measurement of well-being," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 2, pages 7-48, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Aloysius, John A., 2005. "Ambiguity aversion and the equity premium puzzle: A re-examination of experimental data on repeated gambles," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 635-655, October.
    13. Keith Blackburn & David Chivers, 2015. "Fearing the worst: the importance of uncertainty for inequality," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 60(2), pages 345-370, October.
    14. Hueber, Laura & Schwaiger, Rene, 2022. "Debiasing through experience sampling: The case of myopic loss aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 87-138.
    15. Kaufmann, Christine & Weber, Martin, 2013. "Sometimes less is more – The influence of information aggregation on investment decisions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 20-33.
    16. Schwaiger, Rene & Hueber, Laura, 2021. "Do MTurkers exhibit myopic loss aversion?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    17. Daniel Gottlieb & Olivia S. Mitchell, 2020. "Narrow Framing and Long‐Term Care Insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(4), pages 861-893, December.
    18. Elizabeth C. Webb & Suzanne B. Shu, 2017. "Is broad bracketing always better? How broad decision framing leads to more optimal preferences over repeated gambles," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(4), pages 382-395, July.
    19. Caballero, William N. & Lunday, Brian J., 2019. "Influence modeling: Mathematical programming representations of persuasion under either risk or uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 266-282.
    20. Venkatraman, Srinivasan & Aloysius, John A. & Davis, Fred D., 2006. "Multiple prospect framing and decision behavior: The mediational roles of perceived riskiness and perceived ambiguity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 59-73, September.
    21. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:4:p:382-395 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Zhiying Wang & Xiaodi Liu & Shitao Zhang, 2019. "A New Decision Method for Public Opinion Crisis with the Intervention of Risk Perception of the Public," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-14, July.
    23. Xu, Hongzhang & Pittock, Jamie & Daniell, Katherine, 2022. "‘Sustainability of what, for whom? A critical analysis of Chinese development induced displacement and resettlement (DIDR) programs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:17:p:10925-:d:904191. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.