Disparities in outcomes are evident in emergency management interactions, in acute circumstances, like hurricanes or natural disasters, or routine interactions involving first responders, such as traffic stops or patient transport. Women and people of color are disproportionately represented in experiencing adverse effects. In light of observed inequities, this analysis investigates whether codes of ethics articulate the value of equity as a guiding principle. After presenting background evidence on the manifestation of inequities, we reviewed literature on the general nature of codes of ethics and their context in Public Administration and Emergency Management, giving consideration to social vulnerability and cultural competence. The purpose of this inquiry was to examine codes of ethics in various professions comprising the broad field of emergency management and first response within the United States—including that of the American Society for Public Administration—to determine whether they take race and gender into account. As disparities in outcomes are broadly observed, we hypothesized that the terms would be underrepresented. We found that only a small minority of codes make explicit mention of race or gender, and the majority do not mention equity. We also discovered a stronger emphasis on professionalism than on outcomes within the populations served.

结果的差异在紧急情况管理互动中很明显，在紧急情况下，如飓风或自然灾害，或涉及急救人员的常规互动，如交通停止或病人运输。女性和有色人种在经历不利影响方面的比例不成比例。鉴于观察到的不公平现象，本分析调查了道德规范是否将公平价值作为指导原则。在介绍了不公平表现的背景证据之后，我们回顾了关于道德守则的一般性质及其在公共行政和应急管理中的背景的文献，同时考虑了社会脆弱性和文化能力。这项调查的目的是检查包括美国公共管理协会在内的广泛的应急管理和第一反应领域的各种职业的道德规范，以确定它们是否考虑到种族和性别。由于广泛观察到结果的差异，我们假设这些术语的代表性不足。我们发现只有少数代码明确提到了种族或性别，大多数没有提到公平。我们还发现，与所服务人群的结果相比，更强调专业精神。由于广泛观察到结果的差异，我们假设这些术语的代表性不足。我们发现只有少数代码明确提到了种族或性别，大多数没有提到公平。我们还发现，与所服务人群的结果相比，更强调专业精神。由于广泛观察到结果的差异，我们假设这些术语的代表性不足。我们发现只有少数代码明确提到了种族或性别，大多数没有提到公平。我们还发现，与所服务人群的结果相比，更强调专业精神。