Oil disasters and government actions in the face of social, environmental, and health-related impacts: A scoping review

ABSTRACT

This article aims to analyze the actions taken by governments to face the social, environmental, and health impacts of oil spill disasters worldwide. This scoping review was conducted in Bireme, Lilacs, SciELO, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases, considering articles published between 1973 and 2021. The database search returned 22 articles on ten global oil disasters in three continents (Asia, the Americas, and Europe), whose causes were grounding (03), shipwreck (01), collision (02), spill (03), and explosion (01). The actions developed were characterized as intersectoral, economic, environmental, and health-related, and the most frequent were environmental and economic actions. In the actions developed, we observed criticisms of controlling, mitigating, or preventing instantaneous or future damages resulting from oil disasters, which is still an open agenda for social movements in the struggle to ensure a healthy, health-promoting environment that preserves all its biodiversity. The actions to face oil disasters in different countries seem incipient, revealing a governmental inability to guide the confrontation of the impacts of this unusual event.

KEYWORDS
Petroleum pollution; Disasters; Chemical contamination; Environmental health; Health management

RESUMO

Este artigo teve por objetivo analisar as ações desenvolvidas pelos governos para o enfrentamento dos impactos socioambientais e na saúde em decorrência dos desastres envolvendo petróleo no mundo. Trata-se de uma revisão de escopo realizada na Bireme, Lilacs, SciELO, PubMed, Cochrane Library e Embase, considerando artigos publicados entre 1973 e 2021. As buscas efetuadas nas bases de dados resultaram em 22 artigos sobre 10 desastres de petróleo ao redor do mundo em três continentes (Ásia, América e Europa), cujas causas dos desastres foram encalhe (3), naufrágio (1), colisão (2), derrame (3) e explosão (1). As ações desenvolvidas foram caracterizadas como intersetoriais, econômicas, ambientais e na saúde, sendo que as mais frequentes foram ações ambientais e econômicas. Nas ações desenvolvidas, observaram-se críticas ao controle, mitigação ou prevenção dos danos instantâneos ou futuros decorrentes dos desastres por petróleo, sendo essa uma agenda ainda em aberto para os movimentos sociais na luta pela garantia de um ambiente saudável, promotor de saúde e com preservação de toda a sua biodiversidade. Conclui-se que as ações para o enfrentamento dos desastres por petróleo nos diferentes países parecem ter sido incipientes, revelando uma incapacidade governamental de orientar o enfrentamento dos impactos desse evento inusitado.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE
Poluição por petróleo; Desastres; Contaminação química; Saúde Ambiental; Gestão em saúde

Introduction

National and subnational governments have been urged to take responsibility for the environment in a joint action for planetary preservation over the past 50 years. International conferences and treaties were assumed, such as in Stockholm in 1972, the World Climate Summit in 1979, the Sustainable Development Summit in 2012, and the Global Climate Summit in 2021¹,². The need for articulation between production and consumption patterns to ensure the environmental-climate balance and the well-being of humanity for current and future generations³,⁴ has been observed in all these conferences.

However, the capitalist development project and the preservation of the environment clash since the ostensive consumption pattern is the main catalytic force of this system, implying socially determined environmental risks⁵,⁶. The current model of capitalist production is founded on the exploitation of agricultural and mineral commodities, leading to intense environmental contamination and human exposure due to the consumption of pesticides and the exploitation of non-renewable and dirty energy sources, such as oil⁷,⁸,⁹.

The advance of capital over the environment places humanity in a setting where earthquakes, floods, acid rain, landslides, and pandemics will become increasingly frequent¹⁰. These events are, in part, a reflection of how society is reproduced, how wealth is distributed, and the consumption pattern². Climate change has been on the agenda of international organizations and scientists. However, government consensus still needs to be achieved on which courses to follow regarding alternatives to overcome its effects on the planet, mainly for its primary vector: using pollutant energy sources such as oil¹¹.

Oil production has highly polluting characteristics, from extraction, refining, transportation, and consumption, which can cause health, social, economic, cultural, and environmental damage¹². In 2016 alone, the global estimate of oil consumption was approximately 36 billion barrels¹³. Nevertheless, oil spill disasters are among the events that cause substantial impacts on the environmental balance, aggravated by insufficient or non-existent government responses.

Significant accidents still occur despite the progressive reduction in oil disasters since 1970. These disasters are hardly known when they occur far from the coast. However, they impact populations and ecosystems and require immediate responses¹⁴ when they reach the continent. Thus, governments should establish forms, actions, and instruments in their territories to predict, minimize, and control oil sectorborne disasters.

The 2019 Brazilian coast oil spill, whose origin is unknown, rekindled a global alert about the responsibilities of national governments and their health systems regarding protecting the environment and the populations affected by these disasters. Noronha, Lima, and Machado¹⁵ argue that government macro-functions can be understood as: a) planning; b) financing; c) coordination, regulation, control, and evaluation; d) direct provision of actions and services. In social and environmental crisis settings, such functions must be articulated based on strategic thinking¹⁶. Therefore, responding efficiently, effectively, and with efficacy to society’s demands, the complexity of disaster risks, and the health-disease process. However, even in these settings, what is seen, in practice, is still a form of government based on ideological, authoritarian precepts¹⁷ and negligible intersectoral articulation¹⁸.

Oil spills studies worldwide prioritize approaches that separately study health¹⁹,²⁰ ,²¹, environmental²²,²³, economic²⁴,²⁵, and social²⁶ impacts. However, there is a lack of knowledge vis-à-vis studies that systematize the decision-making of government authorities and can support policymakers, managers, health professionals, and civil society in developing appropriate strategic actions targeting comprehensive care and repairing affected populations and the environment²⁷. Therefore, this article aims to map the actions taken by governments in the face of social, environmental, and health impacts from oil disasters worldwide.

Material and methods

A scoping review study was conducted, a method proposed to synthesize evidence, map theories, further analyze concepts, and identify knowledge gaps that need further investigation²⁸, observing the methodological principles structured similarly to systematic reviews²⁹.

The Population, Concept, and Context (PCC, P=Governments; C=Coping; C=Oil disasters)³⁰ strategy was used in constructing the research question. The following is the central question of the review: How did governments act in the face of the social, environmental, and health impacts of oil disasters?

The electronic search was conducted from February to March 2022 in the following databases: Bireme, Lilacs, SciELO, PubMed (Medline), Cochrane Library/ Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Embase, using as primary descriptors those referenced in the review of Euzebio et al.¹² referring to oil spills and their variations: Oil spill, Oil spill accident, Oil spill residues, Petroleum Pollution. We selected articles published from January 1, 1973, to December 31, 2021, considering that the 1972 Stockholm Conference was the first event with a predominantly environmental focus and resulted in the Declaration on the Human Environment².

Boolean operators were used as follows: (Oil spill) OR (Oil spill accident)) OR (Oil spill residues)) OR (Petroleum Pollution) AND (Oil spill effects) OR (Socioeconomic vulnerability)) OR (Socioeconomic activities)) OR (Economic impact) (Environmental impact) OR (Health impact) OR (Social impact).

Two independent researchers (R.C.S. and L.S.) performed the search, with the following eligibility criteria: a) inclusion: original works published in English, Spanish, or Portuguese; b) exclusion: book or book chapters, dissertations, monographs, and theses; technical, normative and related reports; and studies that do not provide any information that answers the driving question, although they mention oil spills. Disagreements were resolved by a third researcher (M.O.S.S.). The search process followed the precepts of the Joanna Briggs Institute³⁰, widely used by other reviews, as per stages described in figure 1 to establish the research corpus.

Figure 1
Flowchart indicating the selection process of studies adapted from PRISMA

The selected articles were tabulated in an Excel® table, extracting the information for analysis regarding the author/year of publication of the article, mentioned disaster and year of occurrence, disaster characterization, actions taken, and analysis of actions in each location.

Results

Twenty-two articles on ten oil disasters worldwide mentioned government actions to face their impacts. Disasters were identified in Asia (6), the Americas (3), and Europe (1), whose causes were grounding (3), shipwreck (1), collision (2), spill (3), and explosion (1) (figure 2). All articles characterized some government actions. Nine mentioned the actions developed, and seven criticized these actions.

Figure 2
Oil disaster by cause, continent, and year of occurrence

On socioeconomic and environmental damage: What do the studies say?

Environmental oil-borne contamination ranged from 75 tons in India to 626 thousand tons in the United States of America (USA), with a territorial extension of impact ranging from 3.5 km in Taiwan to 4 thousand km in Brazil, considered the largest spill in the world’s tropical waters. Intensive contamination in the environment is observed in terrestrial and marine conservation units, beaches, and fishing areas, such as Brazil, Taiwan, Pakistan, and Spain.

At least five studies highlight the social and economic damage caused by the disasters, which affected traditional fishing communities in various aspects, such as food, fishing activity, tourism, and local trade. An estimated 300,000 people were affected in Pakistan, with estimated damage ranging from US$ 1.5 to US$ 2 billion; employment declined by 28% in the region in the US; effects that can last a decade are also being reported in Brazil (table 1).

Table 1
Oil disasters by country, year, characterization and study authors

Country	Disaster, year	Characterization	Authors
Brazil	Unknown spill, 2019	Largest oil spill in tropical waters in the world, with 5,000 tons of oily waste dumped, 4,000 km of coastline, 1,009 beaches in 11 Brazilian states and 55 conservation units affected. More than 40 marine protected areas and two of the largest environmental protection areas in the South Atlantic and other tropical ecosystems unique for their biodiversity were affected. It has social, economic and environmental impacts that can last for a decade.	Silva et al.31; Ladle32; Pena et al.33; Soares et al.34; Magalhães et al.35; Zacharias et al.36; Soares et al.37
India	Ships collision, 2017	Spill caused by the collision of two cargo ships about 2 miles off the coast of Chennai. About 75 tons of heavy fuel oil were released into the Bay of Bengal.	Han et al.38
Taiwan	Shipwreck, 2016	Grounding of the TS Taipei freighter 400 meters off the coast, causing the spill of about 417 tons of diesel oil. The incident occurred close to important and sensitive coastal environments, fishing and tourist areas and two water collection stations of a nuclear power plant.	Fan et al.39
USA	Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion, 2010	Largest oil spill in US history. Oil platform explosion, releasing approximately 626,000 tons of crude oil approximately 1,500 meters below the sea surface. The disaster forced the shutdown of commercial fishing in the state of Louisiana, resulting in an estimated 11% reduction in fishermen's income, 23% in commerce, which impacted a 28% decline in employment for all sectors associated with this industry. It brought serious damage to tourism, food and fishing communities in the region.	Ylitalo et al.40; Simon-Friedt et al.41; Lubchenco et al.42; Osofsky, Osofsky43; Birkland, DeYoung44
South Korea	Hebei Spirit collision, 2007	Collision of the Hebei Spirit vessel with a crane barge off the coast of Taean County, causing the worst oil spill in Korea and the second largest in the world, with the spill of 290,000 tons of crude oil over 375 km across the south coast, polluting and affecting fishermen, restaurant owners, and residents of the region.	Hur45
Lebanon	Jiyyeh plant oil spill, 2006	Large oil spill from coastal Jiyyeh plant caused by bombing in the Lebanese-Israeli war. Released 15,000 tons of fuel oil into the Mediterranean Sea.	Takshe et al.46
Pakistan	Tasman Spirit grounding, 2003	Ship grounding, releasing approximately 31,000 tons of crude oil into the sea, causing extensive environmental damage along the coast of Karachi, affecting 270 km2 of seabed, impacting marine ecosystems and coastal areas. Approximately 300,000 people may have been affected, with damage estimated between US$ 1.5 and US$ 2 billion.	Mian, Bennett.47
Spain	Prestige shipwreck, 2002	Prestige shipwreck, an oil tanker carrying 77,033 tons of heavy fuel. It affected the northwest coast of Spain, 400 km off the coast, which is home to one of the main fishing communities in the European Union.	Carrasco et al.48; Surís-Regueiro et al.49; Salomone50
Taiwan	Amorgos spill, 2001	Spill from the Greek freighter Amorgos off the coast of the Kenting Peninsula, with about 35,000 tons of ore. About 1,300 tons of fuel oil are estimated to have leaked, contaminating 3.5 km of coastline along the Long Kun Ecological Conservation Area.	Chiau51
Canada	Tanker grounding, 1970	Grounding of old tanker SS Arrow, carrying 14,700 tons of fuel oil, in Chedabucto Bay, on the east coast of Nova Scotia, Canada. About two-thirds of its cargo was released into the bay's waters due to weather conditions.	Lee et al.52

• source: Own elaboration.

Between actions and criticism: courses undertaken by governments

From a broader perspective and based on the possible harm caused by oil-related disasters, we stratified government actions into intersectoral, economic, environmental, and health-related (table 2).

Table 2
Government post-oil disaster actions

Disaster/Country/Year	Author	Intersectoral actions	Economic actions	Environmental actions	Health actions
Spill with unknown source. Brazil, 2019.	Silva et al.31	Not Identified (NI)	Emergency aid for R$ 1,996.00 (2 minimum wages in 2019, equivalent to US$ 472), paid in two installments, to around 66,000 professional small-scale fishermen registered in the General Registry of Fishing Activity (RGP) and residing in an area affected by the environmental disaster.	NI	Fishing ban for fear of contamination; food sample analysis.
Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion. USA, 2010.	Ylitalo et al.40; Simon-Friedt et al.41; Lubchenco et al42;Osofsky, Osofsky43; Birkland, DeYoung44.	Establishment of an investigative commission into the causes and damages of the spill and a scientific response committee; articulation between government, academia and private sectors; investment of US$ 11 million for immediate investigations into the spill and US$500 million over 10 years.	NI	Cleaning with chemical dispersants; analysis and monitoring of the impacts of cleaning actions on the environment; establishing protocols and safety standards for detecting contaminants in fauna and flora; provision of training to expand the workforce's capacity in cleaning up and recovering the affected areas.	Food sample analysis; fishing ban; mental health care; meeting to plan community responses to prevent health risks.
Tanker grounding. Canada, 1970.	Lee et al.52	Establishment of a scientific committee for consultancy and coordination of actions; intersectoral articulation between government and universities to create responses and promote monitoring of the situation; funding research on spillage.	NI	Appointment of military agents to manage cleanup activities.	NI
Shipwreck of the Prestige. Spain, 2002.	Carrasco et al.48; Surís-Regueiro et al.49; Salomone50.	NI	Financial aid for fishing industry workers, such as shellfish gatherers and fish sellers; tax benefits for companies, preferred line of credit; coverage of expenses involving material and repair of vessels that collaborated with the cleaning operation.	Cleaning by mechanical methods such as sand removal or using high pressure water jets to clean rocks.	Fishing ban; epidemiological inquiry; dissemination of information to the population about the risks of oil exposure and the need to use Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for cleaning activities.
Ships collision. India, 2017.	Han et al.38	NI	NI	Cleaning with pumps to extract floating oil; hundreds of workers were used to scoop up the floating oil using plastic buckets	NI
Collision of the Hebei Spirit. South Korea, 2007.	Hur45	Social mobilization of residents of the region; government support for voluntary actions; establishment of communicative strategies; interministerial and intersectoral articulation; request for international assistance.	Emergency aid	NI	NI
Amorgos spill. Taiwan, 2001.	Chiau51	Establishment of an intersectoral and intergovernmental crisis committee with universities; creation of Taiwan's national "Ocean Suffering Day" in an ongoing effort to raise public awareness of marine pollution.	NI	Environmental protection department monitoring the situation; military engaged in cleanup.	Training of the population for cleaning actions and community surveillance.
Shipwreck of a vessel. Taiwan, 2016.	Fan et al.39	Interdepartmental cooperation between government agencies and the private sector.	NI	Establishment of an emergency response center to direct cleanup and coordinate follow-up actions and procedures; application of advanced technologies in the cleaning process, monitoring and assessment of the situation such as: helicopters, unmanned aircraft systems, and radar.	NI
Tasman Spirit grounding. Pakistan, 2003.	Mian, Bennett47	Search for national and international experts to conduct the response.	NI	Use of containment barriers, oil dispersants, heavy machinery for digging and removing oil from beaches; mobilization of military agents for cleanup activities.	Fishing ban.

• source: Own elaboration.

We identified measures that guided intersectoral coping actions, such as interministerial commissions, social mobilization, and scientific advisory committees in six disasters in five countries, emphasizing the investment of approximately US$ 60 million in the US for research on the Gulf of Mexico disaster.

Economic actions were found in three disasters (Brazil, Spain, and South Korea), and establishing emergency aid for the affected population was common to all. Besides the aid, Spain offered a special credit line for fishing production and tourism.

Environmental actions, such as cleaning the affected areas, were undertaken in seven disasters. The territory’s military or population was the workforce performing the cleanup. In some of these disasters, committees were set up to monitor the environmental cleanup and recovery measures.

Concerning health actions, banning fishing was the most frequent measure used in disasters in Brazil, the US, Spain, and Pakistan as a food exposure precautionary measure. Other actions include analyzing food samples, community surveillance, information dissemination, and epidemiological survey.

Although governments have developed the actions exemplified in table 2, authors have criticized the courses undertaken in managing seven disasters, shown in table 3, to systematize the setting of the unusual event globally. In general, subnational entities were unable to articulate jointly, and political disputes, substandard national infrastructure, slow and bureaucratized measures to control and reduce impacts, exposure of the population to chemical agents due to lack of protection materials, limited financing of actions, lack of participatory and communication processes were observed.

Table 3
Disaster and criticism of the articles regarding the actions taken

Disaster, Country, Year	Criticism of actions	Authors
Spill with unknown source. Brazil, 2019.	Few fishermen benefited from emergency aid; lack of community and government articulation; little dissemination of information and environmental analyses to certify the quality of water and food for the population; little consensus on the dietary risks of fish in the region; health crisis office unavailable; little intersectoral articulation; lack of financial subsidy to strengthen a specialized laboratory network that could assess and monitor fish quality; lack of transparent guidelines; and inappropriate actions for the context, such as: science budget cuts and the dismantling of environmental policies. Delayed, slow, and uncoordinated response, making local governments, universities, and NGOs responsible for initial mobilization for cleanup and research.	Silva et al.31; Ladle32; Pena et al.33; Soares et al.34; Magalhães et al.35; Zacharias et al.36; Soares et al.37
Ships collision. India, 2017.	The local government did not have a contingency plan to manage large oil spills; volunteer workers received little or no training, and many of them did not have access to any PPE protection.	Han et al.38
Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion. USA, 2010.	Lack of dialogue with the population; little confidence of the population in the government; decentralized coordination between subnational governments insufficient, slow, confusing and bureaucratic.	Simon-Friedt et al.41; Osofsky, Osofsky43; Birkland, DeYoung44.
Collision of the Hebei Spirit. South Korea, 2007.	Disarticulation between government agencies; political conflicts between the central government and subnational entities; little articulation with academia; lack of PPE; little transparency in the disclosure of health-related information; the bureaucratization of decisions caused delays and escalated the impacts; little control of voluntary actions that exposed the population to the imminent risks of contact with crude oil chemicals and dispersants.	Hur45
Jiyyeh plant oil spill. Lebanon, 2006.	Fragmented and poor capacity of the Lebanese government in dealing with pollution, enforcing pollution control legislation, and developing intersectoral strategies.	Takshe et al.46
Tasman Spirit grounding. Pakistan, 2003.	Bureaucratized decision-making, delaying immediate responses; interagency conflict over cleanup accountability; lack of coordination between governments; limited resources for actions and strategies; shortage of trained personnel; lack of temporary storage facilities for oily waste; lack of PPE for cleanup workers; unclear and poorly guiding laws on the responsibilities of national entities.	Mian, Bennett47
Amorgos spill. Taiwan, 2001.	Lack of trained personnel, technology and appropriate equipment; lack of experience and integration of Government institutions; poor articulation with non-governmental organizations.	Chiau51

• source: Own elaboration.

Discussion

The oil disasters described in this study showed that countries were affected by several consequences in which their social protection systems had to reorient themselves to respond to the impacts involved. Actions needed to be coordinated in Brazil³³,³⁴,³⁵,³⁶,³⁷, the USA⁴⁴, South Korea⁴⁵, Taiwan⁵¹, Pakistan⁴⁷, and Lebanon⁴⁶, with the integration of government agencies or robust intersectoral strategies, diverging from the necessary recommendations that this episode demands for exceeding local response capacity⁵³,⁵⁴.

Implementing contingency plans for disasters in a hierarchical, shared, agile, and specific way, considering the technical, administrative, and political aspects that the situation implies and the attributions of each entity and government agency⁵⁵, is what should occur. When such articulation does not occur, the response that emerges from the setting may be the result of legal clashes, such as in Brazil, where the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office filed public civil actions in several states in the Northeast, as well as a joint action involving all states in the oil-affected region,

To ensure, in order of priority, human life safety, the protection of the environment, and the integrity of properties and installations threatened or affected by the oil spill⁵⁶⁽⁷²⁾.

In the disasters of Brazil³¹,³³, the USA⁴¹,⁴³, and South Korea⁴⁵, contrary to what the World Health Organization⁵⁷ postulates for the communication of risks in public health emergencies, the governments did not move towards a reliable, timely, and transparent communication strategy that would allow decision-making regarding individual, family, and community protection.

However, as Bueno⁵⁸ points out, a communicative action through radio, television, internet, and other means guided by health management would be relevant besides considering facts and circumstances of the event, neutralizing dissonance and political and business interference, and facing biased media coverage. In this context, the media would play a vital role during and after the disaster to provide subsidies to the population about the safety and integrity of the actions and means and measures to assist people affected⁵⁹.

Although oil and its derivatives have a high capacity to pollute water, soil, fauna, and flora¹²,²²,²³, we should highlight that disaster management in Brazil³³, Lebanon⁴⁶, India³⁸, and Pakistan⁴⁷ was also characterized by a lack of or inefficient crisis office at the national level, non-compliance with control legislation, and even the non-existence or non-activation of a contingency plan, which would be a national responsibility. As a result of this poor environmental damage mitigation, we could mention the aggravated historical environmental injustice since its harm is not shared homogeneously among individuals, where traditional populations are the most affected, especially fishermen and shellfish gatherers⁶⁰,⁶¹.

Particularly in Brazil, authors mention that this lack of crisis centrality and orientation established a despairing setting in which volunteers, primarily fishermen, defended their territories without knowing the dangers. These individuals immediately worked to remove oil from beaches and mangroves without Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)s, even diving into contaminated waters³³,³⁴,³⁵,³⁷.

Suppose a health policy can be considered State action or omission before society’s demands⁶². In that case, the organization of health management in times of crisis, such as in oil disasters, will reflect coping in its technical aspects. The recognition or not of health’s social value in its broader context, where the territory where one is born, lives, falls ill, and dies, typical of the water populations, such as fishermen and seafood⁶³,⁶⁴, are determinants and conditions.

The articles highlighted that civilians or military personnel were engaged in the cleanup protocols in the mapped disasters. However, Pakistan⁴⁷, South Korea⁴⁵, India³⁸, and Brazil³³ were criticized for lack of PPE or loss of control of volunteers exposed to chemical contaminants, which is particularly troubling, because the literature points to the association between exposure to oil components and various acute and chronic effects on human health, such as acute poisoning, cancer, and endocrine changes⁶⁵,⁶⁶,⁶⁷,⁶⁸.

For example, the Brazilian and international regulatory framework has recognized a vital oil component, benzene, on toxicological aspects, occupational and environmental exposure, and risk assessment⁶⁹. From this perspective, every individual who came into contact with the substance or minimally with the contaminated areas should be evaluated, adopting follow-up measures and health monitoring due to the likely late/chronic effects⁷⁰. An increase in acute respiratory and neurological symptoms was observed among workers cleaning the contaminated areas through inhalation and dermal exposure⁷¹,⁷² in the case of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig disaster that caused an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

In another oil spill disaster in Chennai, off the coast of India, researchers identified that Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) can be highly resistant to climate variations, in which the PAH levels detected on the sixth day of the spill were similar to those identified on the 62^nd day³⁸, pointing to the dangers inherent to its exposure.

In this sense, it would be urgent to establish health actions, as observed in Brazil³¹, USA⁴⁰,⁴¹,⁴²,⁴³,⁴⁴, Spain⁴⁸,⁴⁹,⁵⁰, Taiwan⁵¹, and Pakistan⁴⁷, whether in the analysis of seafood and other fish to ascertain food quality and safety or in the epidemiological mapping of the affected or exposed population for developing programs and policies and readjusting health services in the care of these specific populations.

On the other hand, the measures in these same countries were also the target of criticism for the lack of coordination and consensus between agencies and subnational governments in their implementation or for the inefficient dissemination of surveillance, health promotion, and damage prevention information, which may not have generated the expected protective effect in Brazil³¹,³²,³³ and the USA⁴¹,⁴³.

Recent research has revealed several criticisms of the lack of availability of baseline health data captured before, during, and on an ongoing basis after a disaster, pointing out that health monitoring is essential to reduce and manage the health impacts of future disasters and that it is also necessary to establish an observation and care system⁷³. The Unified Health System (SUS) is internationally recognized for its ability to realize extensive monitoring of human health regarding disasters and may be an example to be followed by other countries⁷³,⁷⁴ .

However, very little of the health potential represented by the SUS was used in Brazil through its primary care units in the territories affected by the oil spill. This system was experiencing funding setbacks, degrading its ability to action⁷⁵. Some authors have reflected on the contributions of Primary Care in this setting⁷⁶,⁷⁷. Although this level of care can collaborate to provide health care during the disaster and monitor the acute and chronic conditions triggered in these situations, in general, professionals are unprepared, this level of care is not adequately recognized, and its performance is not prioritized, disregarding its power and territorial capillarity⁷⁸,⁷⁹.

The literature is consonant with the global deficiencies in preparing health systems to face disasters, especially from the viewpoint of human resources⁸⁰,⁸¹,⁸². When looking at health professionals, inadequate, segmented, and variable training on these unusual events persists, which may have direct implications for the care and healthcare of the affected populations⁸², which makes measures and proposals that consider a robust and consistent training of workers in this field urgent.

The economic and symbolic losses of all fishing production and tourism identified²⁴,²⁵,³¹,³³ – particularly of traditional peoples due to their relationship with the sea and the territory – were also found to generate illness, with outcomes in mental health, alcohol, and other drug abuse¹²,⁸³, which requires the implementation of mental health care measures for those affected, something that emerges as a strategy for coping with the disaster only in the USA⁴³.

Financial compensation through emergency aid in Brazil³¹, Spain⁴⁹, and South Korea⁴⁵ was an important step towards repairing the affected population, given the installed financial losses and food insecurity situation⁶¹. However, the scope of emergency aid, edited by Provisional Measure Nº 911, which allocated resources to a restricted portion of those affected by the disaster, thus undermining the compensatory capacity of this emergency aid³¹, was criticized in Brazil. According to Beristain^84(173),

Reparation refers to measures to restore rights, improve the situation of victims, and promote political reforms that prevent the recurrence of violations.

However, the mapped articles have evidenced negligible control, mitigation, or prevention of instantaneous or future damages from oil disasters, which is still an open agenda for social movements in the struggle to ensure a healthy, health-promoting environment that preserves all its biodiversity⁴.

Each disaster mapped here is immersed in a different social, economic, political, and historical context, characteristic of the affected country, besides the existing conception of health⁸⁵,⁸⁶. Thus, the actions developed to face the impacts abided by the environmental and health perspectives valued in each context and are more or less equitable, guided by the social, medical-hegemonic, or market-oriented determination⁸⁷, justifying the governmental priorities in crisis management and the State operating logic⁸⁸.

Finally, two assumptions observed in this review are striking. The first is that most of the reported disasters are in the so-called developing countries, which shows a need to “develop an ethical, legal framework and a funding mechanism to conduct research responses”^89(124) about the social, environmental, economic, and health impacts, promoting their sharing among different nations, in a mutual aid of prevention and solidarity.

The second is that only some studies address government actions and the role of health management in coping with the impacts of oil disasters, especially when looking at decision-making. Our results should serve as a warning for a gap in the literature that needs to be suppressed in future research, given the growing and intense number of environmental and health disasters endured by humanity, with generalized and complex consequences that need to be interpreted in the light of policy, planning, management, and assessment in health⁸⁹,⁹⁰,⁹¹.

Final considerations

Actions to face oil disasters in different countries seem incipient, revealing a governmental inability to guide the confrontation of this unusual event’s intersectoral, economic, environmental, and health impacts.

The world has lived with meetings of global leaders, treaties, plans, and international policies that guide environmental protection for the entire human existence for 50 years. However, the agreements still have low capillarity within the very national governments, leading to the establishment of tools, norms, and directive agencies that induce and coordinate actions to defend the environment.

Using energy matrices based on fossil fuels such as oil, the hegemonic development model in the capitalist world requires that national health systems integrate a larger project of coordinated, integrated, and effective responses to environmental disasters and health crises that will be increasingly more frequent.

The limitations of the present study are the lack of political, social, and economic context of the different countries and their disasters, which could help interpret the findings about the courses undertaken in managing each crisis, requiring further analysis.

• Financial support: Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel - Brazil (CAPES) - Financing Code 001 Public call for the Science and Technology Support Foundation of Pernambuco (FACEPE) Nº 06/2020. Research program for the SUS: shared management in health (PPSUS) - Pernambuco, CNPq/DECIT/SCTIE/MS/SES/FACEPE. Inova Fiocruz Program/ Strategic Orders, Sustainable and Healthy Territories in the COVID-19 pandemic. CAPES - INCT AmbTropic Phase II (File CNPq 465634/2014-1). CAPES-Entre Mares (File Nº 88881469752/2019-01, AUXPE N° 29/2020). National Council for Scientific Development (CNPq). Grant N° 440784/2020-4. Decentralized Implementation Term (TED) between the Brazilian Ministry of Health and UFBA, File N° 25000137122202114 - TED 49/2021

Referências

• ¹
  Pessini L, Sganzerla A. Evolução histórica e política das principais conferências mundiais da onu sobre o clima e meio ambiente. Rev. Iberoamericana de Bioética. 2016 [acesso em 2022 jul 19]; (1):1-14. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.14422/rib.i01.y2016.009
  » https://doi.org/10.14422/rib.i01.y2016.009
• ²
  Pott CM, Estrela CC. Histórico ambiental: desastres ambientais e o despertar de um novo pensamento. Estud. Avanç. 2017 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 31(89):271-283. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-40142017.31890021
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-40142017.31890021
• ³
  Fonseca FE. A convergência entre a proteção ambiental e a proteção da pessoa humana no âmbito do direito internacional. Rev. Bras. Polít. Int. 2007 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 50(1):121-138. Disponível em: https:// doi.org/10.1590/S0034-73292007000100007
  » https:// doi.org/10.1590/S0034-73292007000100007
• ⁴
  Alencar NM, Costa MCB, Holanda OQ, et al. A saúde ambiental e a sua influência na qualidade de vida: uma revisão integrativa. Braz. J. of Develop. 2020 [acesso em 2022 abr 10]; 6(6):33093-33105. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv6n6-021
  » https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv6n6-021
• ⁵
  Acselrad H. Os desastres e a ambientalidade crítica do capitalismo. Rev. C&Trópico. 2021 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 45(2):83-98. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.33148/cetropicov45n2(2021)art6
  » https://doi. org/10.33148/cetropicov45n2(2021)art6
• ⁶
  Castro AE, Trevisan M. Padrões insustentáveis de consumo: um panorama do desequilíbrio global nos hábitos individuais e suas consequências para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável. Estud. Adm. Soc. 2020 [acesso em 2022 jun 10]; 5(02):22-40. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.22409/eas.v5i2.28572
  » https://doi.org/10.22409/eas.v5i2.28572
• ⁷
  Bizerra AMC, Queiroz JLA, Coutinho DAM. O impacto ambiental dos combustíveis fósseis e dos bio-combustíveis: as concepções de estudantes do ensino médio sobre o tema. Revbea. 2018 [acesso em 2022 jun 10]; 13(3):299-315. Disponível em: https:// doi.org/10.34024/revbea.2018.v13.2502
  » https:// doi.org/10.34024/revbea.2018.v13.2502
• ⁸
  Maia CRS, Alencar FAG, Bezerra IR. Crise energética e agrodiesel: determinações globais da produção capitalista do espaço agrário brasileiro. Revista Nera. 2016 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 19(33):206-233. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.47946/rnera.v0i33.4130
  » https://doi.org/10.47946/rnera.v0i33.4130
• ⁹
  Ródio GR, Rosset IG, Brandalize APC. Exposição a agrotóxicos e suas consequências para a saúde humana. Research. Soc. Develop. 2021 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 10(8):e43010817526. Disponível em: http:// dx.doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i8.17526
  » http:// dx.doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i8.17526
• ¹⁰
  Pinto MB, Cerqueira AS. Reflexões sobre a pandemia da COVID-19 e o capitalismo. Revista Libert. 2020 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 20(1):38-52. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.34019/1980-8518.2020.v20.30485
  » https://doi.org/10.34019/1980-8518.2020.v20.30485
• ¹¹
  Viglio JE, Giulio GMD, Barbi F, et al. Narrativas científicas sobre petróleo e mudanças do clima e suas reverberações na política climática brasileira. Sociol. 2019 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 21(51):124-158. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/15174522
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/15174522
• ¹²
  Euzebio CS, Rangel GS, Marques RC. Oil spills and its environmental and human health impacts. RBCIAMB. 2019 [acesso em 2022 fev 1]; (52):79-98. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.5327/Z2176-94782019047213
  » https://doi.org/10.5327/Z2176-94782019047213
• ¹³
  World o meter. Oil left in the world. [acesso em 2022 jun 2]. Disponível em: https://www.worldometers. info/oil/
  » https://www.worldometers. info/oil/
• ¹⁴
  ITOPF. Oil Tanker Spill Statistics 2021. London: ITO-PF; 2022. [acesso em 2022 abr 2] Disponível em: https://www.itopf.org/fileadmin/uploads/itopf/data/ Documents/Company_Lit/Oil_Spill_Stats_2021.pdf
  » https://www.itopf.org/fileadmin/uploads/itopf/data/ Documents/Company_Lit/Oil_Spill_Stats_2021.pdf
• ¹⁵
  Noronha JC, Lima LD, Machado CV. A gestão do Sistema Único de Saúde: características e tendências. In: Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Saúde no Brasil: Contribuições para a Agenda de Prioridades de Pesquisa. Brasília, DF: MS; 2004. p. 41-94.
• ¹⁶
  Furtado JP, Campos GWS, Oda WY, et al. Planejamento e Avaliação em Saúde: entre antagonismo e colaboração. Cad. Saúde Pública. 2018 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 34(7):e00087917. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1590/0102-311X00087917
  » https://doi. org/10.1590/0102-311X00087917
• ¹⁷
  Matus C. Teoria do jogo social. São Paulo: Fundap; 2005.
• ¹⁸
  Synnevåg ES, Amdam R, Fosse E. Intersectoral Planning for Public Health: Dilemmas and Challenges. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2018 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 7(11):982-992. Disponível em: https://10.15171/ ijhpm.2018.59
  » https://10.15171/ ijhpm.2018.59
• ¹⁹
  Harville EW, Shankar A, Zilversmit L, et al. The Gulf oil spill, miscarriage, and infertility: the GROWH study. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2018 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 91(1):47-56. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1007/s00420-017-1257-4
  » https://doi. org/10.1007/s00420-017-1257-4
• ²⁰
  Lawrence KG, Werder EJ, Kwok RK, et al. Mental health indicators and lung function following a large oil spill. Eur Respir J. 2021 [acesso em 2022 jul 19]; 58(4):2100712. Disponível em: https://10.1183/13993003.00712-2021
  » https://10.1183/13993003.00712-2021
• ²¹
  Lee M, Park MS, Cheong HK. An association between oil spill clean-up work and cardiovascular disease. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2020 [acesso em 2022 jul 19]; (194):110284. Disponível em: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0147651320301238
  » https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0147651320301238
• ²²
  Burton GA, Cervi EC, Rosen G, et al. Tracking and Assessing Oil Spill Toxicity to Aquatic Organisms: A Novel Approach. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2021 [acesso em 2022 jul 19]; 40(5):1452-1462. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5000
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5000
• ²³
  Yim UH, Hong S, Lee C, et al. Rapid recovery of coastal environment and ecosystem to the Hebei Spirit oil spill’s impact. Environ Int. 2020 [acesso em 2022 jul 19]; 136:105438. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.105438
  » https://doi. org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.105438
• ²⁴
  Cirer-Costa JC. Tourism and its hypersensitivity to oil spills. Mar Pollut Bull. 2015 [acesso em 2022 jul 19]; 91(1):65-72. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. marpolbul.2014.12.027
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j. marpolbul.2014.12.027
• ²⁵
  Liu X, Wirtz KW. The economy of oil spills: direct and indirect costs as a function of spill size. J Hazard Mater. 2009 [acesso em 2022 jul 19]; 171(1-3):471-7. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.06.028
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.06.028
• ²⁶
  Garza MD, Prada A, Varela M, et al. Indirect assessment of economic damages from the Prestige oil spill: consequences for liability and risk prevention. Disasters. 2009 [acesso em 2022 jul 19]; 33(1):95-109. Disponível em: https://10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01064.x
  » https://10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01064.x
• ²⁷
  Costa AM, Diniz PCO. Processos de vulnerabilização em grandes empreendimentos desenvolvimentistas e estratégias de reparação integral comunitária em comunidades tradicionais. Rev. espaço acad. 2021 [acesso em 2022 jun 10]; (21):63-72. Disponível em: https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/EspacoAcademico/article/view/60892
  » https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/EspacoAcademico/article/view/60892
• ²⁸
  Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018 [acesso em 2022 jun 10]; 169(7):467-473. Disponível em: https:// pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30178033/
  » https:// pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30178033/
• ²⁹
  Méllo LMBD, Santos RC, Albuquerque PC. Agentes Comunitárias de Saúde na pandemia de Covid-19: scoping review. Saúde debate. 2022 [acesso em 2022 jun 10]; 46(esp1):368-384. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1590/0103-11042022E125
  » https://doi. org/10.1590/0103-11042022E125
• ³⁰
  Joanna Briggs Institute. Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews - Joanna Briggs 2015. Australia: JBI; 2015. [acesso em 2022 fev 5]. Disponível em: https://nursing. lsuhsc.edu/JBI/docs/ReviewersManuals/Scoping-.pdf
  » https://nursing. lsuhsc.edu/JBI/docs/ReviewersManuals/Scoping-.pdf
• ³¹
  Silva LRC, Pessoa VM, Carneiro FF, et al. Derramamento de petróleo no litoral brasileiro: (in)visibilidade de saberes e descaso com a vida de marisqueiras. Ciênc. saúde coletiva. 2021 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; 26(12):6027-6036. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1590/1413-812320212612.15172021
  » https://doi. org/10.1590/1413-812320212612.15172021
• ³²
  Ladle RJ, Malhado ACM, Campos-Silva JV, et al. Brazil’s mystery oil spill: an ongoing social disaster. Nature. 2020 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 578:37. Disponível em: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00242-x
  » https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00242-x
• ³³
  Pena PGL, Northcross AL, Lima MAG, et al. Derramamento de óleo bruto na costa brasileira em 2019: emergência em saúde pública em questão. Cad. Saúde Pública. 2020 [acesso em 2022 fev 18]; 36(2):e00231019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/0102--311X00231019
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0102--311X00231019
• ³⁴
  Soares MO, Teixeira CEP, Bezerra LEA, et al. Oil spill in South Atlantic (Brazil): Environmental and governmental disaster. Marine Policy. 2020 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; (115):103879. Disponível em: https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103879
  » https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103879
• ³⁵
  Magalhães KM, Barros KVS, Lima MCS, et al. Oil spill + COVID-19: A disastrous year for Brazilian seagrass conservation. Sci Total Environ. 2021 [acesso em 2022 fev 18]; (764):142872. Disponível em: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0048969720364020
  » https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0048969720364020
• ³⁶
  Zacharias DC, Gama CM, Fornaro A. Mysterious oil spill on Brazilian coast: Analysis and estimates. Mar Pollut Bull. 2021 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; (165):112125. Disponível em: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0025326X21001594
  » https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0025326X21001594
• ³⁷
  Soares MO, Teixeira CEP, Bezerra LEA, et al. Brazil oil spill response: Time for coordination. Science. 2020 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; 367(6474):155. Disponível em: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaz9993
  » https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaz9993
• ³⁸
  Han Y, Nambi IM, Clement TP. Environmental impacts of the Chennai oil spill accident – A case study. Sci Total Environ. 2018 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; (626):795-806. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.01.128
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.01.128
• ³⁹
  Fan C, Hsu CJ, Lin JY, et al. Taiwan’s legal framework for marine pollution control and responses to marine oil spills and its implementation on T.S. Taipei cargo shipwreck salvage. Mar Poll Bull. 2018 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; (136):84-91. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.09.005
  » https://doi. org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.09.005
• ⁴⁰
  Ylitalo GM, Krahn MM, Dickhoff WW, et al. Federal seafood safety response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Pnas. 2012 [acesso em 2022 mar 7]; 109(50):20274-20279. Disponível em: http://www.pnas.org/ cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1108886109
  » http://www.pnas.org/ cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1108886109
• ⁴¹
  Simon-Friedt BR, Howard JL, Wilson MJ, et al. Louisiana residents’ self-reported lack of information following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill: Effects on seafood consumption and risk perception. J Environ Manage. 2016 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; (180):526-37. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.05.030
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.05.030
• ⁴²
  Lubchenco J, McNutt MK, Dreyfus G, et al. Science in support of the Deepwater Horizon response. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 [acesso em 2022 fev 20]; 109(50):20212-21. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1073/pnas.1204729109
  » https://doi. org/10.1073/pnas.1204729109
• ⁴³
  Osofsky JD, Osofsky HJ. Hurricane Katrina and the Gulf Oil Spill: Lessons learned about short-term and long-term effects. Int J Psychol. 2021 [acesso em 2022 fev 18]; 56(1):56-63. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12729
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12729
• ⁴⁴
  Birkland TA, DeYoungy SE. Emergency Response, Doctrinal Confusion, and Federalism in the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. J. Federalism. 2011 [acesso em 2022 fev 25]; 41(3):471-493. Disponível em: https:// doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjr011
  » https:// doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjr011
• ⁴⁵
  Hur JY. Disaster management from the perspective of governance: case study of the Hebei Spirit oil spill. Disast. Prevent. Manag. 2012 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 21(03):288-298. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1108/09653561211234471
  » https://doi. org/10.1108/09653561211234471
• ⁴⁶
  Takshe AA, Huby M, Frantzi S, et al. Dealing with pollution from conflict: Analysis of discourses around the 2006 Lebanon oil spill. J. Enviro. Manag. 2010 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; 91:887-896. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.11.005
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.11.005
• ⁴⁷
  Mian S, Bennett S. The Tasman Spirit oil spill: implications for regulatory change in Pakistan. Disasters. 2009 [acesso em 2022 fev 18]; 33(3):390-411. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01080.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01080.x
• ⁴⁸
  Carrasco JM, Lope V, Pérez-Gómez B, et al. Association between health information, use of protective devices and occurrence of acute health problems in the Prestige oil spill clean-up in Asturias and Cantabria (Spain): a cross-sectional study. BMC. 2006 [acesso em 2022 fev 25]; (6):1. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-1
  » https://doi. org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-1
• ⁴⁹
  Surís-Regueiro JC, Garza-Gil MD, Varela-Lafuente MM. The Prestige oil spill and its economic impact on the Galician fishing sector. Disasters. 2007 [acesso em 2022 mar 20]; 31(2):201-15. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2007.01004.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2007.01004.x
• ⁵⁰
  Salomone M. Ecological riches threatened as oil-spill history repeats itself. Nature. 2002 [acesso em 2022 fev 18]; (420):347. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1038/420347a
  » https://doi. org/10.1038/420347a
• ⁵¹
  Chiau WY. Changes in the marine pollution management system in response to the Amorgos oil spill in Taiwan. Mar Pollut Bull. 2005 [acesso em 2022 fev 25]; 51(8-12):1041-7. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.02.048
  » https://doi. org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.02.048
• ⁵²
  Lee K, Wells PG, Gordon DC. Reflecting on an anniversary. The 1970 SS Arrow oil spill in Chedabucto Bay, Nova Scotia, Canada. Mar Poll. Bull. 2020 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; (157):111332. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111332
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111332
• ⁵³
  Hermogenes MAT. Desastres e emergências: campo transdisciplinar e gestão em rede – desafios e contribuições da psicologia. [monografia]. Brasília, DF: Universidade de Brasília; 2012. 113 p.
• ⁵⁴
  Vieira MS, Alves RB. Interlocução das políticas públicas ante a gestão de riscos de desastres: a necessidade da intersetorialidade. Saúde debate. 2020 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; 44(esp2):132-144. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-11042020E209
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-11042020E209
• ⁵⁵
  Teixeira CF, organizador. Planejamento em saúde: conceitos, métodos, experiências. Salvador: EDUFBA; 2010.
• ⁵⁶
  Brasil. Ministério Público Federal. Processo nº 0805679-16.2019.4.05.8500 - ação civil pública, 2019. [acesso em 2022 mar 3]. Disponível em: https://www. mpf.mp.br/se/sala-de-imprensa/docs/ACP0232019 IC1.35.000.001274201963DesastreAmbientalPlanoN acionaldeContingencia1.pdf
  » https://www. mpf.mp.br/se/sala-de-imprensa/docs/ACP0232019 IC1.35.000.001274201963DesastreAmbientalPlanoN acionaldeContingencia1.pdf
• ⁵⁷
  Organização Mundial da Saúde. Comunicação de riscos em emergências de saúde pública: um guia da OMS para políticas e práticas em comunicação de risco de emergência. Genebra: Organização Mundial da Saúde; 2018. [acesso em 2022 mar 3]. Disponível em: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/259807/9789248550201-por. pdf?sequence=10&isAllowed=y
  » http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/259807/9789248550201-por. pdf?sequence=10&isAllowed=y
• ⁵⁸
  Bueno WC. Gestão da comunicação em desastres ambientais: conflitos de interesse, de práticas e de discursos. Rev. Observat. 2018; 4(2):539-569.
• ⁵⁹
  Zenatti APA, Sousa SYU. Comunicação em Desastres: a Atuação da Imprensa e o Papel da Assessoria Governamental. Florianópolis: SJC; DEDC; UFSC; CEPED; 2010.
• ⁶⁰
  Calgaro C, Rech MJ. Justiça ambiental, direitos humanos e meio ambiente: uma relação em construção. Rev. Direito Sustent. 2017 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; 3(2):1-16. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10.26668/ IndexLawJournals/2525-9687/2017.v3i2.2261
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.26668/ IndexLawJournals/2525-9687/2017.v3i2.2261
• ⁶¹
  Estevo MO, Lopes PFM, Oliveira-Júnior JGC, et al. Immediate social and economic impacts of a major oil spill on Brazilian coastal fshing communities. Mar Poll Bull. 2021 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; (164):111984. Disponível em: http://10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.111984
  » http://10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.111984
• ⁶²
  Paim JS, Teixeira CF. Política, planejamento e gestão em saúde: balanço do estado da arte. Rev Saúde Pública. 2006 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; (40):73-78. Disponível em: https://www.scielo.br/j/rsp/a/T59CdB gDQyGf3hqLpZCjyks/?format=pdf⟨=pt
  » https://www.scielo.br/j/rsp/a/T59CdB gDQyGf3hqLpZCjyks/?format=pdf⟨=pt
• ⁶³
  Goes L, Cordeiro R. A mulher pescadora no cotidiano da pesca artesanal. Psicol. rev. 2018 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; 24(3):778-796. Disponível em: http://dx.doi. org/10.5752/P.1678-9563.2018v24n3p778-796
  » http://dx.doi. org/10.5752/P.1678-9563.2018v24n3p778-796
• ⁶⁴
  Rios KAN. No rio e no mar, pescadores na luta: a pesca artesanal no Estado da Bahia, Brasil. Um cenário de contradições e resistência. Rev del CESLA. 2019 [acesso em 2022 mar 3]; (23):281-298.
• ⁶⁵
  Xu X, Cho SI, Sammel M, et al. Association of petrochemical exposure with spontaneous abortion. Occup Environ Med. 1998 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 55(1):31-6. Disponível em: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/9536160/
  » https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/9536160/
• ⁶⁶
  Merhi ZO. Gulf Coast oil disaster: impact on human reproduction. Fertil Steril. 2010 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; 94(5):1575-7. Disponível em: https://pubmed.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/20828685/
  » https://pubmed.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/20828685/
• ⁶⁷
  Ribeiro H. Impactos de exploração do petróleo na saúde humana. Rev USP. 2012 [acesso em 2022 jun 2]; (95):61-71. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.11606/ issn.2316-9036.v0i95p61-71
  » https://doi.org/10.11606/ issn.2316-9036.v0i95p61-71
• ⁶⁸
  Klund RL, Knapp LC, Sandifer PA, et al. Oil Spills and Human Health: Contributions of the Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative. GeoHealth. 2019 [acesso em 2022 mar 20]; 3(12):391-406. Disponível em: https:// doi.org/10.1029/2019GH000217
  » https:// doi.org/10.1029/2019GH000217
• ⁶⁹
  Mendes M, Machado JMH, Durand A, et al. Normas ocupacionais do benzeno: uma abordagem sobre o risco e exposição nos postos de revenda de combustíveis. Revista Brasileira de Saúde Ocupacional. 2017 [acesso em 2022 mar 20]; 42(sup1):e3s. Disponível em: https://www.scielo.br/j/rbso/a/NSxq4tBB6cqj4czFgJYLz4K/abstract/?lang=pt
  » https://www.scielo.br/j/rbso/a/NSxq4tBB6cqj4czFgJYLz4K/abstract/?lang=pt
• ⁷⁰
  Gurgel AM, Guedes CA, Friedrich K. Flexibilização da regulação de agrotóxicos enquanto oportunidade para a (necro)política brasileira: avanços do agronegócio e retrocessos para a saúde e o ambiente. Desenv. Meio Ambiente. 2021 [acesso em 2022 mar 20]; (57):135-159. Disponível em: https://revistas.ufpr.br/ made/article/view/79158
  » https://revistas.ufpr.br/ made/article/view/79158
• ⁷¹
  Krishnamurthy J, Engel LS, Wang L, et al. Neurological symptoms associated with oil spill response exposures: Results from the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Coast Guard Cohort Study. Environ Int. 2019 [acesso em 2022 mar 20]; (131):104963. Disponível em: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31382236/
  » https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31382236/
• ⁷²
  Alexander M, Engel LS, Olaiya N, et al. The deepwater horizon oil spill coast guard cohort study: A cross-sectional study of acute respiratory health symptoms. Environ Res. 2018 [acesso em 2022 mar 20]; (162):196-202. Disponível em: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pmc/articles/PMC5811337/
  » https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pmc/articles/PMC5811337/
• ⁷³
  Sandifer PA, Singer BH, Colwell RR, et al. The U.S. Needs a National Human Health Observing System. Front Public Health. 2021 [acesso em 2022 mar 20]; (9):705597. Disponível em: https://www.frontiersin. org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.705597/full
  » https://www.frontiersin. org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.705597/full
• ⁷⁴
  Cerutti DF, Oliveira MLC. Aplicação da gestão de risco de desastres no Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). Cad. Saúde Colet. 2011 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 19(4):417-24. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/ publicacoes/aplicacao_gestao_risco_desastres_sus. pdf
  » https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/ publicacoes/aplicacao_gestao_risco_desastres_sus. pdf
• ⁷⁵
  Castro MC, Massuda A, Almeida G, et al. Brazil’s unified health system: the first 30 years and prospects for the future. Lancet. 2019 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; (394):345-56. Disponível em: https://pubmed.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/31303318/
  » https://pubmed.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/31303318/
• ⁷⁶
  Freitas CM, Barcellos C, Silva DX, et al. Mudanças climáticas, redução de riscos de desastres e emergências em saúde pública nos níveis global e nacional. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz; 2019. [acesso em 2022 fev 10]. Disponível em: https://www.arca.fiocruz.br/ handle/icict/40346
  » https://www.arca.fiocruz.br/ handle/icict/40346
• ⁷⁷
  Silva MA, Xavier SR, Rocha V. Do global ao local: desafios para redução de riscos à saúde relacionados com mudanças climáticas, desastre e Emergências em Saúde Pública. Saúde debate. 2020 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 44(2):38-57. Disponível em: https://www.scielosp.org/article/sdeb/2020.v44nspe2/48-68/
  » https://www.scielosp.org/article/sdeb/2020.v44nspe2/48-68/
• ⁷⁸
  Fernandes GCM, Treich RS, Costa MFBNA, et al. Atenção primária à saúde em situações de desastres: revisão sistemática. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2019 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; (43):e76. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2019.76
  » https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2019.76
• ⁷⁹
  Giovanella L, Martufi V, Mendoza DCR, et al. A contribuição da Atenção Primária à Saúde na rede SUS de enfrentamento à Covid-19. Saúde debate. 2020 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 44(esp4):161-176. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-11042020E410
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-11042020E410
• ⁸⁰
  Gowing JR, Walker KN, Elmer SL, et al. Disaster Preparedness among Health Professionals and Support Staff: What is Effective? An Integrative Literature Review. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 32(3):321-328. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1049023X1700019X
  » https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1049023X1700019X
• ⁸¹
  Horrocks P, Hobbs L, Tippett V, et al. Paramedic Disaster Health Management Competencies: A Scoping Review. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2019 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 34(3):322-329. Disponível em: https:// doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X19004357
  » https:// doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X19004357
• ⁸²
  Berhanu N, Abrha H, Ejigu Y, et al. Knowledge, Experiences and Training Needs of Health Professionals about Disaster Preparedness and Response in Southwest Ethiopia: a cross sectional study. Ethiop J Health Sci. 2016 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 26(5):415-426. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v26i5.3
  » https://doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v26i5.3
• ⁸³
  Nugent N, Gaston SA, Perry J, et al. PTSD symptom profiles among Louisiana women affected by the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: A latent profile analysis. J Affect Disord. 2019 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; (250):289-297. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jad.2019.03.018
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jad.2019.03.018
• ⁸⁴
  Baristain CM. Diálogos sobre la reparación. Serie justicia y derechos humanos. Quito: Ministerio de justicia y derechos humanos; 2009.
• ⁸⁵
  Reis CR, Paim JS. Análise de conjuntura em saúde: aspectos conceituais, metodológicos e técnicos. Saúde debate. 2021 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 45(130):795-806. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/01031104202113017
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/01031104202113017
• ⁸⁶
  Paim JS. O que é o SUS. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz; 2009.
• ⁸⁷
  Garbois JA, Sodré F, Dalbello-Araujo M. Da noção de determinação social à de determinantes sociais da saúde. Saúde debate. 2017 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 41(112):63-76. Disponível em: https://doi. org/10.1590/0103-1104201711206
  » https://doi. org/10.1590/0103-1104201711206
• ⁸⁸
  Mendes JM. A dignidade das pertenças e os limites do neoliberalismo: catástrofes, capitalismo, Estado e vítimas. Sociol. 2016 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 18(43):58-86. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/15174522-018004303
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/15174522-018004303
• ⁸⁹
  Janjua NZ, Kadir MM, Lutfi S, et al. Tasman Spirit oil spill in Pakistan: research response and lessons learned. Am J Ind Med. 2013 [acesso em 2022 fev 10]; 56(1):124-31. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/ ajim.22039
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/ ajim.22039
• ⁹⁰
  Baptista TWF, Azevedo CS, Machado CV, organizadores. Políticas, Planejamento e Gestão em Saúde: abordagens e métodos de pesquisa. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Fiocruz; 2015.
• ⁹¹
  Hartz ZMA, organizadores. Avaliação em Saúde: dos modelos conceituais à prática na análise da implantação de programas. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Fiocruz; 1997. 132 p.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  28 Apr 2023
• Date of issue
  Dec 2022

History

• Received
  29 July 2022
• Accepted
  03 Oct 2022