A comparative study: Accreditation of universities’ disaster risk management for health promotion

BACKGROUND: Risk management processes accreditation in emergencies and disasters can determine the effectiveness and efficiency of these processes. Universities, as the highest level of education, should provide a safe environment for educational services and activities of these people. AIMS: The present study aimed to review and compare different accreditation models for emergencies and disaster risk management in selected countries. Reaching other accreditation models together and identifying their similarities and differences, along with considering the implementation of each model, can significantly help the countries which aim to design and develop a risk management accreditation model or upgrade their models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this qualitative comparative study, the US, UK, Canada, Australia, Japan, and South Africa were selected based on research criteria. A literature review compared university emergency and disaster risk management accreditation models. The obtained data were collected in a researcher-made matrix, and a content analysis method was used for data analysis. Differences and similarities of selected countries in the fields of accreditation program(s), accreditation institute, start year, obligation, accredited organizations, number of criteria, criteria titles, accreditation focus, accreditation stages, number of stages, scoring method, and ranking method were compared. RESULT: Designing a local model for the accreditation of disaster risk management in universities based on the crisis management system in each country can lead to improving the level of responsiveness and quality of services in emergency situations and health promotion.