Is anyone there? The collapse of information and communication technologies in the social worlds of police, fire and emergency medical services

Emergency preparedness has become a significant concern in the wake of such horrific events as school shootings, terrorist attacks and natural disasters. The political attention given to emergency preparedness is largely connected to its apparent failure during the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre in 2001. Since these attacks, there has been substantial attention given to the state of emergency communication and information sharing (i.e., emergency interoperability). To improve emergency interoperability, information and communication technologies (lets) have been implemented throughout Emergency and Protective Services in Canada and the United States.;The functional and ideological disconnects, I argue, have resulted from: (a) technological anomalies arising from the incorporation of nonhuman actants (such as outside technologies and geographical landscape) and human heterogeneity (numerous workers belonging to various social worlds with multiple needs and uses); and, (b) the various social worlds' ideological and organizational contexts that guide the implementation and use of emergency technologies. To date, emergency ICTs have been implemented with little analysis of their impact on frontline responders or society at large. The present research, therefore, provides a grounded analysis and identifies how the local, situational and organizational use of emergency technologies can create impediments to emergency interoperability and collective activity.;Using contextual constructionism, social worlds I arenas theory and concepts from science and technology studies, I assess how these technologies are used by emergency responders in two organizationally distinct Canadian Emergency and Protective Services. From this comparative situational analysis, I uncover a two-part critical design-use disconnect between: (1) how emergency lets are designed to function and their in-situ application (functional disconnect); and, (2) how emergency technologies are conceived and defined to be needed by different emergency responders and ICTs designers (ideological disconnect).