This study compares emergency response legal structures in the US, EU, and China, indicating gaps exist in corporate governance.
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed significant gaps in corporate emergency management, highlighting the need for stronger legal frameworks, regulatory coordination, and corporate governance structures. This study compares corporate emergency response systems in the United States, the European Union, and China, examining key legal requirements, enforcement mechanisms, and internal corporate strategies. The analysis identifies challenges such as inconsistent regulations, enforcement gaps, and weak internal compliance structures, particularly in multinational corporations (MNCs) and state-owned enterprises (SOEs). To address these issues, the study proposes legislative reforms, improved regulatory enforcement, enhanced corporate governance, and greater international cooperation. By adopting clear legal mandates, strengthening compliance mechanisms, and aligning with global standards from organizations like WHO and ILO, businesses and governments can enhance corporate resilience and ensure sustainable crisis management in the future.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Enze Xu (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: