This thesis explores the dynamics of knowledge accumulation from disease outbreak responses. It explores the development of a paradigm of disease outbreak response over the last 20 years, and then explains how this paradigm was challenged and re-entrenched by the 2013-2016 Ebola Crisis. The methodology for this thesis was split into two arms: a document analysis arm and an interview analysis arm. Based in an embedded case study, the document analysis makes the argument for a re-entrenchment of the paradigm through analysing the depth and detail of lessons learned from the 2013-2016 Ebola Crisis. Within this broad case, an analysis of interviews with 14 report authors and 23 report users allows for a detailed examination of the production and use of codified knowledge in disease outbreak responses. The thesis makes two primary contributions - one empirical and the other theoretical. For its empirical context, this thesis demonstrates a path-dependency in knowledge accumulation from disease outbreak responses and makes recommendations as to methods for ameliorating this. The thesis finds how a lack of meaningful engagement in expert panel processes can bias so-called lessons learned reports. In its theoretical context, this thesis contributes an additional empirical context to the literature on knowledge accumulation and learning. The thesis finds that knowledge accumulation in outbreak responses differs from other disaster scenarios because of an isolation of the Global Health epistemic community and offers evidence for codified knowledge as a useful tool and process for learning in complex, ambiguous, equivocal scenarios
