Abhishek Damera, Hemant Gehlot, S. Ukkusuri, Pamela M. Murray-Tuite, Y. Ge, Seungyoon Lee
Abstract Hurricanes are one of the most dangerous catastrophes faced by the USA. The associated life losses can be reduced by proper planning and estimation of evacuation demand by emergency planners. Traditional evacuation demand estimation involves a sequential process of estimating various decisions such as whether to evacuate or stay, evacuation destination, and accommodation type. The understanding of this sequence is not complete nor restricted to strict sequential ordering. For instance, it is not clear whether the evacuation destination decision is made before the accommodation type decision, or the accommodation type decision is made first or both are simultaneously made. In this paper, we develop a nested logit model to predict the relative ordering of evacuation destination and accommodation type that considers both sequential and simultaneous decision making. Household survey data from Hurricane Matthew is used for computing empirical results. Empirical results underscore the importance of developing a nested structure among various outcomes. In addition to variables related to risk perception and household characteristics, it is found that social networks also affect this decision-making process.
{"title":"Estimating the Sequencing of Evacuation Destination and Accommodation Type in Hurricanes","authors":"Abhishek Damera, Hemant Gehlot, S. Ukkusuri, Pamela M. Murray-Tuite, Y. Ge, Seungyoon Lee","doi":"10.1515/jhsem-2018-0071","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2018-0071","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Hurricanes are one of the most dangerous catastrophes faced by the USA. The associated life losses can be reduced by proper planning and estimation of evacuation demand by emergency planners. Traditional evacuation demand estimation involves a sequential process of estimating various decisions such as whether to evacuate or stay, evacuation destination, and accommodation type. The understanding of this sequence is not complete nor restricted to strict sequential ordering. For instance, it is not clear whether the evacuation destination decision is made before the accommodation type decision, or the accommodation type decision is made first or both are simultaneously made. In this paper, we develop a nested logit model to predict the relative ordering of evacuation destination and accommodation type that considers both sequential and simultaneous decision making. Household survey data from Hurricane Matthew is used for computing empirical results. Empirical results underscore the importance of developing a nested structure among various outcomes. In addition to variables related to risk perception and household characteristics, it is found that social networks also affect this decision-making process.","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79180056","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Terri M. Adams and Leigh R. Anderson. Policing in Natural Disasters: Stress, Resilience, and the Challenges of Emergency Management","authors":"William Peak","doi":"10.1515/JHSEM-2019-0023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JHSEM-2019-0023","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78506876","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Despite decades of genuine experience derived from major disasters, emergency exercises and expert reviews of crisis events in reports and after action summaries it seems we know far less about post disaster restoration and recovery than we should. This shortfall presents several challenges to public policy, governance and the practice of emergency management as the specific steps, requirements, connections, issues and interdependencies in resurrecting a severely damaged city goes far beyond cleanup and routine debris removal tasks. Approaches towards restoration and recovery differ between the USA and the UK but there is equal regard for deriving as much insight as possible from post disaster imperatives by deliberately exercising what is seldom examined – the raw details and demands of city and community recovery. One suggested avenue is to expand future emergency exercises by focusing on how better to understand and execute the variety of restoration and recovery activies needed and devote less energy to traditional emergency response measures. This would invite testing emergency management leaders and experts with demanding 'maximum of maximum' scenarios to analyze the depth, challenges and complexity involved.
{"title":"Uncovering the Real Recovery Challenge: What Emergency Management Must Do","authors":"R. McCreight, Wayne Harrop","doi":"10.1515/JHSEM-2019-0024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JHSEM-2019-0024","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Despite decades of genuine experience derived from major disasters, emergency exercises and expert reviews of crisis events in reports and after action summaries it seems we know far less about post disaster restoration and recovery than we should. This shortfall presents several challenges to public policy, governance and the practice of emergency management as the specific steps, requirements, connections, issues and interdependencies in resurrecting a severely damaged city goes far beyond cleanup and routine debris removal tasks. Approaches towards restoration and recovery differ between the USA and the UK but there is equal regard for deriving as much insight as possible from post disaster imperatives by deliberately exercising what is seldom examined – the raw details and demands of city and community recovery. One suggested avenue is to expand future emergency exercises by focusing on how better to understand and execute the variety of restoration and recovery activies needed and devote less energy to traditional emergency response measures. This would invite testing emergency management leaders and experts with demanding 'maximum of maximum' scenarios to analyze the depth, challenges and complexity involved.","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"190 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86824215","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Among disaster victims, the decision to apply for assistance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is not straight forward. It is typically affected a variety of factors beyond individual demographic characteristics. Using Texas in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, this study utilizes bounded rationality as a theoretical framework for exploring what may affect the decision to apply for individual assistance with FEMA. A representative sample of generally affected individuals and a subsample of individuals with home damage are used to investigate various factors thought to be important in decision-making and compare differences between the groups. As a byproduct of the analysis, it is observed that although the loss of employment and being able to rely on one’s immediate network is a significant predictor of applying for aid among individuals with home damage, these variables are not significant among those that were generally affected. Recommendations for future research are provided to enhance our understanding of decision-making in the aftermath of disasters.
{"title":"Deciding to Apply for Federal Disaster Assistance: A Preliminary Investigation of Disaster Decision-Making using a Bounded Rationality Framework","authors":"Jason D. Rivera","doi":"10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0039","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Among disaster victims, the decision to apply for assistance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is not straight forward. It is typically affected a variety of factors beyond individual demographic characteristics. Using Texas in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, this study utilizes bounded rationality as a theoretical framework for exploring what may affect the decision to apply for individual assistance with FEMA. A representative sample of generally affected individuals and a subsample of individuals with home damage are used to investigate various factors thought to be important in decision-making and compare differences between the groups. As a byproduct of the analysis, it is observed that although the loss of employment and being able to rely on one’s immediate network is a significant predictor of applying for aid among individuals with home damage, these variables are not significant among those that were generally affected. Recommendations for future research are provided to enhance our understanding of decision-making in the aftermath of disasters.","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74869700","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kellen Myers, Ashley A. DeNegre, L. Gallos, Natalie J. Lemanski, Alexander Mayberry, Agnesa Redere, Samantha R Schwab, O. Stringham, N. Fefferman
Abstract We discuss a Red Team-Blue Team (RT-BT) study conducted to examine the formation and efficacy of social networks in self-organizing, ad hoc, or crowd-sourced intelligence and counter-intelligence operations in grassroots, improvised communities. Student volunteers were sorted into two teams: one team (Blue) was asked to find puzzle pieces using clues provided by the organizers, with the goal of reconstructing a message contained therein, while the opposing team (Red) was tasked with disrupting this process. While the Blue Team quickly organized into an efficient, centrally-governed structure, the Red Team instead adopted a decentralized, distributed operational network to hinder puzzle completion, using creative and diverse infiltration and disruption methods to interfere in the more centralized, hierarchical organization of their opponents. This exercise shows how untrained, unaffiliated individuals may self-organize into different types of social organizations to accomplish common tasks when aware of potential adversarial organizations, and how these choices may affect their efficacy in accomplishing collaborative clandestine goals.
{"title":"Dynamic Ad Hoc Social Networks in Improvised Intelligence/Counter-Intelligence Exercises: A Department of Homeland Security Red-Team Blue-Team Live-Action Roleplay","authors":"Kellen Myers, Ashley A. DeNegre, L. Gallos, Natalie J. Lemanski, Alexander Mayberry, Agnesa Redere, Samantha R Schwab, O. Stringham, N. Fefferman","doi":"10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0027","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We discuss a Red Team-Blue Team (RT-BT) study conducted to examine the formation and efficacy of social networks in self-organizing, ad hoc, or crowd-sourced intelligence and counter-intelligence operations in grassroots, improvised communities. Student volunteers were sorted into two teams: one team (Blue) was asked to find puzzle pieces using clues provided by the organizers, with the goal of reconstructing a message contained therein, while the opposing team (Red) was tasked with disrupting this process. While the Blue Team quickly organized into an efficient, centrally-governed structure, the Red Team instead adopted a decentralized, distributed operational network to hinder puzzle completion, using creative and diverse infiltration and disruption methods to interfere in the more centralized, hierarchical organization of their opponents. This exercise shows how untrained, unaffiliated individuals may self-organize into different types of social organizations to accomplish common tasks when aware of potential adversarial organizations, and how these choices may affect their efficacy in accomplishing collaborative clandestine goals.","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90286141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
17.5 billion dollars. Between the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) budget, government agency expenditures, and the estimated opportunity costs of the travelling public’s delays and damages, this is how much we as a country put into aviation security in fiscal year 2016. Where does this money go? Why does it cost so much? Are we safe enough? Most importantly, is this cost worth it? In JohnMueller andMarkG. Stewart’s newbook,Are We Safe Enough? Measuring and Assessing Aviation Security, the authors explore the nature of aviation security in the USA. They cite official government reports, stories from the media, and comparisons to other country’s version of our Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Using their consolidated data, they argue that “these considerations are particularly important because it certainly appears that avoiding overreaction is by far the most cost-effective counterterrorism measure.”1 The book attempts to determine the costs and benefits of transportation security spending, including those associated with potential changes to current screening methods. After defining the goals of the TSA and what constitutes a terrorist attack, the authors detail the 21 current layers of aviation security, breaking them down individually, and displaying how effective each layer is at deterring or disrupting a potential terrorist attack. They find that of the twomain terrorist threats, hijacking has approximately a 99.3% chance of being deterred or disrupted, and a passenger-borne bomb attack has a 98% chance of being deterred or disrupted. They conclude that “these levels of risk reduction are very robust” given the standard for acceptable risk.2 They further break down the cost of each layer. The authors use historical terrorist attack data from 1970 to the present as benchmarks for costs, both in lives and economic loss. This enables an analysis of costs that pertain specifically to aviation security. The authors compare the cost of each individual layer. They find that several layers, such as the hardened cockpit door and the Federal Flight Deck Officer program (FFDOs) are effective at preventing hijacking attacks at an exceptionally affordable cost. They also findmarginal cost-effectivemeasures – in regard to thwarting both hijackings and bombings – in the Visual Intermodal Protection Response (VIPR) teams, canine teams, and others. Some of the most expensive and cost-ineffective layers are found to be the Behavioral Detection Officers (BDOs) and the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS), as neither layer has been found to adequately protect hijackings or bombing threats. Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) and their duties at checkpoints and as travel document checkers (considered two separate layers) were not found to be cost-effective, either. However, the authors praised the creation of TSA PreCheck, arguing it allows for more efficient screening of nearly half of the trav
{"title":"Mark G. Stewart and John Mueller. Are We Safe Enough? Measuring and Assessing Aviation Security","authors":"Mark C. Millett","doi":"10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0018","url":null,"abstract":"17.5 billion dollars. Between the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) budget, government agency expenditures, and the estimated opportunity costs of the travelling public’s delays and damages, this is how much we as a country put into aviation security in fiscal year 2016. Where does this money go? Why does it cost so much? Are we safe enough? Most importantly, is this cost worth it? In JohnMueller andMarkG. Stewart’s newbook,Are We Safe Enough? Measuring and Assessing Aviation Security, the authors explore the nature of aviation security in the USA. They cite official government reports, stories from the media, and comparisons to other country’s version of our Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Using their consolidated data, they argue that “these considerations are particularly important because it certainly appears that avoiding overreaction is by far the most cost-effective counterterrorism measure.”1 The book attempts to determine the costs and benefits of transportation security spending, including those associated with potential changes to current screening methods. After defining the goals of the TSA and what constitutes a terrorist attack, the authors detail the 21 current layers of aviation security, breaking them down individually, and displaying how effective each layer is at deterring or disrupting a potential terrorist attack. They find that of the twomain terrorist threats, hijacking has approximately a 99.3% chance of being deterred or disrupted, and a passenger-borne bomb attack has a 98% chance of being deterred or disrupted. They conclude that “these levels of risk reduction are very robust” given the standard for acceptable risk.2 They further break down the cost of each layer. The authors use historical terrorist attack data from 1970 to the present as benchmarks for costs, both in lives and economic loss. This enables an analysis of costs that pertain specifically to aviation security. The authors compare the cost of each individual layer. They find that several layers, such as the hardened cockpit door and the Federal Flight Deck Officer program (FFDOs) are effective at preventing hijacking attacks at an exceptionally affordable cost. They also findmarginal cost-effectivemeasures – in regard to thwarting both hijackings and bombings – in the Visual Intermodal Protection Response (VIPR) teams, canine teams, and others. Some of the most expensive and cost-ineffective layers are found to be the Behavioral Detection Officers (BDOs) and the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS), as neither layer has been found to adequately protect hijackings or bombing threats. Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) and their duties at checkpoints and as travel document checkers (considered two separate layers) were not found to be cost-effective, either. However, the authors praised the creation of TSA PreCheck, arguing it allows for more efficient screening of nearly half of the trav","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85628739","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Despite older adults’ vulnerability to climate change, little research has investigated their preferred adaptation strategies. The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into their perspective and the potential for participatory adaptation to enhance their resilience. This paper presents the results of a collaborative adaptation planning process conducted with older adults in Bridgeport, Connecticut. During two meetings, older adult participants developed recommendations following adaptation best practices. Recommendations focused on encouraging preparedness through workshops and informational materials tailored for older adults. Additional recommendations focused on enhancing community services to provide effective warning mechanisms, shelter access, ride sharing and transportation assistance, and establishing a telephone based clearinghouse for extreme weather and emergency resources for older adults. A prioritization exercise showed that the participants and city staff believed all recommendations were potentially effective and feasible. A summative evaluation showed that the participatory planning enhanced resilience by raising awareness among the older adult participants and city agencies, enhancing communication, and increasing the older adult participants’ ability to self-advocate.
{"title":"Promoting the Resilience of Older Adults Through Participatory Climate Change Adaptation Planning","authors":"Jason Rhoades, James S. Gruber, Bill Horton","doi":"10.1515/JHSEM-2017-0057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JHSEM-2017-0057","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Despite older adults’ vulnerability to climate change, little research has investigated their preferred adaptation strategies. The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into their perspective and the potential for participatory adaptation to enhance their resilience. This paper presents the results of a collaborative adaptation planning process conducted with older adults in Bridgeport, Connecticut. During two meetings, older adult participants developed recommendations following adaptation best practices. Recommendations focused on encouraging preparedness through workshops and informational materials tailored for older adults. Additional recommendations focused on enhancing community services to provide effective warning mechanisms, shelter access, ride sharing and transportation assistance, and establishing a telephone based clearinghouse for extreme weather and emergency resources for older adults. A prioritization exercise showed that the participants and city staff believed all recommendations were potentially effective and feasible. A summative evaluation showed that the participatory planning enhanced resilience by raising awareness among the older adult participants and city agencies, enhancing communication, and increasing the older adult participants’ ability to self-advocate.","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78761173","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Resilience measurement continues to be a meeting ground between policy makers and academics. However, there are inherent limitations in measuring disaster resilience. For example, resilience indicators produced by FEMA and one produced by an independent academic group (BRIC) measure community resilience by defining and quantifying community resilience at a national level, but they each have a different conceptual model of the resilience concept. The FEMA approach focuses on measuring resilience capacity based on preparedness capabilities embodied in the National Preparedness Goals at state and county scales. BRIC examines community (spatially defined as county) components (or capitals) that influence resilience and provides a baseline of pre-existing resilience in places to enable periodic updates to measure resilience improvements. Using these two approaches as examples, this paper examines the differences and similarities in these two approaches in terms of the conceptual framing, data resolution, and representation and the resultant statistical and spatial differences in outcomes. Users of resilience measurement tools need to be keenly aware of the conceptual framing, input data, and geographic scale of any schema before implementation as these parameters can and do make a difference in the outcome even when they claim to be measuring the same concept.
{"title":"Implementing Disaster Policy: Exploring Scale and Measurement Schemes for Disaster Resilience","authors":"S. Cutter, S. Derakhshan","doi":"10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0029","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Resilience measurement continues to be a meeting ground between policy makers and academics. However, there are inherent limitations in measuring disaster resilience. For example, resilience indicators produced by FEMA and one produced by an independent academic group (BRIC) measure community resilience by defining and quantifying community resilience at a national level, but they each have a different conceptual model of the resilience concept. The FEMA approach focuses on measuring resilience capacity based on preparedness capabilities embodied in the National Preparedness Goals at state and county scales. BRIC examines community (spatially defined as county) components (or capitals) that influence resilience and provides a baseline of pre-existing resilience in places to enable periodic updates to measure resilience improvements. Using these two approaches as examples, this paper examines the differences and similarities in these two approaches in terms of the conceptual framing, data resolution, and representation and the resultant statistical and spatial differences in outcomes. Users of resilience measurement tools need to be keenly aware of the conceptual framing, input data, and geographic scale of any schema before implementation as these parameters can and do make a difference in the outcome even when they claim to be measuring the same concept.","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"157 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82655185","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In response to a disaster, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs creates a framework for cooperation in which Information Management Officers from different organisations can work together to provide decision makers with necessary information. Geospatial data are among the first information delivered. Recently, online mapping, remote sensing and the support of volunteers and technical communities wrought dramatic changes in the use of geospatial information, bringing new challenges to the digital humanitarian community. Information Management Officers are tapping alternative data sources, and institutions are adapting their working procedures to this new reality. The perspectives of these Information Management Officers have been studied through semi-structured interviews and monitoring of the tools used during responses to real emergencies. This study determines the required data and the relation with geospatial preparedness. It also explores the potential and limitations of development organisations, community mapping and social networks as alternative sources of information.
{"title":"Geospatial Preparedness: Empirical Study of Alternative Sources of Information for the Humanitarian Community","authors":"R. San Martín, M. Painho","doi":"10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0046","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In response to a disaster, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs creates a framework for cooperation in which Information Management Officers from different organisations can work together to provide decision makers with necessary information. Geospatial data are among the first information delivered. Recently, online mapping, remote sensing and the support of volunteers and technical communities wrought dramatic changes in the use of geospatial information, bringing new challenges to the digital humanitarian community. Information Management Officers are tapping alternative data sources, and institutions are adapting their working procedures to this new reality. The perspectives of these Information Management Officers have been studied through semi-structured interviews and monitoring of the tools used during responses to real emergencies. This study determines the required data and the relation with geospatial preparedness. It also explores the potential and limitations of development organisations, community mapping and social networks as alternative sources of information.","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75011908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The complexity of large-scale disasters requires governance structures that can integrate numerous responders quickly under often chaotic conditions. Complex disasters – by definition – span multiple jurisdictions and activate numerous response functions carried out by numerous legally autonomous public, nonprofit, and private actors. The command operating structure of the Incident Command System (ICS) is a hierarchical structure used to manage complex incidents. Increasingly, complex disasters are seen as networks of multiple actors. Improving our capacity to respond to large-scale, complex disasters requires moving beyond the “hierarchy versus networks” debate to understand the conditions under which governance structures can best serve disaster response goals. Understanding the capabilities and limitations of the governance structures embedded in our national policy tools and frameworks can enhance our ability to govern effectively in networked contexts. In this article, we suggest the need to shift focus to build greater capacity for hybrid and network governance approaches, including a more sophisticated understanding of the conditions under which these governance forms are most effective.
{"title":"Beyond ICS: How Should We Govern Complex Disasters in the United States?","authors":"Branda Nowell, T. Steelman","doi":"10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0067","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JHSEM-2018-0067","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The complexity of large-scale disasters requires governance structures that can integrate numerous responders quickly under often chaotic conditions. Complex disasters – by definition – span multiple jurisdictions and activate numerous response functions carried out by numerous legally autonomous public, nonprofit, and private actors. The command operating structure of the Incident Command System (ICS) is a hierarchical structure used to manage complex incidents. Increasingly, complex disasters are seen as networks of multiple actors. Improving our capacity to respond to large-scale, complex disasters requires moving beyond the “hierarchy versus networks” debate to understand the conditions under which governance structures can best serve disaster response goals. Understanding the capabilities and limitations of the governance structures embedded in our national policy tools and frameworks can enhance our ability to govern effectively in networked contexts. In this article, we suggest the need to shift focus to build greater capacity for hybrid and network governance approaches, including a more sophisticated understanding of the conditions under which these governance forms are most effective.","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81816393","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：