{"title":"“灾害周期”(DC)和灾害管理中的参与者","authors":"M. Balamir","doi":"10.1108/ijdrbe-01-2022-0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose is to indicate that the conventional graphical expression of cyclic stages of stages of disaster activities is still irrelevantly used in communications.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nLatent assumptions of the disaster cycle (DC) depiction are scrutinized. The nature of current organizational units responsible for carrying out related tasks and equipped with contemporary technology and know-how are clarified. It is indicated that the operations of these organizations today have no resemblance to any cyclic sequence.\n\n\nFindings\nWith all of its various mutations, DC does not only represent an outdated conceptualization of disaster-related activities but also conceals the globally adopted priority currently given to risk reduction policy. The contemporary organizational setup based on mitigation efforts depends on highly specialized units and teams simultaneously dedicated to the different aspects of risk management tasks.\n\n\nPractical implications\nDC is to be taken as a representative understanding of a past policy environment. It is no more an explanation of current disaster affairs and must be removed from circulation.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe argument serves to disregard past policy concepts, clarify the new organizational setup in disaster management and help adopt communications to current realities.\n","PeriodicalId":45983,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The “disaster cycle” (DC) and actors in disaster management\",\"authors\":\"M. Balamir\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ijdrbe-01-2022-0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose is to indicate that the conventional graphical expression of cyclic stages of stages of disaster activities is still irrelevantly used in communications.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nLatent assumptions of the disaster cycle (DC) depiction are scrutinized. The nature of current organizational units responsible for carrying out related tasks and equipped with contemporary technology and know-how are clarified. It is indicated that the operations of these organizations today have no resemblance to any cyclic sequence.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nWith all of its various mutations, DC does not only represent an outdated conceptualization of disaster-related activities but also conceals the globally adopted priority currently given to risk reduction policy. The contemporary organizational setup based on mitigation efforts depends on highly specialized units and teams simultaneously dedicated to the different aspects of risk management tasks.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nDC is to be taken as a representative understanding of a past policy environment. It is no more an explanation of current disaster affairs and must be removed from circulation.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe argument serves to disregard past policy concepts, clarify the new organizational setup in disaster management and help adopt communications to current realities.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":45983,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijdrbe-01-2022-0008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijdrbe-01-2022-0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The “disaster cycle” (DC) and actors in disaster management
Purpose
The purpose is to indicate that the conventional graphical expression of cyclic stages of stages of disaster activities is still irrelevantly used in communications.
Design/methodology/approach
Latent assumptions of the disaster cycle (DC) depiction are scrutinized. The nature of current organizational units responsible for carrying out related tasks and equipped with contemporary technology and know-how are clarified. It is indicated that the operations of these organizations today have no resemblance to any cyclic sequence.
Findings
With all of its various mutations, DC does not only represent an outdated conceptualization of disaster-related activities but also conceals the globally adopted priority currently given to risk reduction policy. The contemporary organizational setup based on mitigation efforts depends on highly specialized units and teams simultaneously dedicated to the different aspects of risk management tasks.
Practical implications
DC is to be taken as a representative understanding of a past policy environment. It is no more an explanation of current disaster affairs and must be removed from circulation.
Originality/value
The argument serves to disregard past policy concepts, clarify the new organizational setup in disaster management and help adopt communications to current realities.