Similarly, private-sector corporations often provide professionals to assist governments in their response. Private industry is also a large provider of geospatial information for emergency management, primarily in the area of aerial photography or other airborne remote sensing light detection and ranging [LIDAR], thermal imaging, hyperspectral data and satellite imagery. These data are vital for assessing impacts and damage immediately following an event and for supporting response and recovery activities.
They also can be used for risk and vulnerability assessments in mitigation and preparedness phases. Section 4. Some of the data necessary for emergency response, such as critical infrastructure data, are developed and maintained by the private sector. Issues with the use of these types of data are discussed in Chapter 4. The committee also queried members of the international emergency response community about geospatial needs.
They largely echoed the needs expressed by responders in the United States and, in addition, cited key gaps in the global coverage of framework data and problems in preparing for and responding to emergencies that span national boundaries.
Also, metadata at multiple levels are lacking, and as a result, there is poor harmonization among users. Attempts have been and are being made to address this problem.
There are numerous international activities in the area of geospatial data for emergency response, and much could be learned from them. Although it was beyond the scope of this study to analyze these activities in detail, a few are mentioned here as examples. The European Union Research and Development Programme has had programs running for many years on the specific role of geospatial information in disaster management, particularly in the Sixth Framework Programme.
Subsequent meetings have been held to bolster this effort, and GDIN now exists as a voluntary self-sustaining nonprofit association. Moreover the Indian Ocean tsunami of created significant international interest in a warning network for such disasters. An excellent summary of lessons learned from the Indian Ocean tsunami regarding the deployment of geospatial data and tools in sudden-onset emergencies can be found in Kelmelis et al.
It presently includes an interface that provides multiscale access to data for these countries at a variety of levels of geographic detail from ,, to , that have been contributed by some of the participating countries.
Low- and high-resolution imagery is also available. As described above, demands imposed by disasters have prompted the evolution of emergency management into a formal set of activities assigned to responsible parties and coordinated across governments.
Practices and policies have evolved over decades, and organizations and agencies, such as the Red Cross and Civil Defense, and emergency services, such as police and fire departments, have evolved a complex system of practices and procedures.
However, the events of September 11, , further crystallized these responsibilities. The Bush administration immediately established an Office of Homeland Security, and slightly more than a year later, the Department of Homeland Security was created.
We will prevent and deter terrorist attacks and protect against and respond to threats and hazards to the nation. We will ensure safe and secure borders, welcome lawful immigrants and visitors, and promote the free-flow of commerce. This section will identify the major policies and plans that currently guide.
HSPD-7 establishes national policy on critical infrastructure identification, prioritization, and protection. DHS and the intelligence community also collaborate with other agencies, such as the EPA, that manage data addressed by geographic information systems.
The NRP adopts and adapts many of the functions and requirements detailed in those plans, including those related to geospatial data and tools. The NRP also seeks to provide the framework for federal interac-. It describes federal capabilities, resources, and responsibilities, making reference to geospatial responsibilities in some cases.
The NRP has five main components: Support annexes, which describe administrative processes designed to facilitate plan implementation; and. Incident annexes, which address how the NRP is applied to particular contingencies or hazards. Geospatial requirements appear in the ESF, support, and incident annexes as follows:. At time of writing, the NRP was under revision, with an update expected in late It specifies that with respect to the protection of natural and cultural resources and historic properties and to animal and plant disease pest response, the Department of Agriculture is responsible for coordinating with the Department of the Interior for relevant mapping and geospatial data and assessment tools.
Emergency Support Function 12—Energy is intended to restore damaged energy systems and components during a potential or actual incident of national significance. The NIMS rests on the well-established and broadly accepted ICS, which is employed to organize and unify multiple disciplines, jurisdictions, and responsibilities on-scene under one functional organization that directs incident operations.
The ICS is classically organized into five major functions command, operations, logistics, planning, and finance and administration; see Section 3. The NIMS suggests a sixth function, information and intelligence, which explicitly includes the analysis and sharing of geospatial data. HSPD-8 focuses on strengthening preparedness, 20 and one of its requirements is the establishment of a national domestic all-hazards preparedness goal.
List TCL. The TCL identifies the capabilities required to perform the critical tasks identified in a Universal Task List UTL , which provides a menu of tasks that may be performed in major events such as those illustrated by the National Planning Scenarios. Among these tasks, some are deemed critical. Universal Task List. Version 2. Target Capabilities List. In discussing resources needed for the management of emergency operations centers by cities, geographic information systems and geospatial imagery are listed as required resources to support planning.
With respect to investigation of animal health emergencies, the TCL mentions that equipment must be able to enter, store, and retrieve geospatial information from the field and that geographic information systems may be used by epidemiologists to track the progress of an outbreak or to predict the impact of various management strategies.
Beyond the federal-level policy and doctrine described above, various other documents codify geospatial requirements. The DHS geospatial. Universal Task List version 2. Target Capabilities List version 1. A revised version was published in August and is available to the emergency response community, although it is not yet publicly available.
Other examples include national interagency plans and agency-specific plans, which are founded in either statutory or regulatory authorities and tend to pertain to specific contingencies. These plans provide protocols for managing incidents to be implemented by agencies that have jurisdiction, and often operate independent of DHS coordination and the NRP framework. While the focus in this section has been on DHS and policy initiatives or revisions since September 11, , since these largely define the current disaster management operating environment at a national level, some other long-standing federal policies continue to impact emergency management.
Notably, however, DMA makes no mention of geospatial capabilities. Overall, direct reference to geospatial capabilities in federal policies is sparse. While there is general acknowledgement of the role that geospatial data and tools may play in incident response and management, no specific requirements are articulated in the National Response Plan or elsewhere. Further, there is no explicit reference to the role of geospatial data and tools in the pre-incident planning process.
As a result, these policy documents offer little guidance or direction to governments in terms of the type or level of geospatial capability they ought to develop, or how these capabilities should be integrated into the broader emergency management architecture. They also provide little incentive for DHS to convene a robust team of geospatial experts that can be deployed rapidly to support field operations.
More importantly, certain needs articulated by the user community are unaddressed. One in particular deserves attention: the management. The National Response Plan specifies that FEMA is responsible for coordinating remote-sensing and geographic information system support. The NRP does not explicitly address the development and maintenance of data archives, however, and as a result such archives are rarely generated. The time to develop data archives is during an incident; recreating them after the fact is well-nigh impossible.
Mission demands and the organizations that participate in fulfilling them vary across the phases of disaster and across hazard types. As a result, geospatial requirements also vary. Geospatial resources and processes must be able to adapt and respond to follow the contour of these changing demands.
The table is not intended to be comprehensive, definitive, or prescriptive. It illustrates needs and current capabilities, highlighting some that are available versus some that are not. Its objective is to prompt further discussion about technology development and deployment. From this table, some important general categories of user needs stand out. The most prominent requirements for geospatial data and analysis by decision makers are the following:. Pre-incident forecasts about hazard behavior, likely damage, property vulnerability, and potential victims;.
Decision aids to support recommendations for pre-positioning resources and evacuation;. The committee was told that the U. Timely, incident-specific locational information with respect to hazards, damage, victims, and resources, including information such as where people went, what kind of help is needed where, and the location of available resources;. Ongoing monitoring of evolving hazards, response efforts, and resource status; and.
Insight into the interdependence and status of infrastructure components energy, water, sanitation, road, communications, security systems, etc. This chapter begins with an elaboration of the processes and practices of emergency management and defines its key terms. Key elements of federal emergency management policy have been reviewed from the perspective of geospatial preparedness. TABLE 3. Models, information, and analysis that can be used to develop grant guidance, analyze grant proposals, and assess plans.
Research studies that can improve image analysis and inform resource pre-deployment and disaster response approaches. Improved understanding of changing environmental conditions post-disaster e. Foundation data and imagery that allow for identification and graphic relationships among critical facilities, hazards, and resources. Clear understanding of infrastructure inventories, locations, relationships, and interdependencies. Effective land-use planning using current local graphic information with incorporated hazards information and GIS decision support tools.
Critical infrastructure database including information on high-risk occupancy facilities such as schools, medical facilities, and nursing homes that includes attribute information. Comprehensive geospatial database tied to full demographic profile for communities to yield understanding of populations at risk.
Detailed geospatial data on the location and characteristics of businesses and the size of their workforce. Detailed geospatial data on the location and characteristics of equipment and supply assets as well as human assets. Database of current resource status and locations e.
Spatial distribution and classification of residential structures by resiliency to hazards. Digital elevation models developed from ground-based survey or processing of remote-sensing data-LIDAR, photogrammetry, or radar. Pre-event and post-event analysis change detection using remote-sensing and other geographic data. Comprehensive geospatial database with full attribute data may not be available in all communities. Modeling capability that determines and describes multiple effects due to dependencies in infrastructure and a single or multiple failures.
Robust, easily understood procedures that identify specific features of interest to emergency response managers in image data. Image data from government programs such as the National Aerial Photography program, Google Earth, or commercial providers.
Land-cover classification for discriminating variation in residential structures using remote-sensing data supported by ground survey.
Comprehensive, current, accurate geographic database with census data and full attribute information for all features at the parcel level. A robust predictive model for estimating evacuation demographics- who will leave, where will they go, how long will they stay, who will come back-age is an important attribute. Incomplete up-to-date imagery less than years old and detailed elevation data. Detailed geospatial data on the location and characteristics of equipment and supply assets as well as human resources.
Ability to track the activities of public, private, and nonprofit service providers; maps of where current assistance is being provided. Rapid identification and categorization of the extent and type of damage over a widespread area, assessment of damage severity, including maps of damage areas and affected populations.
Common operating picture based on shared geospatial data and analysis and continuous, real-time data about incident, damage, resources. Creation of an archive of social, economic, and geographic issues and responses for the incident.
Detailed information on refugee and stranded demographics especially age and location and maps of needy and underserved areas. Robust communication system that supports data transmission from point of service to site of definitive analysis and decision making. Understanding of critical infrastructure damage e. Ability to provide coordinate locations for planning and executing search-and-rescue operations.
Application-specific remote-sensing data i. Hazard model input to parcel-level geographic database for prediction of at-risk population. Robust geospatial analytical capability- COTS GIS, products for mapping and spatial analysis, and the ability to incorporate model output.
Sophisticated, nearly incident-specific, remote-sensing, image acquisition, and exploitation capabilities. Capability to track the location and characteristics of equipment and supply assets as well as human assets. Fleet tracking systems that provide full resource location in a dynamic context possible but not used.
Integrated system for real-time reception of remote-sensing data to forward deployed capability. Integrated, location-based field data acquisition system linked to central GIS for use by initial response teams and recovery teams.
Dynamic update of geospatial database content from any approved point in the response activity. Assured communication system for geography-specific public alert and feedback from affected population on status and need. Ability to track resource locations and status, and the locations and activities of service providers. Identification and analysis of optimal landfill, shelter, long-term housing sites, disaster recovery centers, and recovery team staging areas.
Maps of how population shifts as a result of disaster—age is an important attribute. User-friendly decision support tools to systematically evaluate short-and long-term demands such as allocation of resources, capacity shortfalls, and status of restoration. Optimal location analysis using image data, geographic data, and spatial modeling. Commercial or government-provided remote-sensing acquisitions to monitor recovery progress on a regional basis. Land-cover or land-use classification, change detection, and mapping using COTS image analysis tools.
Fleet tracking or location-based service to tag field activity with a handheld device; used by private sector e. Dynamic models that incorporate real- time geographic data of response activity within a GIS for full understanding of resource use and changing need. Simple geocoding capabilities that allows nontechnical staff to provide coordinates for search and rescue operations.
In the past few years the United States has experienced a series of disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina in , which have severely taxed and in many cases overwhelmed responding agencies. In all aspects of emergency management, geospatial data and tools have the potential to help save lives, limit damage, and reduce the costs of dealing with emergencies. Great strides have been made in the past four decades in the development of geospatial data and tools that describe locations of objects on the Earth's surface and make it possible for anyone with access to the Internet to witness the magnitude of a disaster.
However, the effectiveness of any technology is as much about the human systems in which it is embedded as about the technology itself. Successful Response Starts with a Map assesses the status of the use of geospatial data, tools, and infrastructure in disaster management, and recommends ways to increase and improve their use.
This book explores emergency planning and response; how geospatial data and tools are currently being used in this field; the current policies that govern their use; various issues related to data accessibility and security; training; and funding. Successful Response Starts with a Map recommends significant investments be made in training of personnel, coordination among agencies, sharing of data and tools, planning and preparedness, and the tools themselves. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.
Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book. Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text. To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.
Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available. Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released. Get This Book. Visit NAP. Looking for other ways to read this? No thanks. Suggested Citation: "3 Emergency Management Framework.
Page 48 Share Cite. Page 49 Share Cite. More specifically, the magnitude, scope, uncertainty, dynamism, and infrequency of disasters give rise to some important questions: How can we increase the resilience of communities to disasters— for example, by adding levees, raising the elevation of the living floor in homes, or imposing zoning regulations?
Page 50 Share Cite. Page 51 Share Cite. Page 52 Share Cite. Page 53 Share Cite. Page 54 Share Cite. Page 55 Share Cite. Page 56 Share Cite. Page 57 Share Cite. Page 58 Share Cite. Page 59 Share Cite. Page 60 Share Cite. Page 61 Share Cite. Response Recovery Warns public Provides emergency communications Evacuates public Conducts search and rescue Manages hazardous materials Stabilizes debris Provides emergency food, water, shelter Disseminates public information Restores essential infrastructure Provides fire suppression Provides law enforcement Provides triage and medical care Implements curfews Funds ongoing emergency activities Provides mutual aid to other localities Removes debris Restores public services and facilities Restores individual emotional health Restores economic stability Restores governmental self- sufficiency Restores individual self-sufficiency Rebuilds and repairs capital stocks, homes, and businesses Restores infrastructure Coordinates with nonprofit agencies to support human welfare activities Renews economic development efforts.
Page 62 Share Cite. Page 63 Share Cite. Page 64 Share Cite. Page 65 Share Cite. Page 66 Share Cite. Page 67 Share Cite. Page 68 Share Cite. Page 69 Share Cite. Page 70 Share Cite. Page 71 Share Cite. Page 72 Share Cite. Page 73 Share Cite. Page 74 Share Cite. Page 75 Share Cite. Page 76 Share Cite. Page 77 Share Cite. Page 78 Share Cite. Page 79 Share Cite. Timely, incident-specific locational information with respect to hazards, damage, victims, and resources, including information such as where people went, what kind of help is needed where, and the location of available resources; Ongoing monitoring of evolving hazards, response efforts, and resource status; and Insight into the interdependence and status of infrastructure components energy, water, sanitation, road, communications, security systems, etc.
Page 80 Share Cite. Page 81 Share Cite. Page 82 Share Cite. Page 83 Share Cite. Current Capabilities Gaps Shared geospatial databases within individual cities and counties State- or county-funded image acquisition Visualization technologies Application-specific remote-sensing data i. Page 84 Share Cite. Page 85 Share Cite. Current Capabilities Gaps Optimal location analysis using image data, geographic data, and spatial modeling COTS GIS tools for spatial analysis of optimal siting and land-use planning e.
Page 86 Share Cite. This page intentionally left blank. Page 47 Share Cite. Login or Register to save! Stay Connected! Supports research of hazard causes Develops means to modify the causes of or vulnerability to hazards Reviews and approves state mitigation projects Provides training and technical expertise Directs flood control program Directs hazard prediction and mapping initiatives Provides hazard mitigation grants Provides funds to individuals for small projects to prevent losses Funds coastal land-use planning Creates geospatial data model Provides federal flood insurance Invests in development of new technologies.
Provides training and professional development programs Provides public education Coordinates warning system Formulates, implements, and evaluates emergency management policy Conducts inspection and assessment programs Reviews, coordinates, and conducts federal, state, and regional exercises Assesses and coordinates disaster plans Provides grants for disaster planning, equipment, and training Operates the national operations center Specifies required response capabilities Facilitates information sharing Coordinates incident response planning Synthesized intelligence Generates threat assessments Inventories critical infrastructure Stockpiles equipment and supplies.
Conducts hazard identification Conducts land-use planning Develops, adopts, and enforces land-use standards Regulates growth Solicits mitigation projects and establishes funding priorities Establishes legal basis for local ordinances Regulates construction Provides aid to localities.
Conducts risk and exposure assessment Monitors and surveys potential hazards Creates resource inventory Conducts disaster planning Coordinates plans of localities, facilitates interagency policy coordination Stockpiles equipment and supplies Conducts capability assessment Provides public education Conducts training and exercises Provides technical expertise to localities Obtains grant funding to support preparedness activities.
Collects data about the disaster Creates and disseminates common operating picture Assesses damage President may declare disaster or emergency Implements the National Response Plan and activates Emergency Support Functions Designates principal federal official Establishes Joint Field Offices to coordinate support Provides atmospheric modeling Can mobilize the military Validates and makes recommendations in response to threat assessments Provides food, water, temporary power, and technical assistance.
Restores economic stability Provides crisis counseling Provides legal assistance Provides technical assistance, debris removal, communications, and public transportation, if requested Provides temporary housing assistance, individual and family grants, funds to repair facilities, and disaster unemployment assistance Provide loans for repair of homes, businesses, farms Provides tax relief. Mobilizes National Guard Provides food, water, clothing, and shelter Conducts damage assessment Disseminates public information Restores essential infrastructure Executes state emergency plan May request FEMA to assess damage May seek presidential declaration Runs EOC Coordinates resources across jurisdictions Funds mutual aid to other states Provides aid to localities Assists with evacuation.
Conducts debris removal Restores public services and facilities Restores infrastructure Restores economic stability Renews economic development Restores governmental self- sufficiency Prepares hazard mitigation plan May request federal agencies to perform short-term tasks Administers federal assistance Provides technical assistance to localities Provides relief funds to localities.
Controls siting of structures to avoid disasters Develops, adopts, and enforces building codes and land-use standards Requires construction of disaster- resistant structures Initiates retro-engineering activities to correct inappropriate building designs Regulates growth Undertakes hazard identification and control efforts.
Analyzes and monitors hazards Identifies and assesses risks and exposure Identifies and inventories resources Conducts disaster planning Develops interagency and interjurisdiction response systems Stockpiles, pre-positions, and maintains emergency equipment and supplies Measures and assesses response capability Conducts training, exercises, testing Provides early warning Conducts pre-disaster evacuation Provides public education information.
Warns public Provides emergency communications Evacuates public Conducts search and rescue Manages hazardous materials Stabilizes debris Provides emergency food, water, shelter Disseminates public information Restores essential infrastructure Provides fire suppression Provides law enforcement Provides triage and medical care Implements curfews Funds ongoing emergency activities Provides mutual aid to other localities.
Removes debris Restores public services and facilities Restores individual emotional health Restores economic stability Restores governmental self- sufficiency Restores individual self-sufficiency Rebuilds and repairs capital stocks, homes, and businesses Restores infrastructure Coordinates with nonprofit agencies to support human welfare activities Renews economic development efforts.
Framework data, particularly detailed elevation data Models, information, and analysis that can be used to develop grant guidance, analyze grant proposals, and assess plans Data archive from previous incidents to support research and analysis Research studies that can improve image analysis and inform resource pre-deployment and disaster response approaches Improved understanding of changing environmental conditions post-disaster e.
Critical infrastructure database including information on high-risk occupancy facilities such as schools, medical facilities, and nursing homes that includes attribute information Foundation data and imagery that allow for identification and graphic relationships among critical facilities, hazards, and resources Comprehensive geospatial database tied to full demographic profile for communities to yield understanding of populations at risk Detailed geospatial data on the location and characteristics of businesses and the size of their workforce Detailed geospatial data on the location and characteristics of equipment and supply assets as well as human assets Identification of alternate sites for critical facilities Pre-event imagery Pre-plans that include building interior data Database of current resource status and locations e.
Current Capabilities. Digital elevation models developed from ground-based survey or processing of remote-sensing data-LIDAR, photogrammetry, or radar Intelligent query of multiple spatial databases Pre-event and post-event analysis change detection using remote-sensing and other geographic data Geospatial analysis of project proposals in line with state policies Visualization technologies that incorporate geographic risk data Land-cover or land-use classification, change detection, and mapping using COTS GIS spatial analytical tools Hazard models from government or commercial sources Comprehensive geospatial database with full attribute data may not be available in all communities.
Modeling capability that determines and describes multiple effects due to dependencies in infrastructure and a single or multiple failures Data to drive these models lacking in many communities Robust, easily understood procedures that identify specific features of interest to emergency response managers in image data.
National cadastral database National model or structure to share cost of database development Comprehensive, current, accurate geographic database with census data and full attribute information for all features at the parcel level A robust predictive model for estimating evacuation demographics- who will leave, where will they go, how long will they stay, who will come back-age is an important attribute Incomplete up-to-date imagery less than years old and detailed elevation data Detailed geospatial data on the location and characteristics of equipment and supply assets as well as human resources.
Emergency managers can play an important role in emergency management policy by supporting the hazard mitigation efforts of local planning and zoning commissions as they seek to expand the number of groups involved in the process.
Since hazard mitigation, emergency response preparedness, and disaster recovery preparedness are meant to protect lives and property, it is possible to develop a strong coalition in favor of these practices when they are properly presented to the public.
Such coalitions can be most effectively mobilized if issues are properly framed to maximize their appeal. The media have an important role in this process, particularly in the matter of issue framing —the words used to describe an issue.
Issue framing can vary significantly depending on who is doing the talking. For many years, emergency management in the United States was framed in terms of the Cold War confrontation with the Soviet Union. In the s and s, a shift in framing from civil defense to comprehensive emergency management occurred, which promoted an increased emphasis on natural hazards and technological accidents.
Currently, the federal government is reframing emergency management in terms of terrorism, coining the phrase homeland security to describe the new frame of reference.
Another frame, used for discussing natural disasters, has been the term acts of God. This phrase implies a view of humanity as powerless victims of impersonal external forces and, thus, absolved from responsibility for avoiding disasters.
The mass media are particularly prone to use this frame, showing pictures of suffering victims that reinforce the message. The rise of the sustainable development paradigm has fostered an increased acceptance of the idea that disasters are at least partly a result of vulnerability created by human choices and actions.
This recognition of human responsibility, in turn, has raised the prominence of hazard mitigation on the governmental agenda. Scholars have noted that political issues might not be defined immediately as political problems. Thus, the first stakeholder to frame an issue can seize a significant political advantage, especially if he or she is successful in linking a proposed policy with widely shared public values.
Those who support land use regulation as a means of promoting hazard mitigation can offset the takings definition by reframing the issue in terms of the linkage to an alternative value. Thus, proponents of hazard mitigation could frame the issue of land use regulation as one of balancing property rights and responsibilities. Emergency management policy entrepreneurs must have a set of policy proposals on hand before they attempt to shape the agenda. As the reframing of an issue from a condition into a problem becomes increasingly widespread, different stakeholders will propose solutions Anderson, ; Kingdon, During this stage, many policy alternatives are likely to emerge.
This makes policy formulation a critical stage in the process because it is a more technically demanding activity than agenda setting. Next, proposed policies must be developed with the local political context in mind.
It is crucial to define clearly who are the targets of a policy i. With regard to the activities to be regulated, government has many alternatives. Land use policies can be used to avoid the construction of residential, commercial, or industrial structures in frequently flooded wetlands. Such wetlands serve important hazard mitigation functions by absorbing wave energy during hurricanes and retaining excess water during riverine floods. Alternatively, building construction policies can be used to ensure houses within floodplains are elevated, those near the coast have adequate wind resistance, and those near fault lines have seismic safety features.
Moreover, emergency preparedness policies might be used to control lot sizes thus limiting the population at risk in hazard-prone areas or mandate the width of streets in subdivisions to provide access for emergency vehicles and egress for evacuees. To achieve the desired land use, building construction, and emergency preparedness objectives, governments can use hazard awareness campaigns to make households and businesses aware of the risks they face and of suitable hazard adjustments for reducing their vulnerability.
Hazard adjustments include all pre-impact actions—hazard mitigation, emergency preparedness, and recovery preparedness Burton, et al. Information campaigns relying on voluntary compliance tend to be politically acceptable, but few have been based upon contemporary scientific theories of social influence, and so these programs have had limited success to date Lindell, et al. As will be discussed in Chapter 4, many hazard awareness programs provide very general information about physical hazards e.
However, few of them personalize the risk or describe appropriate hazard adjustments. Alternatively, governments can motivate the adoption of hazard-resistant land use and building construction practices by providing economic incentives such as low interest loans or tax credits.
Of course, the money for such incentives must come from somewhere and cash-strapped local jurisdictions may not be able to provide it. Finally, governments can require hazard-resistant land-use and construction practices as a condition for construction permits. Of course, verification of compliance requires on-site inspections, and the problems with such inspections are extremely well known Lindell et al.
Specifically, local jurisdictions experiencing budget difficulties frequently cut back funding for building inspectors, so those who remain on the job must process higher inspection workloads. In turn, this requires them to spend less time inspecting construction projects, which increases the likelihood of contractors successfully evading building code requirements and thereby cutting their construction costs. One important strategy in the policy formulation stage is to seek opportunities to work with other stakeholder groups to formulate policies that have a strong chance of being adopted and implemented.
In most cases, this will involve working with weak proponents and neutrals to add features that will convert them into strong proponents. Sometimes, this will involve seeking out those who would normally be considered weak opponents—or even strong opponents—to craft a policy that they can accept. For example, this might mean working with developers and builders to formulate policies that allow them to develop less hazard prone areas, build on the less hazardous portions of their properties, or build structures that are more hazard resistant.
The policy adoption phase involves the mobilization of stakeholder groups to pressure the relevant level of government in order to ensure passage of the desired policy. An emergency manager should have a strategy for presenting the policy in the correct manner and at the right time so procedural issues do not derail policy adoption.
It is important to have a policy officially adopted and on the books, for that is what gives it legal authority and allows for the institutionalization of a policy. When developing any public policy, care should be taken to include members of relevant stakeholder groups to ensure their interests are considered.
Inclusiveness is especially important in the case of hazard policies, because these policies often require a certain present investment e. Moreover, these costs tend to be concentrated on a few stakeholders, whereas the benefits are widely distributed over the community as a whole. Consequently, those who expect an emergency management policy to affect them negatively have a more powerful incentive to mobilize than do those who expect to benefit.
The typical stakeholder groups that should be considered at the local level are those that have been mentioned already—business leaders developers, builders, Chamber of Commerce , elected officials, government agency staff, civic groups, church leaders, and neighborhood associations. All these groups have roles to play in providing for community hazard management.
For example, business leaders might need to enhance their business plans to include business continuity planning to be used in case of disaster Federal Emergency Management Agency, no date, c.
Considerations other than economics should be addressed as well. Agencies such as the public works department might be accustomed to dealing with hazards but feel threatened when the decisionmaking process is expanded to include meetings with neighborhood groups.
As anonymous bureaucrats, they might not be accustomed to being held personally accountable for technical decisions and might equate citizen participation with needlessly looking for trouble. Conversely, some neighborhoods that are especially vulnerable to hazard impact might have a large proportion of lower income or ethnic minority residents who lack knowledge about the political system or even actively mistrust it.
All of these concerns need to be balanced because any perceived unfairness in the policy or the way it was adopted is likely to cause problems in the implementation phase.
Even after a policy has been developed, there are many veto points at which interests can block the adoption or implementation of policies they consider undesirable. Adoption is not the end of the story. All policies must be implemented in order to be effective. Implementation is the stage most fraught with difficulties because opponents who have failed to block policy adoption often seek to undermine it as it is put into practice.
Implementation of emergency management policy depends substantially upon the nature of the governmental structure. In the United States, the government has a federal structure, so strong state and local governments can support or thwart the implementation of federal policy—whichever suits their purposes.
Conversely, the federal government can either strengthen local emergency management processes by providing information or technical support or undermine local goals by failing to provide promised funding.
If all stakeholders are included in the early stages of the policy process, it is more likely that the policy will be implemented in accordance with legislative intent. Mazmanian and Sabatier have developed a widely used model of policy implementation, highlighting specific variables and their interactions that produce varying levels of success.
Three types of independent variables are included in this model, the first of which is the tractability of the problem , or how easy it is to solve. Emergency management involves complex problems. Consequently, overly simplistic policies can have unintended consequences, yet comprehensive policies are difficult to develop. As a result, hazard mitigation policies rank low on the tractability dimension and are difficult to implement. The second group of variables involves the ability of the statute to structure implementation.
This is where statecraft and legislative skill are needed. One component of this concept is an adequate causal theory, which is a clear idea of how a particular emergency management policy will reduce casualties, damage, and losses. In the case of floods, dams are expected to protect people and property by confining excess river flow in reservoirs.
The second component is a set of clear and internally consistent policy objectives. Using floods again as an example, conflicting objectives arise because dams are often intended to provide irrigation, electric power generation, and recreations functions which favor full reservoirs as well as flood control which favors empty reservoirs.
Moreover, policy clarity can be difficult to achieve because emergency management policy must be carefully crafted to achieve a balance between specificity and adaptability. Thus, on the one hand, clear directives are needed to produce results consistent with the intent of the policy. On the other hand, however, bureaucrats need the freedom to adapt the policy to the varied situations they encounter. The emergency management policy arena is especially prone to changes over time, so a significant amount of bureaucratic discretion probably will be necessary.
Another important variable is the percentage of governmental resources allocated to emergency management, which is highly dependent on the fiscal resources available to the jurisdiction at the time of policy passage and on the importance of emergency management relative to other issues on the agenda.
These are constraints over which policymakers have little control in the short term. However, these constraints can be relaxed by means of investments in sustainable economic development to enhance socioeconomic conditions and technologies such as Geographic Information Systems to enhance the level of technology , both of which are increasingly available to local governments.
The second variable is one that carries over from previous stages of the policy process—the level of public support for emergency management policy. Public support tends to be cyclical, but it can be stabilized and even increased by persistent efforts to keep emergency management on the systemic agenda.
Indeed, this affects the third and fourth factors—the attitudes and resources of constituency groups and support from the state or local government—both of which can be affected by coalition building activity. Finally implementing officials need to develop high levels of managerial and political skills to ensure successful implementation of emergency management policies.
0コメント