Disaster & Emergency Planning - Essay Example

?Running Head: Disaster and Emergency Planning Disaster and Emergency Planning Submission Disaster and Emergency Planning Introduction Disasters can be man-made or natural. A modern state must arrange suitably to combat disasters and emergency situations. Proper planning is a key issue in the context of disaster and emergency preparedness. Disaster may befall a population all at a sudden. Suddenness of a disaster adds lethality to it. Early warning and proper information system can help us to combat a disaster. In the case a population is left unprepared to combat potential threats, a disaster can prove to be dangerous and cause wide spread destruction. However, proper planning and strategy development in the context of potential threats can help in bringing down the number of casualties and the extent of damage of property. Therefore, it becomes an imperative to communicate risks in proper time. By warning and informing public about the potential threats and ways to combat them, community resilience can be considerably increased. In the age of information technologies, good and accurate information systems targeted to disaster management can help us a lot. In the case of a disaster, the response agencies should act in proper time. These response agencies would face difficulties in a time of crisis if people are not made aware of their role in the context of a disaster. So, in order that a threat may not become an unmanageable crisis, the response agencies should be synchronised with the community. Hence, there should be a clear concept of emergency planning that would help in the response and recovery process. The concept of emergency planning would strengthen strategy development in the context of risk communication and community resilience. Review of the Principles of Emergency Planning Basically, in the times of emergencies, cooperation between different response agencies and general public together becomes very important. The principle of information sharing would help the community and the response agencies to prepare in advance. The local responders should be given the duty of regular risk assessment. The risks can vary from flooding, storm, etc. to terrorist attacks and chemical accidents. During and after the disaster, business continuity becomes a key issue and the stakeholders involved should focus on it. Advice and assistance to business and voluntary organisations become important together with monitoring and enforcement (Schneid & Collins, 2001). In the UK, the Civil Contingencies Act (CCA) 2004 provides an important framework based on the principles of emergency planning. Emergency planning must involve a consistent level of civil protection activity based on the synchronisation of the Category 1 and 2 responders. The framework provided by the Act does not aim to change the ways of civil protection radically. Instead, it provides that the emergency planning should be based on the existing processes and systems. The framework provides a common platform to the decentralised functionary of local responders who would act according to the local circumstances during a disaster. The Integrated Emergency Management (IEM) under the framework of CCA 2004 finally comprises of six activities: anticipation, assessment, prevention, preparation, response and recovery. (HM Government, 2005) However, it is still needed that the principles of emergency planning be more dynamic to address the problems of our social systems which are becoming more complex with the lapse of time. Interaction between public and response agencies should be steadily increased. Strategy for Communicating Risks The CCA 2004 provides clear directive that the response agencies should be agile enough to improve the community behaviour in the face of a disaster. The responders must communicate the risks and provide accurate information to the community in time. There should be a warning and information system at the local level within the framework of CCA 2004. The duty of the responders include public education before, during and after an incident has occurred. The communication links should be properly designed so that the community can be warned in advance of a disastrous incident. Hence, community resilience would be increased with the help of proper information distribution and warning system which should be supplemented by a consolidated strategy of organised work processes addressing the realm of disaster management. Management of the Duty of Warning and Informing In the context of the strategy for communicating risk, warning and informing the community about the potential threats would begin at the level of the decentralised functionary of the local responders who would act according to the local circumstances. In the pre-event environment, public awareness is most important. At this stage, the responder must inform and educate the public about risks and preparedness (HM Government, 2005). This is a socio-psychological process which cannot be accomplished without the cooperation and coordination of the various social institutions at the local level. For example, the role of schools, youth and families in promoting community resilience in the context of disaster management and emergency planning cannot be neglected (Ronan & Johnston, 2005). At the time of an event or when one is likely, public warning becomes an imperative. This involves alerting by all appropriate means the members of a community whose immediate safety is at risk (HM Government, 2005). The Local Resilience Forum (LRF) would play a key role at this level. The Category 1 responders are primarily responsible for the information processes through the local functionary. In the immediate and long-term post-event situation, informing and advising the public becomes consequent. The responders would be providing relevant and timely information about the nature of the unfolding event. The risk to human or animal health and welfare, and the risk to environment or property should be minimised. Assistance to the recovery phase should be initiated. The impact of the emergency has to be controlled and ways to return to the normal arrangements should be found out (HM Government, 2005). The Local Resilience Forum should be equipped and coordinated with the Category 1 responders like the local health bodies, fire and rescue services, police personnel, etc. This will help the authority in both emergency planning and rapid action. Role of media in disaster response: Media is not a single organisation with a single purpose. Its constituents, audiences and concerns are diversely arranged. Some journalists may seek to find out external and political influences of an event, while a specialist correspondent would seek detailed and technical information. A national level daily newspaper would seek to know about the national significance of an event, while the local reporters would look for news of local relevance. Journalists must not create unnecessary panic during an emergency. Also, they should not always look for sensational news. Rather, the Local Resilience Forum must maintain good relations and close contact with the local news media. Policy officials and press officers should build effective networks so that an emergency can be timely addressed and the public can be rapidly informed (Paton, 2005). Duty of Category 1 responders – promotion of business continuity: Category 1 responders would play a vital role in integrating hazard management and community engagement. The process must begin at the local level with ample scope of national level synchronisation (Paton, 2005). The Category 1 responders primarily include police services, fire and rescue services, health bodies, Maritime and Coastguard Agency, Environment Agency and local authorities like the Local Resilience Forum. They would be the main organisations involved in most emergencies at the local level. Risk assessment, maintaining public awareness and arrangements to warn, inform and advise the public and business continuity management are the primary responsibilities of the Category 1 responders. Proper coordination of the Category 1 responders would immensely facilitate the strategy of communicating risks in the context of warning and informing (HM Government, 2005). Warning and informing would further culminate at the promotion of business continuity. Promotion of business continuity would take place through business continuity management (BCM) which provides the strategic framework for improving an organisation’s pliability to interruptions. Its purpose is to facilitate the recovery of key business systems and processes within the agreed time frames, while maintaining the Category 1 responder’s critical functions and the delivery of its vital services. The Category 1 responders must further familiarise themselves with subsequent developments in viable practice and reflect on the implications for their BCM work (HM Government, 2005) Figure 1: Structure of Warning and Information Management Involvement of Agencies and Professional Competencies There are various response agencies within the framework of the CCA 2004. These agencies are divided among Category 1 and 2 responders. Category 1 responders include police services, fire and rescue services, health bodies, Maritime and Coastguard Agency, Environment Agency and local authorities like the Local Resilience Forum. Category 2 responders include transport providers, Highways Agency, Health and Safety Executive, utilities like gas and electricity transmitters, water and sewerage undertakers, telecommunication providers, etc. Also, there is the wider resilience community that includes Department of Health, Animal Health Agency, Armed Forces, NHS Blood and Transplant, etc. (HM Government, 2005). All the agencies within the framework of CCA 2004 must remain alert and help in raising public awareness in relation to disaster preparedness and management. In the time of an emergency, specific agencies may be involved or given more importance in the relief operations. For example, in the case an epidemic breaks out, Health and Safety Executive and Department of Health must act in time along with the local health bodies to begin relief operations and rapidly convey related and necessary public information. Potential conflict to disaster resolution: Various agency management structures may give rise to conflicting circumstances. For example, during a disaster, the opinions of Department of Health and the Armed Forces may clash. Also, due to commercial reasons, contradictions may arise between Category 1 responders and a Category 2 responder like a private telecommunication provider. The best way to avoid such potential conflicts is to synchronise the work processes of the various agencies involved under CCA 2004 through cohesive implementation of guidance documents, response procedures and inter-agency team working. Strategy Aims and Objectives 1. Raising public awareness through the institutions like LRF, school, media, etc. 2. Implementing a synchronised system of public warning 3. Informing and advising public at the local level, mainly through the Category 1 responders 4. Business continuity management through a generic network spread across voluntary, private and public sectors 5. Appropriate risk selection and specific involvement of response agencies and professional competencies 6. Avoidance of conflicts in disaster resolution 7. Integrated emergency management through the six points defined by CCA 2004: anticipation, assessment, prevention, preparation, response and recovery Development of Work Streams: 5 Year Work Plan The work streams in relation to emergency preparedness would be covered under the framework of CCA 2004 and the supporting Regulations (The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 (Contingency Planning) Regulations 2005). The work streams would be based on the guidance on what the Act and the Regulations require of Category 1 and 2 responders. Also, the work streams would be based on the guidance on how to carry out the requirements of the legislation (HM Government, 2005). The work streams would primarily focus on building community resilience; inter-agency coordination; promotion of business continuity and identification of risks in the long run. Over the next five years, building community resilience must focus on educating public about the potential threats and how can the threats turn into disasters. Educating public would be mainly through the Category 1 responders together with the media and other social institutions. This would involve timely informing and warning. Inter-agency coordination would be based on the common framework provided by the CCA 2004. The combined implementation of the guidance documents, response procedures and national level legislation would smooth the progress of inter-agency team work. Further, integration of the business continuity management process is important in the 5 year work plan. The Business Continuity Institute has developed a five-stage process which has become widely accepted and has been incorporated into a British Standards Institute Publicly Available Specification – PAS 56 (HM Government, 2005). The Category 1 responders need to be educated and trained within the framework of CCA 2004 so that in the next five years, the methodology set out in PAS 56 can be integrated into a British standard. Further, the Category 1 responders should familiarise themselves with subsequent development in competent practice and reflect the implications for their BCM work (HM Government, 2005) The 5 year work plan must identify the risk through the process of risk selection in the long run. Due to global warming, the risk of floods has increased. Coastal erosions have added more risks to the future flooding and the response agencies have to develop suitable plans to combat emergency due to floods (Thorne et al, 2007). Also, storms are a prominent threat to the community. One of these was Hurricane Katrina, cause of the most costly natural disaster to befall the US (Garrison, 2006). The US experience tells us that much work is left in the field of oceanography and storms. In the context of man-made disasters, the conflict between environment and urbanisation poses prominent threat. Erosion of corporate responsibility has been dangerous – Bhopal gas tragedy of 1984 in India has been a grimly experience (International Institute of Environment and Development, 2002). Thus, it is important that the 5 year work plan integrate the legal and technical work streams to enforce corporate responsibility and avoid chemical accidents. Increase in the number of road accidents is also a risk to the community. Road accidents have psychological, social and legal consequences. Road accidents can be disastrous and cause everyday trauma to the victims (Mitchell, 1997). The works streams of Highways Agency, Health and Safety Executive, police, etc. should be systematically defined and coordinated to minimise the threat of road accidents as well. The 5 year work plan must also focus on community resilience against terrorist attacks. The security agencies must be properly coordinated and the response agencies must be given investigative powers too. Elaborate and updated guidance documents should be drafted and implemented in the context of terrorist attacks (Hinton, 2006). Embedding the Strategy in all Stakeholder Organisations The major stakeholder organisations work within the framework of the CCA 2004. The strategy for communicating risk has also been devised within the said framework. Communicating about risks to public health is an important duty which is to be executed under the management of the responsibility of warning and informing. The strategy can thus be embedded in the functionary of the Health and Safety Executive. The Office of Science and Innovation can also be involved at the stage of policy making and scientific advice. Role of media in disaster response can be widely amalgamated in scientific journalism which can be facilitated by networking the policy officials and press officers. Stakeholder analysis involvement would further embed the strategy in the organisations like the Cabinet Office. At this level, promotion of business continuity under PAS 56 will be defined and designed. Other important stakeholder organisations are the Institution of Civil Engineers, Environment Agency, Department of Health, etc. where the strategy of involvement of agencies and professional competencies can further be embedded. The strategy for communicating risk designed so far encompasses not only the Category 1 and 2 responders but also the wider resilience community at the various levels of preparedness, rescue and recovery. Conclusion Critically reviewing the principles of emergency planning, it can be concluded that the existing framework should be more dynamic. In order that the existing framework be dynamic enough in relation to general public, a step-wise plan should be there to supplement the strategy for disaster management. According to the Health and Safety Executive, we can effectively handle the primary job of risk assessment by means of the following steps: 1. Identify the hazard 2. Decide who might be harmed and how 3. Evaluate the risks and decide on precaution 4. Record the findings and implement them 5. Review the assessment and update it if necessary (Health and Safety Executive, 2011) Thus, effective risk assessment must precede risk communication so that there is ample scope of a foolproof emergency preparedness structure. After anticipation, assessment, prevention and preparation, we can move to response and recovery. Therefore, public awareness, public warning and informing and advising the public must be preceded by a strong anticipation and assessment mechanism. The Category 1 responders must prepare themselves in this context and subsequently help the public to prepare for disaster and emergency situations. In the same go, coordination with the media personnel is necessary. Also, promotion of business continuity management cannot be neglected and this has to be achieved in an organised way under the specifications of the Business Continuity Institute. Reference List Garrison, T. 2006. Oceanography: An Invitation to Marine Science. London: Cengage Learning HM Government. 2005. Emergency Preparedness. York: Emergency Planning College Health and Safety Executive. 2011. How do I carry out a risk assessment? Available: http://www.hse.gov.uk/contact/faqs/riskassess.htm Last accessed 13 March, 2011 Hinton, K. 2006. Terrorist Attacks: A Practical Survival Guide. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group International Institute of Environment and Development. 2002. Environment and Urbanization. London: International Institute od Environment and Development Mitchell, M. 1997. The Aftermath of Road Accidents: Psychological, Social and Legal Consequences of an Everyday Trauma. London: Routledge Paton, D.F. 2005. Community Resilience: Integrating Hazard Management and Community Engagement. Launceston: School of Psychology Ronan, K.R. & Johnston, D.M. 2005. Promoting Community Resilience in Disasters: The Role of Schools, Youth and Families. New York: Springer Schneid, T.D. & Collins, L. 2001. Disaster Management and Preparedness. Boca Raton: Lewis Publishers Thorne, C.R., Evans, E.P. & Penning-Rowsell, E.C. Future Flooding and Coastal Erosion Risks. London: Thomas Telford Publishing Read More