Emergency Marketing Planning of Shell - Essay Example

INTEGRATED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PRACTICE AND ISSUES (MO24LON) END OF MODULE ASSIGNMENT EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN OF SHELL WORD COUNT (EXCLUDING TABLES AND LIST OF REFERENCES): Table of Contents 1.Introduction 3 2.Analysis of External Environment 3 3.Porter’s Value Chain Analysis 4 4.Risk Identification Using Value Chain Analysis 5 5.Risk Qualification 6 6.Risk Quantification 8 7.Risk Management Strategy 8 8.Scenarios 9 9.Explanation of Scenarios 10 9.1Constant Monitoring 10 9.2Oil Spill Controlled 10 9.3Precarious Condition 11 9.4Imminent Disaster 11 10.Decision-Making Process (Strategy Development Using SWOT and TOWS Analysis) 12 11.Emergency Management Plan for Shell 13 11.1Purpose of Plan 13 11.2Stakeholder Analysis 14 (Source: Adapted from Johnson, Scholes, and Whittington 2011:142) 15 11.3Objectives 15 11.4Loss Estimation 15 11.5Resource Inventory 16 11.6Mitigation of Methodologies 17 11.7Emergency Medical Plan 19 11.8Communication Plan 19 12.Recovery, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Plan 20 13.Action Plan 22 14.Conclusion 22 1. Introduction Royal Dutch Shell plc, widely referred to as Shell operates as a multinational corporation in the oil and gas industry. According to Shell (2013a) the company seeks to apply advanced technologies and innovations in the field of energy and petrochemicals to establish a sustainable energy future. Additionally, the division of company operations is organized under three categories: Upstream, Downstream, and Projects & Technology, where upstream business activities primarily deal with the extraction of natural gas and oil while, downstream businesses hold the responsibility of processing and distributing the extracted resources into refined products. Aiding the effectiveness of upstream and downstream business operations is the projects and technology constituent of Shell’s operations which essentially aims to enhance the innovative capacity of upstream and downstream operations (Shell 2013b). This report aims to develop an emergency management plan for Shell, as a means of assisting the successful attainment of the company’s goals with its operations in the Arctic. By acting as a plan of action in case of the emergence of potential hazards, disasters and threats that are associated with the commencement of the project, the creation of this report takes into account an assessment of various scenarios, procedures that should be initiated during disaster, recuperation from the consequences of disaster and frameworks for rehabilitation. Furthermore, the establishment of the emergency management plan succeeds the application of credible tools of assessment such as Porter’s Value Chain Analysis, PESTEL analysis and SWOT Analysis. 2. Analysis of External Environment The factors contributing to the course of Shell’s operations with regards to its external environment are assessed below by the employment of the PESTEL framework: Category Interpretation Drivers P Political 1. Attaining important tax breaks or subsidies to promote commercial feasibility of Arctic drilling 2. Possible issues of political instability and risk factors posed by Russian administration (Out in the Cold; Investor Risks in Shell’s Arctic Exploration). 3. Regulations set by the United States and approval of US department of the Interior Eco Economic 1. Infrastructure facilities in targeted sites cannot aid achievement of economic goals 2. Gas extraction comparatively infeasible (Out in the Cold; Investor Risks in Shell’s Arctic Exploration) 3. High prices of oil S Social 1. Hazards related to health and safety 2. Requirement of social license for operation commencement (Out in the Cold; Investor Risks in Shell’s Arctic Exploration). T Technological 1. Technological demands for project initiation are extensive 2. Sensors and automatic shut-off systems (Reardon 2012) 3. Subsurface visualization (Shell in Offshore Alaska) 4. Seafloor Surveys (Shell in Offshore Alaska) L Legal 1. Approval by U.S Department of Interior 2. Laws regarding safety regulations 3. Legal issues posed by the United Nations Convention on Laws of the Seas (Gardner 2012) En Environmental 1. Threat to exposed wildlife 2. Risks posed by climate change 3. Creation of greenhouses gases (Goodyear, Beach and Clusen 2012) 4. Increase in the probability of oil spill 3. Porter’s Value Chain Analysis The publication of Michael Porter’s second book titled Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance highlighted the critical role of competitive advantage in aiding business success and promoting advanced performance (Harmon 2003: p57). This strategic tool helps assess how activities conducted by Shell share an association with the strengths of its value creation process. For better understanding, the division of these activities is conducted on the basis of supporting activities and primary activities as presented below: (Source: Adapted from Johnson Scholes and Whittington 2011:98) The upstream business operations of Shell that are related to the extraction of natural gas and crude oil are categorized as the primary activities of the company as per the framework presented above. Henceforth, any imminent threats to Shell’s operations can be either operational or technological depending on the nature of business activity. The offshore activities of Shell in Alaska include exploratory drilling operations for uncovering the abundance of natural resources in the region. These activities constitute of: exploration phase, development phase and production phase (Shell in Alaska). Moreover, logistics as a primary activity are also taken into consideration to meet the necessities of supply, promptness of rescue operations and management of transportation modes such as helicopters and air-cushioned vehicles (Shell in Alaska). 4. Risk Identification Using Value Chain Analysis Description Activity Risk Operation and Production Seismic Surveys and Exploration Exploration Drilling Rigs 1. Displacement of natural habitat and vulnerable wildlife 1. Increase in Seabird mortality due to flare (Wiese et al. 2001) 2. Unpredictable release of compounds 3. Effects of drilling muds, pipeline leaks and brine wastes (Oceana 2012) Development and Production Phase Production Wells Production Drilling Discharge 1. Air pollution 2. Water contamination due to chemical release 3. Loss of control 4. Risk of blowout 5. Hydrocarbon release to surface 1. Harmful discharge 2. Disposal of waste Logistics Transportation Modes 1. Marine life disruption 2. Impact on subsistence lifestyle (Shell in Alaska) 3. Oil spills 4. Safety issues in transportation 5. Risk Qualification The process of risk qualification is conducted on the basis of assigning values to the probable incidence of an activity based on its probability of occurrence and impact as per prior experiences. The placement of values for each type of risk is conducted by the use of effective judgment and prior experiences in relation with the risk (Coppolla 2011). No. Risk Type Probability of Occurrence Impact 1 Oil Spill Technological High – According to the US bureau of Ocean Energy Management there is a one in five chance of a major oil in Beaufort Sea over a lifetime of operations (Out in the Cold: Investor Risks in Shell’s Arctic Exploration). High - Oil spill in Nigeria in 2001 and 2011. 40,000 barrels of crude oil reportedly spilled in latter (Vidal 2011) 2 Accidents on Rig Technological / Natural Medium – Incidents of flooding and sinking of rigs due to lack of safety measures and issues with weather High - Systematic failures reported on Shell rig which pose severe threats to wellbeing of workers 3 Fire and Explosion Technological High – Oil rigs may catch fire which puts the life of crew members in jeopardy High - In 2012 a drill rig located in the port of Dutch Harbor in Alaska caught fire. 4 Pipeline Leaks Technological Medium – Shell’s pipeline in West Columbia reportedly leaked High - 700 barrels of crude oil leaked as reported by US Coast Guard in 2013 5 Towing Failures Technological Medium - Failures in towing and detachment from vessels rendering support High - Towing failure on the Kulluk caused evacuation of 18 workers (Rosen 2013) 6 Planned Discharges Technological High - Domestic waste, disposal of waste in water Medium - Disposal of mud, cuttings and water onto subsurface (Shell in Offshore Alaska) 7 Air Pollution Technological High – Release of greenhouse gases (GHG) and volatile organic compounds (Martin 2012) High – Onset of respiratory diseases in workers, crew members and inhabitants 6. Risk Quantification Quantification of probable risks of business activity requires the association of quantitative measures with the type of risk associated with drilling activities in the Arctic. Relevant data is quantified on the foundations of objectivity as per the considerations of the probability theory (Verzuh 2012). 5 Pipeline Leaks, Towing Failures Oil Spill, Air and Water Pollution 4 Accidents on Rigs, Planned Discharges Fire and Explosion 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 7. Risk Management Strategy Risk Probability Impact Control Measure Accept Avoid Reduce Share Transfer Oil Spill High High  Accidents on Rigs Medium High   Fire and Explosion High High   Pipeline Leaks Medium High  Towing Failures Medium High   Planned Discharges High Medium   Air Pollution High High   8. Scenarios Based on the evaluations presented by the tools and frameworks of assessment used in the preceding sections, the two most uncertain and high impact risks can be developed into four possible scenarios with regards to Shell’s activity of exploratory drilling in the Arctic. These scenarios reflect the decision-making, course of action and steps that must be taken by Shell in the event of disaster. Imminent Disaster Severely damage marine life and natural habitat of the ocean Water pollution in the Arctic Oil can settle on sea bed for a very long period of time, causing permanent damage Stunted plant growth Oil Spill Controlled Immediate oil spill response by ordering nearby vessels to commence recovery operations on an immediate basis On-call oil spill response teams Adoption of relevant response strategies such as mechanical containment and recovery Controlled In situ burning Ice deflection techniques in conditions of Arctic Precarious Condition Immediate placement of recovery systems enables the disruption caused by oil spill to be minimal Actions taken by recovery and response teams minimizes the extent of the disaster Adequate knowledge of ice, wind, current and wave conditions Constant Monitoring Placement of effective and comprehensive prevention techniques Minimal damage to Arctic ecosystems and habitat Critical Operations Curtailment Plan (COCP) for constant monitoring at site Blowout preventers put in place to diminish probability of spill during drilling process 9. Explanation of Scenarios 9.1 Constant Monitoring In the emergence of the best case scenario, prior preparations against protection from any imminent disaster would have been carried out by the company. The placement of monitoring and preventive measures entails the appointment of effective systems that can reduce the risks and threats that are associated with drilling in the Arctic. Establishment of thorough and comprehensive monitoring and preventive frameworks by integration of knowledge, expertise of Shell’s employees and analysts and technological innovations in the field. The incidence of oil spills is most likely to occur during the process of drilling; this understanding implies that monitoring efforts should be most rigorous during this procedure. Multi-layered well control systems must be integrated to minimize and reduce the probability of blowouts. Additionally, devices and machinery should be repaired and serviced on a constant basis to detect any signs and indications that reflect chances of a malfunction. The nature of a drilling site such as Arctic must be taken into account. This observation essentially postulates that ice and weather forecasting systems must be able to predict any drastic changes beforehand. Consequently, if signs of dangers posed by changes in climate become evident then all activities must be ceased on an immediate basis to remove chances of oil spill and to protect all those who are concerned with the drilling activity in Arctic. 9.2 Oil Spill Controlled This scenario proposes that while the oil spill has already occurred, Shell has effective recovery and response measures and frameworks in place that can combat the disaster thereby, reducing the scale of impact and lessening the damage to the ecosystem. Shell’s response to disaster must be characterized by the notion of preparedness; this implies that Shell holds the ability of engaging all its resources to the task of responding to disaster on an immediate basis by saving precious time. Each and every task team that has been created for the sole purpose of managing disaster should be available 24/7. Response to an oil spill should be conducted after determining the exact source of disaster. By conducting this activity in the least possible times the extent of impact can be ascertained. 9.3 Precarious Condition In case of an unstable and unpredictable condition, Shell faces several issues such as unavailability of effective frameworks and standard procedures for tackling the issue posed by the disaster. Concerned authorities must be informed on an immediate basis regarding the scope and extent of disaster. All resources of the operation must be directed towards dealing with the situation at hand. Therefore, operations must be suspended and personnel informed. 9.4 Imminent Disaster In the worst case scenario it is understood that Shell preventive measures have failed and an oil spill has occurred. This scenario is particularly serious because of the location of operations. Lack of information regarding disaster management in the Arctic can enhance the dangers of disasters. Shell has failed to control the oil spill and measures of control such as Mechanical Containment and Recovery, In situ burning and use of dispersants are not available at the company’s disposal. Prolonged oil spill poses severe threats to the Arctic habitat and can leave severe damaging effects on the marine life which are also fatal. In the given scenario Shell must act in accordance with an emergency management plan to ensure that the damage caused by the disaster is confined and does not spread to a monumental scale. The deadly effects of oil spills are not limited to marine life and are also observable in humans. The Shell oil spill in Nigeria has led to incidence of cancer amongst residents of various communities due to an increase in the level of carcinogens. 10. Decision-Making Process (Strategy Development Using SWOT and TOWS Analysis) INTERNAL FACTORS EXTERNAL FACTORS Strengths: Shell’s commendable financial position in the global market makes it one of the most valuable companies in the world Skilled management and employees R&D capabilities, technological progress and innovation Extensive worldwide operations Weaknesses: Shell’s production capacity has declined over the years Legal issues facing Shell in its extension of its worldwide operations Opportunities: Joint-venture of Shell in China Purchase of offshore leases in Alaska Strategic capital investment SO1: Extensive growth of Chinese market presents several opportunities for Shell that may assist its production capacity. Differentiated oil products are a main market in China and can enhance the organization’s financial position. SO2: Purchase of Beaufort Sea leases means that the company is able to operate in the region of Alaska once it gains approval the Minerals Management Service (MMS) WO1: Shell must concentrate on advancing joint ventures in countries that present opportunities for offshore drilling WO2: Before the commencement of operations, Shell must meet all legal obligations that are set by the US Department of Interior. Therefore, purchase of leases does not guarantee commencement of operations. Threats: Threats posed by environmental organizations such as Greenpeace ST1: Despite of public backlash and strong reaction from environmental groups, Shell was able to receive the approval for commencing operations in Arctic. Success of operations will be highly favorable for Shell. WT1: Shell must engage in negotiations and discussions with environmental organizations and preset to them the positive aspects of exploratory drilling in Arctic. Preventive measures for removing chances of any oil spills must be highlighted. This would also encourage dialogue between the public and Shell. 11. Emergency Management Plan for Shell The emergency management plan for Shell addresses the situation facing the company in the commencement of its drilling operations in the Arctic. The plan follows the examinations of a worst-case scenario that can occur as a ramification of Shell’s operations in the Arctic. The scenario that is to be addressed with the implementation of the emergency management plan was termed as a situation of Imminent Danger, in the scenario matrix. This term implies the incidence of a situation where, each and every preventive, response and recovery measure developed by Shell has failed to deliver expected results. Thus the objective of an emergency management plan is to effectively deal with impending disaster by reducing the extent and scale of calamity. 11.1 Purpose of Plan Experts report that if the worst-case scenario of a blowout occurs then it is most likely to take place towards the end of fall. This observation implies that a blowout of such characteristics would be more severe in the situation and environment of the Arctic. The creation of an oil gusher at the surface due to the presence of ice would render the surface incapable of being accessed by machinery recovery tools and other devices thereby, increasing the magnitude of disaster (Schmidt 2010). Therefore, any access to the site of disaster would become impossible and impermissible until the month of June (Schmidt 2010). According to the US department of Homeland Security U.S Coast Guard, all response plans, requirements and emergency plans must gain approval from the US Department of Interior and must comply with: The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90) International Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plans 11.2 Stakeholder Analysis The stakeholders with regards to this plan are the Board of Directors of Shell, the government of the United States including the Department of Interior and U.S Coast Guard, the Inupiat natives of Alaska, other local residents and communities, environmental actions groups such as Greenpeace, civil society organizations, political forces within the EU who are calling for a stop to the Arctic drilling expeditions and other concerned members of society. STAKEHOLDER MAPPING LOW HIGH HIGH (Source: Adapted from Johnson, Scholes, and Whittington 2011:142) 11.3 Objectives Protection of Arctic Habitat Protection of Ecosystem Ensuring that Shell does not bear severe financial and economic losses Ensuring the wellbeing and safety of crew members at time of disaster 11.4 Loss Estimation The characterization of loss estimation must be conducted on the basis of the factors that would be impacted as a consequence of an oil spill. While this measure is central to recovery it also helps in the preparation of an emergency plan and in assigning responsibilities to various personnel at the time of disaster furthermore, loss estimation assessments are central to resource allocation, in terms of labor, financial costs, devices, machinery and tools that are required for dealing with an emergency situation. Loss Category Description Outcome Casualty Risk of injury and fatalities amongst crew members, marine life and mammals An oil spill will primarily impact the marine life and arctic habitats, if evacuation of rigs is conducted then the risk of crew fatalities can be removed. However, marine life and mammals face the grave risk of exposure and death. Structural Damage Severity of Damage to Structure Blowouts caused by Towing Failures can lead to structural damage Economic Loss Financial costs, social costs, economic costs, fines, compensation for adverse impact on marine life Payment of fines for damage to marine life and mammals would be severe. Compensations for habitat loss will be incurred. Financial costs of machinery damage, device malfunction and loss of investment in the exploratory drilling project. 11.5 Resource Inventory As per the extent, scale, level, impact and severity of loss, the company would have to utilize all internal and external resources at its disposal for the purposes of disaster recovery which are as follows. Internal Resources Available Resources Resource Gap Manual Resources Crew members, engineers, personnel, disaster recovery teams Volunteers from environmental groups Capital Goods Devices, machinery, helicopters, tools, vessels and equipment Aerial overflights, heavy machinery Renewable Supplies First aid kits and medicines Medical drugs Information Resources Alarms, cellular phones, transistors, radios, information signals, sirens Satellite telephones, two-way radios Additionally, external resources can also be utilized for effective disaster management EXTERNAL RESOURCES SUPPORT PROVIDED U.S Coast Guard Additional vessels, resources and equipment for evaluating place of disaster Environmental agencies and groups Provision of volunteers, environmental activists for providing aid to animals 11.6 Mitigation of Methodologies Mitigation: Strategies of mitigation are put into place to ensure that hazards do not transform into disasters of great magnitude. By placing such techniques and tools that hold the capability of reducing possible impact, the scale of disaster is reduced and the level of damage becomes minimal. Preparedness: Once the risks and threats have been identified in the phase of mitigation, recovery and response teams can proceed towards the practical implementation of the plan by acting on an immediate basis. Preparedness indicates that personnel are readily available to cope with issues and risks posed by disasters without any delay due to the emergence of problems and issues. Response: Once the course of action is identified, resource mobilization efforts must be put into place by assigning resources where they are required. Emergency managers must conduct this phase in a precise manner to ensure that problems with resource allocation do not lead to wastage in time and delay response to disaster. Recovery: In the recovery phase, managers must focus on the rehabilitation of affected area by resuming operations and handling the issues that arose as a ramification of disaster (Haddow and Bullock 2003). This phase is focused on fulfilling financial obligations, paying fines and performing all necessary tasks before an attempt at full recovery from disaster. Keeping the four phases of emergency disaster management in mind, the worst case scenario has been evaluated in the table below. Hazard Mitigation Preparedness Response Recovery Oil Spill Ensure that all procedures of compliance are followed and are based upon the regulations developed by the U.S Department of Interior Prevention of oil spills during the process of drilling is made sure by putting into place a multi-layered well control system Blowout Preventers (BOPs) are put into place at all oil rigs Early detection of blowouts and possible threats is conducted Placement of 24/7 on call disaster recovery teams Real time weather forecasting to ascertain changes in ice, wind and weather Training of personnel in disaster management and response Development of comprehensive response strategies Mechanical containment and recovery via oil skimmers to penetrate through thick layers of oil that set on surface In arctic conditions, the response must comprise of measures that are effective and immediate. In situ burning can be undertaken to penetrate through ice Ice deflection in Arctic conditions to augment the level of recovery and rehabilitation from disaster Recovery measures depend on the extent of disasters and nature of oil spill Once the source of oil spill is identified it must be contained on an immediate basis Availability of rehabilitation and medical teams must be made immediate to deal with the damage faced by mammals and marine life as a consequence of oil spill 11.7 Emergency Medical Plan The damages of oil spill on Arctic mammals and marine life should be dealt with on the basis of the implementation of an effective medical plan. This plan involves the following factors that must be taken into consideration for desired results. Stabilization: Marine life veterinarians, marine biologists and personnel who have extensive experience in working in the Arctic habitat and populations must be deployed at the affected location. Teams should be assigned to look after mammals that have been impacted by the oil spill. Disposal of Animal Carcasses: Animal carcasses that wash off to shore must be collected and disposed off according to health and safety regulations. Personnel must ensure that areas do not hold an extensive number of animal dead bodies. Location: Emergency centers must be established to report the incidence of any severe impact on arctic mammals of the oil spill; locations must be assigned for collection of carcasses that should be transported to assigned areas as soon as possible. Special Care Units: After the evaluation of impact, the most severely hit animal species must be protected as per the establishment of specific frameworks, thereby , ensuring that disaster response is quick, immediate and effective to ensure that maximum number of species are saved. 11.8 Communication Plan The constituents of an effective communication plan are: 1. Notification: Communication process by which other members of crew and personnel are notified regarding the disaster at a certain location. 2. Collection of Information: The magnitude of disaster must be ascertained after communicating with officials present on site, once facts are confirmed the crew can inform other entities. 3. Delivery of Information to Emergency Public Team: Flow of information to personnel, entities, third-parties and publics is assisted by the establishment of emergency public teams. 4. Action Plan: Preparation of documents that must be presented for disclosure to media, governments, politicians, public officials and general public. 5. Internal Information Dissemination: To inform each and every member of the organization’s senior management regarding the disaster. 6. External Information Dissemination: Presentation of information on a range of outlets such as company website and media statements by company spokesperson. 7. Incident information Flow: Further evaluation of media reports, fact sheets, public reporting and constant update regarding the progress on site of disaster. 8. Post-incident Review: Analysis of reports generated by third-party outlets such as electronic and print media, internet forums, blogs and social networking websites. Discussion on community feedback and public opinion is also conducted. 9. Incident Command Centre: Responsible for regulating each and every piece of information regarding the disaster for a range of purpose and information transmittals. 12. Recovery, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Plan The factors affecting the scope of recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction plans include political, social and geographical observations that can play a critical role in implementation of plans their ultimate success (Oliver 2010). Response plans for exploratory drilling operations in Arctic must be established after keeping in the view the changing conditions that prevail in the region throughout the year (Schmidt 2012). The rehabilitation plan presented below outlines the measures that would be undertaken in the case of an unforeseen oil spill as a consequence of exploratory drilling in the Arctic. No Description Action Required Time Frame 1. Disturbance to Local Communities The impact of disaster on the local Inupiat people must be considered and communities should be provided thorough assistance. During and after disaster 2. Temporary or Permanent Relocation to Other areas Populations must be offered opportunities to relocate either temporarily or permanently from affected area in the wake of disaster Immediately after the disaster 3. Initiatives for Protection of Marine Animals and Mammals Disposal of animal carcasses, medical help and protection from posed dangers must be provided During and After Disaster 4. Reconstruction of damaged machinery Ascertain the cause of oil spill (blowout, pipeline leak) and reconstruct damaged machinery. After environmental and social issues have been addressed PROPOSED RECONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION AFTER OIL SPILL SHORT TERM (0-1 MONTH) MEDIUM TERM (1-6 MONTHS) LONG TERM (6 MONTHS AND ABOVE) 1. Relocation of the local Inupiat population to safer locations 2. Evaluation of financial damages incurred because of disaster 3. Communication to concerned authorities regarding the extent of disasters and initiatives being taken for rehabilitation. 4. Putting disaster teams in place 5. Reducing the extent of disaster by using effective response strategies (Mechanical Containment and Recovery, In situ burning) 6. Cleaning the water source 7. Disposing carcasses 8. Protecting animal species under danger 1. Identifying the causes behind disaster (blowout, pipeline leak) 2. Determining whether disaster could have been prevented 3. Repairing damage 4. Conducting loss estimation 5. Monitoring progress of animal species 6. Reviving the ecosystems by establishing long-term plans 1. Putting long-term rehabilitation plans in place 2. Regularly inspecting devices, tools, machinery and site of oil rigs 3. Checking the possible long-term effects of oil spill on ecosystem 4. Regulating procedures and following legislations 5. Rigorous adoption of stricter prevention policies 6. Development of preventive frameworks after learning from oil spill 13. Action Plan In accordance with the guidelines provided in the action plan, crew members and personnel at Shell can identify each phase and step that must be followed in order to effectively tackle with an oil spill. Emergency Levels Interpretation Action One The location/site of oil spill has been ascertained on an immediate basis Inform and notify all personnel Inform relevant authorities such as US Coast Guard Two The preventive measures have failed to perform up to the required standards Inform relevant stakeholders Put disaster response plan into effect Notify local authorities and community Three The extent of oil spill covers a large area and is likely to have a monumental impact on community and environment Put actions plans one and two into effect Inform all entities Initiate all response strategies available Ask for services of concerned organizations and authorities for tackling with situation at hand 14. Conclusion The establishment of the emergency management plan for Shell’s exploratory drilling operations in the Arctic has been developed in accordance with an evaluation of Shell’s operations and business activities. The plan aims to put into effect relevant factors that should be taken into consideration before tackling with disaster. The plan is marked by important characteristics such as mitigation, preparation, response and recovery to ensure the effectiveness of the plan. Furthermore, the emergency management plan also covers aspects regarding communications, three phase plans and action plans to ensure that each component of effective emergency management is addressed if a worst-case scenario emerges. List of References Gardner, R. (2012). EET. American Security Project [online] available from [22 June 2013] Goodyear, J., Beach, B., & Clusen, C. (2012). Environmental Risks with Proposed Offshore Oil and Gas Development off Alaska’s North Slope. Harmon, P. (2003). Business process change: a managers guide to improving, redesigning, and automating processes. Morgan Kaufmann Pub. Johnson, G.; Scholes, K.; Whittington, R. (2011) Exploring Strategy: Text and Cases, 9th edn. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited Martin, A. S (2012). The impacts and risks of deepwater hydrocarbon development. Sustainalytics. [online] available from [22 June 2013] Ocean (2012). Impact of Offshore Drilling. Oceana.org [online] available from [22 June 2013] Oliver, C. (2010). Catastrophic disaster planning and response. CRC PressI Llc. Out in the cold: investor risks in Shell’s Arctic Operations. Greenpeace [online] available from < http://www.greenpeace.de/fileadmin/gpd/user_upload/themen/oel/20120521-Risiken-Oelbohrungen-Arktis-Investoren-englisch.pdf> [22 June 2013] Reardon, S. (2012). Shell overcomes legal obstacles to Arctic drilling. New Scientist, 214(2859), 7. Rosen, Yereth (2013). Shell feared disaster days before Alaska rig grounding: official. Reuters [online] available from [22 June 2013] Schmidt, C. W. (2010). Cold hard cache: The Arctic drilling controversy.Environmental health perspectives, 118(9), A394. Schmidt, C. W. (2012). Offshore Exploration in the Arctic: Can Shell’s Oil-Spill Response Plans Keep Up?. Environmental health perspectives, 120(5), a194. Shell (2013a). About Shell [online] available from [22 June 2013] Shell (2013b). Our business [online] available from [22 June 2013] Shell in Offshore Alaska. Shell [online] available from [22 June 2013] US Department of Homeland Security. [online] available from http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg6/cg611/COI/omb/1625-0066.pdf Verzuh, E. (2012) The Fast Forward MBA in Project Management, 4thedn. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Vidal, John (2011). Nigeria on alert as Shell announce worst spill in decades. Guardian.co.uk [online] available from < http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/dec/22/nigerian-shell-oil-spill> [22 June 2013] Read More