Disaster theory and frameworks

Disaster Theory & Emergency Management Theory

With the increasing number of emergencies and disasters that have occurred in the world, the issue of disaster and emergency management theory has become a research focus in recent years. This focus on disaster management theory and praxis has also been emphasized by event such as the 9/11 terrorism attacks on New York. There are many theoretical aspects and models considered in the literature on emergency management. This paper will deal with these theories that are controversial and which have tended to dominate the academic and practical debate in recent years. This paper is also concerned with the understanding of the significance and importance of disaster management, particularly in the larger metropolitan areas.

The central thesis that will be explored in this paper is that emergency and disaster theory must be wide ranging and inclusive in order to be practical and effective. The literature clearly points out that there are many variables and aspects that need to be taken into account in the creation of viable and competent emergency management. Contemporary disaster theory has also increasingly focused on the way that the public is prepared and educated and the way that this aspect impacts on various components of emergency management and planning. This also includes studies of stress and resilience in the general population and the importance that this has for dealing with hazards and emergences. Furthermore, a related area of concern in theory is the integration of different models and areas of emergency management. This integrative aspect is stressed in many contemporary studies, as it is through more cohesive and cooperative integration that the most effective methods and models for dealing with emergencies and disasters can be developed.

General theoretical issues

As one study in the field of emergency management theory states; " a massive transformation is taking place in emergency management right now... The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States have resulted in a significant reformulation of the purpose and nature of emergency management" (McEntire 2004). Many experts are of the opinion that theory has become more important in emergency management and that emergency managers are receiving more recognition from the general public. "Emergency managers have obtained a long-overdue (but still incomplete) recognition from the general public while politicians and legislators have increased funding for the profession to historic levels" (McEntire 2004).

A general theoretical overview of disaster and emergency management takes its basic starting point from an understanding of natural and other hazards that "...pose a threat to people, structures and economic assets" (Gaillard 2006). These natural hazards can refer to a number of events such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, tsunamis, storms and cyclones, droughts, floods and storm surges, among others. (Gaillard 2006).

An important theoretical concern that is essential for the understanding of emergency management issues is the response capacity of people in the face of these events. This response capability is usually explained with reference to conceptual variables such as the degree or extent of vulnerability and resilience in the population.

A definition is vulnerability is"... The quantitative degree of potential loss in the event of the occurrence of a natural hazard" (Gaillard 2006).

However, as Gaillard (2006) notes, this earlier concept of vulnerability was later extended to include a much wider understanding of social vulnerability. This was subsequently defined by D'Ercole (1994) as the "...propensity of a society to suffer from damage in the event of the occurrence of a given hazard" (Gaillard 2006). Using these variables the degree of the disaster or emergency could be ascertained and this played an important part in management and planning for these events; for example, the degree to which the society is "stressed" will determine when a hazard becomes a disaster. This assessment would theoretically and practically include a host of variables, which could be demographic, social, cultural, economic and political in nature.

The question of vulnerability also forms an integral part of the theoretical foundations of disaster management in that it reflects the daily conditions of society. (Wisner 1993) in essence therefore, disaster vulnerability is viewed as "...the extension of everyday hardships wherein the victims are marginalized in three ways: geographically because they live in marginal hazard- prone areas, socially because they are poor, and politically because their voice is disregarded" (Gaillard 2006). Vulnerability is determined as varying according to the nature and the degree of the hazard.

Another factor to consider in the general theoretical understanding of the disaster or emergency situation is the concept of resilience. Resilience is define as follows by Gaillard (2006) as, "People's capability of response in the face of natural hazards..." (Gaillard 2006). This is an aspect that is still controversial and the subject of debate in the literature. Resilience is also seen to include aspects of planning, management and "... premeditated adjustments undertaken in the face of natural hazards" (Gaillard 2006).

These foundational theoretical viewpoints provide the basis from which the more complex and integral aspects and dimensions of emergency management and disaster planning can be discussed. As noted in the introduction to this paper, the contemporary theoretical emphasis is on the inclusion of a variety of related variables in management planning and the integration of various models and issues to provide a more comprehensive view of emergency management.

3. Public education theories

The involvement and awareness of the public and the way that the public relates to and participates in disaster management models is seen in many studies as an essential aspect of management and planning. A study entitled, Public Perceptions About Trust in Emergency Risk Communication: Qualitative Research Findings by Wray et al. (2006) states that, "Communication to the general public is a critical component of effective emergency response..." (Wray et al. 2006) the authors of this study also emphasize the aspect of trust in effective communication and that without a high degree of trust, emergency management that depends on communication can be problematic. The study focused on different ethnic groups, communication and strategies in the event of an emergency. Among the findings it was found that,

General lack of confidence in the government's ability to respond was associated with concerns about preparedness, lack of disclosure and dedication. Local officials and emergency responders were more trusted than federal officials, and were associated with greater levels of disclosure and empathy

(Wray et al. 2006)

Aspects such as the past experience of the respondents in the survey undertaken also played a role in the issue of trust and had concomitant implications for emergency management. Furthermore, these findings led to certain recommendations, such as closer integration between local and federal agencies in emergency response preparedness and communication. There was also an emphasis on the necessity for information sharing and the principle of full disclosure. (Wray et al. 2006) central finding of the above study is noteworthy in that it states that,

This distrust appears to be rooted in the perception that the government has not done enough to prepare for an attack, and the belief that government officials (especially at the federal level) withhold important information and are dishonest at times.

(Wray et al. 2006)

Studies such as the above serve to illustrate the importance that is being given to public responsiveness and awareness in theory. This also leads to a cardinal area that is emphasized in many contemporary studies on the subject, which is the area of public education and disaster management. A study that deals with this area of concern is Public education and disaster management: is there any guiding theory by Samuel Nielsen and John Lidstone (1998). The authors clearly state the view that public education in emergency situations is an important aspect in modern theory. "Public education is increasingly mentioned as one of the major strategies available to disaster managers, being particularly effective at the preparedness end of the prevention-preparedness-response- recovery spectrum" (Nielsen and Lidstone 1998).

To this end the authors tend to focus on the underlying theoretical concepts and precepts that determine the extent and the effectiveness of public awareness. The theoretical basis of public education in disaster management relates to the view that, while disasters and emergencies are increasing in society, there is a general expectation from the public that the authorities and the government are responsible for ensuring safety and for implementing models and means of preventing disasters and dealing with emergency situations. In other words, "... An increase in disasters is occurring simultaneously with increased expectations of public safety" (Nielsen and Lidstone 1998). Governments are therefore expected to provide for aspects of safety and emergency management and this tends to foster and perpetuate an illusion that disasters are easily manageable. It is this illusion that public education programs are intended to dispel and to make the public more aware of the importance of the integrative role that they have to play in emergencies and disasters. (Goldstein,1990)

Studies from various countries have also shown that the public often ignores safety measures and model that are provided by the authorities. A case in point is the Australian experience. As Nielsen and Lidstone (1998) note,

It is ironic that the public demands safety yet a number of cost-effective and feasible measures to mitigate disasters are not adopted by many... Such a failure of the public to adopt disaster mitigation measures has a long record in Australia

(Nielsen and Lidstone 1998)

This attitude is one of the reasons given for the greater emphasis on public education. In theoretical terms, the view is put forward that an educated public will be able to deal with emergencies and disasters more effectively and that this should form an integral part of emergency and disaster management and planning. This in turn has resulted in a "...renewal of focus, at both a national and global level, upon public education as a means to disaster mitigation" (Nielsen and Lidstone 1998). To this end the Federal Emergency Management Agency of the United States (FEMA) has collected data from more than 15,000 participants from Federal State, regional, tribal, and local government agencies, as well as from private industry, academia, non-profit research, professional, trade, environmental, and disaster response organizations and individual citizens. The study that resulted from this intensive data collection found dominant view that the public can become better informed about its vulnerability to natural hazards and more knowledgeable about ways to mitigate these hazards via electronic and print media, displays and brochures, presentations by Federal, State, and local agencies and professional organizations

(Nielsen and Lidstone 1998).

This study therefore tends to emphasize the importance of public education in emergency and disaster management and also suggests that courses as well as school curricula be utilized in this educational process. (Nielsen and Lidstone 1998)

As has been referred to, the emphasis of much of the literature is on the integration of various aspects of emergency management. This also applies to the integration of public education with the intentions of emergency planning. This includes aspects such as the contemporary trend towards lifelong learning and an understanding of modern world views and preferences in disaster education. (Nielsen and Lidstone 1998) However, the study by Nielsen and Lidstone also notes that, while here is a need for an integrated theory of public education in a disaster management context, "There has been a lack of research investigating hazard and disaster managers' interpretations of public education as a management strategy and a lack of sound underlying educational theory"

(Nielsen and Lidstone, 1988).

Family and other theoretical variables

There are also other important aspects of emergency management theory that needs to be considered from a comprehensive and holistic perspective. An important variable that is considered in the literature is the family. Alan Kirschenbaum in an article entitled Families and Disaster Behavior: A Reassessment of Family Preparedness (2006) considers the view that the family is a "....principal conduit for disaster behaviors and critical for its individual members' survival." (Kirschenbaum). This refers particularly to the issue of preparedness in emergency planning. While there are experiential and anecdotal evidence to support this theoretical contention, studies also point out that there has been little empirical research on this aspect. The study by Kirschenbaum does however find that, "...the extent and intensity of family social networks and gender of the household head did predict differences in preparedness levels" (Kirshenbaum 2006).

Among the many other aspects of emergency management that are considered in the literature on this subject is the issue of modular integration and the necessity to develop theoretical models that incorporate the different variables that influence and affect management and planning. An article that deals with this topic is a dynamic integrated model for disaster management decision support systems by Asghar et al. This article refers to the fact that while there have been many studies of decision support needs for disaster management there has not been enough focus on how these systems can be integrated. As the author's state,"One of the limitations however is that they cannot be readily modified to adapt to the dynamic needs of disaster management area. Secondly, particular attention has not been paid on commonality of decision support needs in the area" (Asghar et al.). This view again places emphasis on the cardinal aspect of integration that has been emphasized throughout this paper as a central concern in modern emergency and disaster management.