NIMS does include a unified approach to incident
management and incorporates standard command
and management structures and aids coordination,
it has certain limitations. For example, NIMS is a
technical system that can function effectively when
its goals in a particular situation are consistent,
clearly prioritized and
coherent. However, when
situations present complex value conflicts or
trade-offs, NIMS lacks
the ability to make politically legitimate decisions and to mobilize Increased time pressure
public support for sub- and urgency
sequent action [ 6].
Effective coordination
is an essential ingredient
for ERM. The coordination of emergency
response is demanding as
it involves requirements
typical of an emergency Disruption of
situation that include, forinfrastructure support
example, high uncertainty and necessity for
rapid decision making Multi-authority and massive
and response under tem- people involvement
poral and resource constraints. Yet, the available
literature on coordination issues relating to
ERM consists largely of High demand
practitioner articles, gov- for timely information
ernmental reports, and
testimonies to Congress. Academic research in this
area, other than [ 2, 3, 8, 11], is scarce. Given the
importance of ERM coordination, this area needs to
be studied in greater detail. In this article, we propose
a framework to analyze emergency response coordination patterns, based primarily on semi-structured
interviews with 32 emergency response personnel,
including town, city, county, and state emergency
managers and Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) coordinators. We also illustrate the
usefulness of the framework by applying it to an
actual incident.
pressure and urgency; severe resource shortages;
large-scale impact and damage; and the disruption
of infrastructure support necessary for coordination
like electricity, telecommunications, and transportation. This is complicated by factors such as infrastructure interdependencies; multi-authority and
massive personal involvement; conflict of interest;
and the high demand for
timely information.
Table 1 elaborates some
of these issues based on
our conversations with
emergency responders.
Challenges Coordination Support Activities
High uncertainty, - Real-time monitoring and timely alert notification for situation awareness
sudden and - Improvisation and rapid adaptation of predefined plans to the scenario
unexpected events - Periodic evaluation and update on existing coordination practices
Risk and possible - Threat, vulnerability, and risk assessment and countermeasure
mass casualty - Risk-sharing policy among parties involved
- Operational sustainability management
- Repository of related plans, procedures, policies
- Knowledge base and network of internal and external experts
- Efficient information and intelligence mining; knowledge elicitation
- Decision support technologies
- Psychological fortitude to deal with effect and behavior
Severe resource - Policies (such as priority list and access control) for resource use and
shortage requisition
- Logistic management and resource-sharing network across local,
national, and international levels
- Self-equipped response teams
- Law and order, price control mechanism management
Large-scale impact - Joint effort of governmental, public, and private sectors across local,
and damage national, and international boundaries
- Broad information-, intelligence-, and resource-sharing networks
- An integrated public communication network to inform, guide, and
reassure the general public
- Protection of critical infrastructures
- Performance monitoring of built structures
- Planning for infrastructure interdependencies such as proximity of foliage
and civil infrastructure
- Control of infrastructure redundancy
- Management of alternative infrastructures
- Unified response command for coordination
- Establishment of role structures with corresponding authority,
responsibility, and accountability
- Management of power and regulation conflict
- Exercise of leadership and norms
- Communication operability and interoperability
Conflict of - Understand the political, ethnic, economic, and environmental impact
Interest - Shared vision and alignment of core interests
- Reconcile the objectives of various involved parties in a politically
sensitive and emotionally charged environment
- Shared vision of priority among responders and the public
- Information gathering and provisioning
- Information fusion and validation
- Information exploitation and dissemination
Table 1. ERM coordination
at a glance.
COORDINATION IN ERM
The coordination of emergency response is challenging because it involves factoring in exigencies
typical of an emergency situation such as great
uncertainty; sudden and unexpected events; the risk
of possible mass casualty; high amounts of time
LIFE CYCLE APPROACH
A life cycle approach provides a broad and systematic view of the activities
relating to emergency
response management
[ 12]. Therefore, the
framework we suggest is
adapted to each of the
stages in the life cycle.
The management of
emergency response can
be visualized in terms of
three distinct sets of activities on the time line continuum [ 4]. These include
actions taken prior to an
incident (typically concerning preparedness
issues such as planning
and training), during the
incident, and after the
incident. The cycle is
completed when de-briefing has occurred and the
lessons learned are framed as actionable items
designed to affect future preparedness. Many of the
core elements of ERM coordination (such as activities, coordination objects, and constraints) differ from
stage to stage [ 12]. Cultural, political, regulatory, and
infrastructural (civil structures, people, process, and
technology) issues all have an impact on coordination
patterns and outcomes. In Figure 1, we present the
schema of the framework we developed, which represents not only a development of the work presented
by Raghu et al. [ 9], but also a context modification of
that work. The framework considers five basic elements that are applied to each stage of the life cycle: