A Safety Culture in Disaster Management - Essay Example

? Multi-Hazard Risk Assessment Multi-Hazard Risk Assessment According to U.S. Deapartment of Homeland Security , multi-hazard risk assessment is the process of estimating different impacts of hazards causing harm and loss to people, human activity, property, and the environment. This includes the interrelation and interdependence of natural hazard such as floods, landslides, and consequential risks such as toxic spills after a flood and fire after an earthquake. This type of assessment requires a deep understanding of vulnerability and comprehensive concepts. Luiz, in his book ‘The 1755 Lisbon Earthquake: Revisited’, states that multi-hazard risk assessment considers three issues which include the interaction of generically different types of hazards, comparison of different types of risks from financial and disaster management points of view, and finally the consequential risks for industrial production, infrastructure, and the economy. Moreover, in the case of an imaginary disaster workshop, there exist aims to be achieved, objective messages for Non-Governmental Organisations and locals, solutions in multi-hazard assessment, as well as target information from the multi-hazard risk assessment using colour mapping on natural disasters. Colour mapping, also known as colour coded mapping is a risk assessment tool that allows objective and visual determination of risk levels. It also provides a route on which priority events can be identified hence easy assigning of responsibilities and determination of actions to be taken. This method of colour coding was developed by Maria Dineen, as a result of the growing need to manage the increasing volume of incident investigations. Initially, Maria established only three incident grades. These grades include Green to represent minor events that do not require follow-up, yellow for moderate events that require local management action and red to represent significant events that require senior management attention. Later, orange was also introduced to represent events that, although not requiring follow up by the senior management, they should be reviewed and monitored by relevant local management teams (“Consequences UK”). Risk assessment aims at identifying, measuring, quantifying, and evaluating the worst effects of natural hazards in a comprehensible and comparable way (Haimes, 2009). The use of colour mapping in risk assessment by an organisation aims at various things. First, an organisation aims at introducing clearly defined levels of accountability for action and learning from adverse events. Secondly, organisations aim at curbing disasters and risks before they take place. Colour coding enables an organisation to identify any potential disasters. In addition to that, organisations aimed at risk assessment are required to explore safety and quality to ensure that no one is hurt in the future. It also aims to reduce consequential risks that may take place after a disaster has passed. This aims at creation of a safety culture in the organisation. Another aim of using colour mapping in multi-hazard risks assessment, is to use it as a tool for qualitative analysis. Qualitative analysis is important in the incident management process. Colour mapping gives a quality analysis since it eases the analysis process. The concentration of one colour over a certain region on a map show the level of risk experienced in that area without necessarily requiring an expert’s interpretation. More so, colour coding enables a systematic determination of the events that require more attention. For instance, colour red represent an urgent attention to a certain area; so more concentration and spread of it shows that a larger area is at a high level of risk (Zhang, 2009). However, it goes without saying that challenges will be faced in application of colour mapping. In most cases, it is possible for someone to confuse between code red and code orange which are different although they represent very close levels of risk. This can compromise the adaptation of a realistic, credible, and balanced view of the risk exposure associated with any incident. However, multi-hazard risk assessment using colour mapping on natural disasters is designed to fulfil the objective of passing the message to locals and NGOs in risk prone areas. Since each colour represents various levels of risks, the message can be passed very clearly and easily if the NGOs and locals understand the meaning of each colour. In colour psychology, is the easiest means of communication in risk assessment, since potential users are able to relate easily with colours as compared to plain graphs and charts used before. Colour red, is associated with physical stimulation because it represents danger or excitement. As a result, colour red is the best in sending the message of an occurrence of a very serious event (Haimes, 2009). In addition, colour orange or amber, is presumed to be an alert or warning signal. It therefore represented incidents that can be of great risk but not necessarily tragic or catastrophic. In 1996, Edward and Irina discovered that the most selected colours to represent the notion of risk were red and orange (Fedra & Reitsma, 1990). The colour yellow, is presumed to support optimism and creativity. As a result, it is used to represent low risk events. On the other hand, colour green is used to represent the lowest risk events that do not pose any risk or threat to people or property presently and in the future. Green is view by many people as a calm colour and a sign of a positive future. Therefore, events under the colour green require no follow up unless stated otherwise by local observers. Advantages of using colour mapping in improving assessment of events and research are limitless. Use of colour mapping enables NGOs and locals to develop a more systematic approach in risk preparedness and recovery after the risk has occurred. Moreover, it increases the awareness of the significance of incidents that occurs. For instance, if the colour changes from orange to yellow, people can easily understand that the level of risk has reduced significantly. Colours are user-friendly and simple to apply even with the illiterate. This creates a more consistent method of notifying people about serious natural disasters. Finally, use of colour mapping brings a shift from the culture of blaming each other. This is because of inconsistent methods of communication and creating awareness to a more systematic review of occurrences (Fedra & Reitsma, 1990). According to U.S. Deapartment of Homeland Security (2013), information passed on in multi-hazard risk assessment using colour mapping takes places in stages. In the first stage, information about the possible effects of a natural disaster on people and their property is passed on. For instance, after the passing of a natural disaster impact evaluation is carried out. The natural disaster is categorised according to the damage it has caused, as well as, the psychological harm and suffering on casualties. However, if the disaster is still taking place information about the safe regions is sent in efforts to rescue and evacuate people. Information at the second stage is, therefore, mainly about the spread of the damage incurred. Here, specific and accurate figures are stated on the value of the property destroyed as well as the number of casualties. However, in low effect natural disasters the target information is, therefore, about the improvements that can be made to avert the disaster if it recurs. Challenges faced in multi-hazard risk assessment using colour coding can be solved by introducing a safety culture in disaster management (Kendrick, 1955). Training should be done to enhance awareness long before a natural disaster takes place. It is not always that everyone will understand colour coding. Experts and even locals need training that can help them get used to understanding the message sent to them through colour codes. Moreover, local governance monitoring systems should be put in place to assist in risk assessment and disaster preparedness. Local appraisal and peer review processes should be carried out to confirm that the message passed is accurate. For instance, a flood alert may be rated at code red, yet it is does not pose a high risk. In such a case, people will be evacuated but if the effects are not as stated initially, they may refuse to evacuate the next time a real risk is posed by floods. Therefore, any disagreements should be reviewed and assessment to determine the reason why an event was ranked at a certain level. In addition to that, the parties involved should come to a consensus on what the actual risk level is (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013). On the other hand, some risk managers may minimize the significance of a risk to only a specific location. A natural disaster on a specific area may pose consequential risk in the surrounding areas. Assumptions should not be made in such serious events since every decision should be supported by facts. For example, a junior employee may notice that a mistake has been made go ahead to inform the seniors. The rating of a simple employee should not be undermined because of his or her rank. More research should be carried out in order to rule out the possibility of a mistake. In other cases, employee statements can be defined as outrageous simply because they have never taken place before. It is important to note that nature is unpredictable; and there is no limit to what it can do. For instance, Hurricane Katrina of 2005 was one of the most disastrous natural occurrences (Ye, 2012). Although the hurricane was expected not much was done in disaster preparedness. In addition, many people were trapped in New Orleans simply because they were not able to leave on time. The announcement of the risk posed by the hurricane came too late; and therefore many lives were lost and property of high value destroyed. In conclusion, colour mapping is a very important tool in multi-hazard risk assessment since it simplifies assessment by experts, and at the same time it eases the creation of awareness and transfer of information to the people affected. Initially, colour mapping was mostly used by meteorological departments to indicate rainfall amounts in various areas, indication of altitudes on maps and climates of different areas. In addition, colour has also been used before in traffic controls and advertisement banners. Its inception is the risk assessment process has been a major leap in simplify the initially complicated process. References Consequences UK. Risk Assessment. Retrieved from: http://www.consequence.org.uk/risk- assessment/ Das, H.P., Sivakumar, V.K., & Motha, P. R. (2012 ). Natural Disasters and Extreme Events in Agriculture: Impacts and Mitigation. New York. Springer. Fedra, K., Reitsma, R. F. (1990). Decision Support and Geographical information Systems. Netherlands: Springer. Haimes, Y.Y. (2009). Risk Modeling, Assessment, and Management: New Jersey. Wiley. Kaiser, J. E., Brower, D., Berke, P., Beatley, T., & Godschalk, D. (1998). Natural Hazard Mitigation: Recasting Disaster Policy And Planning. Washington: Island Press. Kendrick. D.T.(1955). The Lisbon Earthquake. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company. U.S. Deapartment of Homeland Security. (2013). Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance Under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. New York: Create Space Independent Publishing Platform . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2013). Geographical Information Systems, Decision Support Systems, and Urban Storm water Management. New York: BiblioGov. Ye, Q., Jaeger, C., & Shi, P. (2012). Integrated Risk Governance: Science Plan and Case Studies of Large-scale Disasters. New York: Springer. Zhang, F., Hara, T., Suzuki, M., & Honjo, Y. (2009). Geotechnical Risk and Safety: Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Geotechnical Safety and Risk. New York: CRC Press. Read More