Factors Affecting Flood Emergency Management - Term Paper Example

FACTORS AFFECTING EMERGENCY PLANNERS, EMERGENCY RESPONDERS AND COMMUNITIES FLOOD EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT By Name Course Instructor Institution City/State Date Table of Contents FACTORS AFFECTING EMERGENCY PLANNERS, EMERGENCY RESPONDERS AND COMMUNITIES FLOOD EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 1 Table of Contents 2 Abstract 3 1.0 Introduction 4 1.1 Background 4 1.2 Problem Statement 4 1.3 Significance of the Study 5 1.4 Research Aims and Objectives 6 1.5 Definition of Terms 7 2.0 Literature Review 7 2.1 River Test and Cuhahane River 7 2.2 Flood Emergency Management 8 2.3 Flood Emergency Management in UK and Turkey 9 2.4 Community-Based Approaches 12 3.0 Methodology 13 3.1 Research Questions 13 3.2 Research Design 14 3.3 Sample Populations and Sampling Procedure 14 3.4 Data Collection 15 3.5 Data Analysis 15 4.0 Timescale 16 5.0 References 17 Factors Affecting Emergency Planners, Emergency Responders and Communities Flood Emergency Management Abstract Amongst the various factors which result in flood risk, inadequate systems for storm drainage, heavy storms, as well as the assets and population concentration have normally been deemed as the main factors influencing flood damage. Besides that, climate change has also become a major threat since it brings more frequent and heavier storms. Hydrological factors result in the growth of flood discharge and rapid flood runoff, especially in the impervious areas. Concentrated assets, as well as the population, are also crucial social features of flood risk. Flood risk in UK and Turkey has been increased by climate change, with torrential storms increasing in intensity and frequency. Flood risk can be reduced if the local and national governments put into practice structural measures such as the construction of flood control reservoirs as well as storage and infiltration facilities. Besides that, the governments can espouse non-structural measures in order to decrease the flood risk by means of tools like effective forecasting systems and hazard maps. A flood is a form of emergency that needs collaborative response effort from the communities, emergency planners, and emergency responders. Flood can be a large-scale event creating a need for a large response or could be somewhat small in scale that needs small response. Regardless of the scale, it is imperative to be prepared for floods. An accurate and timely response to a flood entails having suitable equipment and personnel to manage the threat. Furthermore, it involves coordination of resources which would be utilised effectively in managing the emergency. As it will be demonstrated in this piece, managing emergency effectively needs the collaboration of emergency management agencies, citizens, as well as first responders. Lack of collaborative effort could lead to improper resource allocation, poor communication, and efforts repetition by various entities taking part in the response activities. This proposal seeks to examine factors affecting emergency planners, emergency responders and communities flood emergency management with the view to the River Test, Southampton and Cuhahane River, Izmit. 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background Lately, floods emergency management in many countries focus mainly on the development of improved preparedness capacities. For this reason, the emergency management concept has changed from a focusing primarily on emergencies’ response as well as its effects to the improved attention of increasing resilience in the communities to the floods’ impacts. Without a doubt, the ability to effectively respond to floods is still crucial but emergency planners and responders are more intently considering the earlier emergency planning stages as well as how floods’ plans could be enhanced. Besides that, it has become imperative that such plans include preparations for high consequence, low probability events. 1.2 Problem Statement As pointed out by Drobot and Parker (2007), developing capacities for ensemble flood forecasting that capitalise on the ensemble prediction techniques is one of the challenges associated with flood emergency management. The way uncertainty data is communicated by the scientist to professionals tasked with flood forecasting and emergency response is still a major issue. How floods emergency responders, emergency planners and forecasters handle and use the uncertainty information is still a key issue. Capacities and competencies for flood emergency response and forecasting have been challenged by the most recent coastal wave surge and rainfall-runoff models. These models, according to Drobot and Parker (2007), were designed with the aim of stimulating the flood defence infrastructure fragility. The study would address the issue of poor preparedness evidenced by first responders, emergency managers, and communities in Izmit, Turkey and Southampton, UK before major disastrous incidents such as floods. Convergence is an event which happens when services, goods, and people are mobilised spontaneously and sent into flooded areas. Even though convergence is beneficial since resources are rushed to the area facing the crisis, it could create confusion, resulting in congestion, obstruct aid delivery, lead to wastage of scarce resources, and compromise security. Contrary to the convergence problem, nearly all large-scale response team face problems associated with communication, information management, as well as logistical support. Many emergency responders face major challenges in optimising flexibility as well as the ability to solve problems rapidly and decentralise operations, which is a key requirement for responding successfully to catastrophes such as floods. Operations related to emergency response are normally plagued by confusion over responsibilities amongst the emergency managers, law enforcement, policymakers, first responders, and federal agencies as well as poor information sharing. Furthermore, the need for speed could worsen the challenge associated with coordination. Flood emergency management is also affected by the fact that scores of first responders are ill-equipped and poorly organised to rapidly address an emergency that could need equipment or assets that are not normally used. Additionally, the majority of the communications systems have been designed with a redundancy, but are rooted in a routine loss rather than infrastructure’s catastrophic loss. 1.3 Significance of the Study The study will describe in details the factors that affect the emergency planners, emergency responders and communities flood emergency management, which consequently, would help reduce the challenges that are attributed to the emergency. The study will demonstrate the actions that individuals associated with flood emergency management can take to improve the level of preparedness. The study will demonstrate why the preparedness level has to be shared by communities, emergency planners, and emergency responders in order to manage a catastrophic event collaboratively. The study will also address the lack of preparedness amongst the entities associated with flood emergency management in Southampton and Izmit and provide solutions that would help develop better comprehensive and collaborative plans capable of addressing the gaps in preparedness measures. Furthermore, the study would sum up the main principles as well as key steps of flood risk mitigation in these two coastal cities. The flood risk management, as it will be evidenced in the study, involves identification of vulnerability, flood hazard as well as the flood-prone area’s coping capacity. It also involves assessing the risks’ levels and mitigating the risk levels by sharing, reducing or avoiding them. This study will undoubtedly be unique since it addresses factors that affect entities involved in flood emergency management in Southampton and Izmit. These two areas have not been researched extensively despite the fact that they are coastal cities with a high risk of floods. The existing literature has focused mainly on preparedness, response as well as mitigation efforts as ways of managing emergencies. Even though these areas are important for handling a disastrous situation, factors that affect entities involved in emergency management have not been addressed adequately. Therefore, the study’s results would offer insights with regard to the factors that affect emergency planners, emergency responders and communities that could result in the improvements of emergency management plans. More importantly, the study’s findings would enormously impact how Southampton and Izmit manage emergency situations, thus, reducing property loss and saving lives in future floods. 1.4 Research Aims and Objectives To examine the factors that affect emergency planners, emergency responders and communities in flood emergency management. To find out the factors that influence the preparedness of entities associated with emergency management while responding to flood. To highlight the measures that emergency planners, emergency responders as well as communities could take to enhance their respective preparedness levels in responding to floods. To determine the community-based risk management approaches to lessen social vulnerability by means of communication and planning and linkages, bottom-up activity as well a flood management partnerships. To develop community-based plans and policy recommendations that would help reduce vulnerability to floods. 1.5 Definition of Terms Emergency – It is the widespread unforeseen incidents which influence and interrupt normal activity; thus, resulting in damage to property, loss of life, as well as severe impacts to the economy. Flood hazard – It is the probability of the flood to cause damage. Flood risk - It is the likelihood that a flood hazard would happen resulting in an injury or damage. Emergency preparedness – It is the extent to which entities are ready to manage the man-made or natural emergency through forecasting as well as espousing precautionary measures and the needed action prior to the emergency (Mohammad-pajooh & Aziz, 2014). Perceived risk - It is how much damage or risk that people believe it has been caused by an emergency or hazard. Emergency management – It is an administrative function tasked with the development of a framework that facilitates the reduction of vulnerability to emergency. Emergency responders – They are emergency medical personnel, local enforcement agencies, and fire personnel and other entities, responsible for performing the emergency management efforts. Emergency planners – Are individuals tasked with making management of potential crises possible by identifying expected performance levels and establishing priorities. 2.0 Literature Review 2.1 River Test and Cuhahane River The River Test is considered to be a magnificent fly fishing river in the world. The river is situated in Hampshire and can be reached easily through road and train. Abundant aquatic shrimp and insect life make River Test an extremely fertile environment for fish (Go Fly Fishing UK, 2016). As pointed out by Visit Hampshire (2017), River test has a length of 44 mile long distance and passes through a number of most picturesque villages in Hampshire. These villages have houses, historic churches as well as listed buildings. Furthermore, the river passes through Stockbridge and Romsey. Cuhahane River is located in the coastal city of Izmit. 2.2 Flood Emergency Management In Henry (2010) study, he observed that identifying the extent and nature of the flood threat posed to the vulnerable population is the most suitable approach for flood risk management. More importantly, this approach creates the need for utilising hydrodynamic flood models which would allow the water to flow along the flood plain wherein the water level, velocity and depth are indicated. These models’ outputs should indicate areas where structures mitigation like embankments and dykes can fail; critical facilities like emergency response agencies, bridges, schools, hospitals, as well as emergency shelters; and areas which have to be evacuated when the emergency strikes. As mentioned by Henry (2010), an unexpected flood event could have a catastrophic impact on the communities living along the river’s flood plain. These communities depend on levees or dyke as the mitigation measure for preventing the flooding. For that reason, it offers a bogus sense of safety and failure of the structures results in consequences that are often devastating. Dyke failure can be caused by high precipitation intensity or changes in land use patterns. For instance, the flood events in 1953 that impacted the England and Netherlands coastlines were mainly caused by a windstorm as well as high spring tide. Such factors resulted in increased level of water, which rose by almost 5.6 meters leading to the destruction of flood defences deaths of 307 people in the UK, and 1835 in the Netherlands (Henry, 2010). According to Mohammad-pajooh and Aziz (2014), the coastal cities should not only pay attention to the infrastructure aspect of floods but should also consider vulnerabilities hotspots and take proper action which could result in the improvement of the community’s preparedness level. As pointed out by the authors, emergency preparedness tries to prevent a potential risk from turning into an emergency; even though it needs significant efforts to increase awareness about natural emergency preparedness in the community. A number of studies cited by Mohammad-pajooh and Aziz (2014) established that the preparedness level in many countries is insufficient; thus, the impact of flood emergency remains higher. As mentioned by Morita (2014), scores of factors bring forth the flood risk in coastal cities. For instance, the hydrological factors could lead to rapid flood runoff while climate change can exacerbate the flood risk. According to Price and Vojinovic (2008), emergency response activity and preparedness are the most important factors in the collection of activities related to management of emergencies. Given that responding to warning about a looming emergency has to be comprehensive, instant, and exhibit clear chain of command, the line of command’s hierarchy have to be created for every responsible staff. Emergency management activities, according to Price and Vojinovic (2008), can be grouped into preparation phase, supportive phase, and restoration phase. The first phase (preparation phase) focus on detailing the response plans required to become prepared and must be reviewed by every player in the emergency management. Success in this phase depends on how the emergency planners are trained and resourced. More importantly, the individual skills have to be upgraded continually. In the supportive phase, activities like warning and notification, residents’ evacuation from areas that have been stricken with the emergency, control of traffic, water supplies and emergency food distribution, and evacuating goods of high-value from areas prone to flood are carried out. After the flood event is through, the emergency responders will continue working through resettlement, restoration as well as clean-up activities. This process is recognised as restoration phase, where recommendations are made to improve preparedness to reduce losses in case of a future event. 2.3 Flood Emergency Management in UK and Turkey In the United Kingdom, a flood is considered as a major natural hazard since approximately 5.6 million properties are vulnerable to floods (Lumbroso et al., 2011). Furthermore, over 5.3 million people are working as well as living in 2.4 million buildings which are vulnerable to flood event caused by sea or rivers while another one million are in danger of surface water flooding. In 2007, more than 6,000 businesses and 55,000 homes were flooded because of widespread floods. These floods enormously affected critical infrastructure considering that more than 100 sewage treatment facilities located in the Midlands were severely impacted. In the UK, the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 governs the emergency planning and issues like communication and evacuation are by and large covered by generic plans. Such plans, according to Lumbroso et al. (2011), are subsequently indicated by the Multi-Agency Flood Plan (MAFP), which is tasked with producing Local Resilience Forum. All the Local Resilience Forums must take into consideration the flood risk across the entire areas they are responsible. In their study, Lumbroso et al. (2011) established that there was an inconsistency between the levels of detail that the emergency planners need as well as the actual level of detail accessible in the emergency plans for numerous issues. Such inconsistency is less significant for the metrics associated with organisation and communication. The authors concluded that the emergency plans in the UK have failed to observe the requirements on issues associated with receptors like buildings, people and critical infrastructure. According to McNulty (2013), historical responses’ charting to UK flooding exhibits some shifting views and attitudes of these events. The manner in which people perceive flooding is fundamental in influencing ways of responding to it. Enhanced warning systems and flood defences, improved flood forecasting, and increased emergency planning in the UK have resulted in reduced flood risks. Still, it is not economically affordable or technically feasible for all properties to be protected from flooding. Despite investing heavily on the coastal and flood defences, the flooding financial impact is still enormous since the UK incurs an average of £1 billion worth of damages annually as a result of flooding (McNulty, 2013). The Department for Environment (2014) suggests that emergency planners and responders have to familiarise themselves with the national emergency management. Basically, planning for as well as responding to flood event rests with local organisations that act collectively through Strategic Coordination Groups (SCGs) and Local Resilience Forums (LRFs). In Southampton, the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) is Southampton City Council (SCC) as stipulated under the Flood & Water Management Act 2010. The SCC is required by the Act to create, maintain, put into practice and monitor a strategy for managing the local flood risk. This strategy, as pointed out by Southampton City Council (2014), help authorities, businesses, communities and individuals to effectively understand and manage flood risk in Southampton. This Strategy takes into consideration the flooding from ground water, surface water as well as rivers since they are local flooding main sources that must be managed by Southampton City Council as an LLFA. As pointed out by Southampton City Council (2014), main rivers’ flood risk is well documented and has been mapped to demonstrate the likelihood of flooding happening. Still, flood risks attributed to the smaller rivers in Southampton are yet to be mapped extensively as compared to the main rivers. In Turkey, flood plains along the rivers that cross the urban areas and cities are utilised for recreational purpose, car parking, as well as for sporting activities while in rural areas, they are utilised for agricultural purposes (Yuksel et al., 2011). Experiences achieved from the flooding events in the past decade demonstrate that the implemented structural measures within the basin-wide have been efficient; however, decreasing the flood damages risk is exceedingly expensive. For this reason, the focus has been shifted to non-structural measures, especially updating design standards and guidelines of building code, modifying traditional land use and creating public awareness. Currently, the local administrations are using non-structural measures, especially mayors as well as municipalities. Still, because of the current economic status, implementing the required activities by such bodies has been limited. Yuksel et al. (2011) posit that the local units lack sufficient trained and educated staffs that can put the non-structural measures into practice. Numerous governmental as well as nongovernmental organisations have indirect and direct responsibilities in the integrated floods emergency management. Yuksel et al. (2011) posit that floods in Turkey are mainly caused by heavy rainfall on the southern and the western coastal areas of Turkey or because of sudden air temperature increase that leads to snow melt in the south-eastern Turkey, particularly the Eastern Black Sea Region. Furthermore, floods have been exacerbated by ignorant development, erosion and deforestation (Şahin, 2013). As pointed out by Balaban (2016), the urban planning approach considering flooding as a technical issue seems to be the key factor that brings forth high flood losses in cities across Turkey. Failure to take into account sustainable measures would make impacts of flood events more widespread and intense because of climate change and the growing population concentration in cities. The Turkey’s urban population rate is projected to reach 84 per cent by 2050 (Balaban, 2016). Given that the coastal and riverine cities are the hotspots of economic activities and population, flood risk management has turned out to be a pressing issue; thus, creating the need for the improved resilience of Turkish cities to flood events that would happen in future. As cited by Ceylan et al. (2007), there are many factors that cause flood hazards in Turkey; for instance, the country’s complex topographic features, its closeness to water makes it vulnerable to floods. Floods in Turkey are also caused by land-use, especially illegal and wrong land-use. For instance, Turkey has lost significant forest cover because of continuous forest cutting by people seeking to create new areas for agricultural purposes, particularly in the steep slopes of the northern Anatolian. This has consequently increased the possibility of debris flows and landslides as well as soil erosion. Another reason as pointed out by Tas et al. (2013) is the rapid urbanisation and the country’s unpreparedness and vulnerable to emergencies. 2.4 Community-Based Approaches According to Stewart (2007), community-based approaches to emergency management have turned out to be more and more important within the society, especially in areas facing uncertain and complex change. Without a doubt, grassroots action could offer the social capital and local knowledge required for identification of the factors behind human vulnerability as well as brings forth adaptive solutions that would help resolve flood risk and improve resilience. Stewart (2007) emphasises that the bottom-up activity could help in filling the gaps of the preceding centralised and top-down forms of management and decrease over relying on expert-driven solutions as well as short-term technological fixes. As pointed out by Sperry (2013), improving participation of citizens in emergency planning can help reduce the gap of expectation. When the community is more engaged in emergency management activities they learn ways of becoming prepared for emergencies. When people understand the value of being prepared, they will easily understand how to overcome the emergency response limitations. In view of this, Emergency Management Cycle (CDM) can be used since it offers the framework for what the community should do in terms of preparing themselves for emergencies. The objective of the CDM, according to Henry (2010) is reducing potential losses attributed to hazards, making sure victims get rapid and appropriate assistance and realising effective and rapid recovery. Therefore, CDM connotes the continuous process which is carried out by various communities, civil society, organisations, businesses and government officials to reduce the effect of the emergency. As pointed out by Sayers et al. (2013), successful managers and leaders should be able to recognize activities which allows for effective operations and to ensure that the espouse measures are given continuous attention. Therefore, enablers of flood emergency management at community level include funding and scheduling of activities, continuous coordination with other emergency response plans, and establishing adaptive management program. Other enablers as pointed out by Sayers et al. (2013) include risk communication as well as stakeholder outreach and partnership working. Still, there are barriers to flood emergency management; incapacity to adapt plans; budget overruns and fiscal deviations; political leadership changes; changes in national priorities; lack of resources; and failure to understand who is in charge of the on-going maintenance (Sayers et al., 2013). As mentioned by Bruijn (2005), people could change the response to flood risk management by espousing measures that enhance the resilience of the flood emergency management system. The flood risk management’s resilience strategies can improve the system capability to recover from impacts of a flood event. Without these strategies, flood events could disrupt critical infrastructures; thus, resulting in cascading failure across various infrastructure systems. In 2007, for instance, floods in the UK left 350,000 people without water supply for nearly 17 days while approximately 42,000 were left without electricity for 24 hours (Jonkman & Dawson, 2012). Drobot and Parker (2007) observed that public warning agencies must pay attention to education efforts so as to ensure that the public understand warnings, the value of taking warnings seriously, and the risks associated with driving on flooded roads. Furthermore, it is imperative to strengthen resilience and promote awareness in the community as well as making sure the needs of people in the flood risk areas are addressed (Perwaiz, 2008). In most countries, the existing hazard mitigation policy system in urban areas is inadequate since it is weakened by unplanned development strategies consequences and loopholes (Chatterjee, 2010). As mentioned by Caymaz et al. (2013), crucial factors in the survival of people during the emergency phase depends heavily on efficient and effective preparation of the emergency responders and communities, Emergency management can be improved by applying new technologies for forecast dissemination, visualisation as well as alerts (Middlemis-Brown, 2011) 3.0 Methodology 3.1 Research Questions 1. What are the factors that affect emergency planners, emergency responders and communities in flood emergency management? 2. What are the factors that influence the preparedness of entities associated with emergency management while responding to flood? 3. What measures should emergency responders, emergency planners and communities take to enhance their respective preparedness levels in responding to floods? 4. What are the suitable community-based risk management approaches that could help lessen social vulnerability by means of communication and planning and linkages, bottom-up activity as well a flood management partnerships? 5. How can community-based plans and policy recommendations be developed to reduce society vulnerability to floods? 3.2 Research Design The study will adopt comparative method to perform a feature-by-feature comparison of two coastal cities, Southampton and Izmit with the aim of gathering information regarding the factors that affect emergency planners, emergency responders and communities in flood emergency management. Case study will be used as a qualitative method for data collection because it would allow for in-depth descriptive information regarding River Test and Cuhahane River in a narrative format. As the data collection approach, case study approach would offer rich insights as well as perspectives that would result in in-depth understanding of problems, issues, and variables. As mentioned by Marrelli (2007), implementing the case study approach entails a distinctive interaction level for the respondents, researcher, as well as the targeted audience. In this case, the researcher will collaborate closely with the respondents in order to gather sufficient data and then ideas will be embedded in a narrative context. More importantly, the case study would allow the researcher to examine the data closely in the context of flood emergency management. The case study will investigate and explore flood event in Southampton and Izmit through comprehensive contextual analysis of events as well as their relationships. Case study was selected because it allows for data examination in the context of its use; that is to say, in the situation wherein the activity is happening. 3.3 Sample Populations and Sampling Procedure For reasons of data collection, the sample population will be those living in Southampton and Izmit. The sample population will comprise of emergency planners, emergency responders, and communities from these two coastal cities. Although no major flood event have recently been caused by River Test and Cuhahane River, the participants will be interviewed with the aim of establishing how well are prepared to manage future emergencies and to establish factors that hinder their preparation efforts. Participants will be contacted in advance to inquire their willingness to play a part in in the study. Generally, the study targets 120 people (60 from Southampton and the other 60 from Izmit) for the questionnaires with a projected response rate of at least 88%). The first group of participants will be emergency planners, which will consist of policy makers and local government officials in both coastal cities (n = 10). The second group of participants will be emergency medical service providers, fire department, and police (n = 40). The last group will be citizens from these cities (n = 70) who will be selected randomly. All participants will be sent information regarding the study through email. The survey will be done online through Survey Monkey application and interviews. 3.4 Data Collection While primary data will be gathered through qualitative methods, secondary data will be collected by reviewing relevant documents, like prior studies on flood emergency management as well as past emergencies’ after-action reviews. Secondary data will also be gathered from journal articles, books, organisations’ reports, and local government websites. The qualitative methods that will be used to gather information include case studies, interviews, closed questionnaires, and participant observation (Krishnaswamy et al., 2009). The interviews will be conducted face to face while close ended questionnaires will be administered online through Survey Monkey application. The researcher will travel to Southampton to gather data whereby the planners and responders will be interviewed. Furthermore, closed ended questionnaires will be used for communities. Interviews will be used because they are cheap and reduce travel time. The case study data will be gathered from review documents available online and also from emergency management organizations taking part in this study. 3.5 Data Analysis Data analysis will involve dismantling, segmenting as well as reassembling raw data in order to generate meaningful finding with the aim of drawing inference (Wahyuni, 2012). In this stage, the collected data will be organized in themes in line with the overall goal of making sure that all the research questions have been answered. Data analysis would be the initial step of interpreting the gathered date and generating an analytical view. The data will be analysed without delay to make sure that the data collected has greater accuracy. The questionnaire and interview data will be analysed through line-by-line coding since it provides the ability to disintegrate the data, outline the actions under which the fall, try to find tacit assumptions, extract meanings as well as implicit actions, find their meaning, gaps identification, and allows for data to data comparison. On the other hand, the case study data will be analysed through since it is a comparative study of two coastal cities. Incidents in River Test and Cuhahane River will be compared in order to find our uniformity under various conditions with the goal of generating new theoretical properties. 4.0 Timescale Task July July – August September October November Proposal Review of the Literature Preliminary field work and research Formulation of research question and methods Completing the Draft Paper  Revising the Thesis Data collection as well as analysis Thesis writing Publishing and submitting the Thesis 5.0 References Balaban, M.Ş., 2016. An Assessment Of Flood Risk Factors In Riverine Cities Of Turkey: Lessons For Resilience And Urban Planning. Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, vol. 33, no. 2, pp.45-71. Bruijn, K.d., 2005. Resilience and Flood Risk Management: A Systems Approach Applied to Lowland Rivers. PhD Thesis. Delft: Delft University Press. Caymaz, E., Akyon, F.V. & Erenelc, F., 2013. model proposal for efficient emergency management: the Turkish sample. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 99, pp.609 – 618. Ceylan, A., Alan, I. & Uğurlu, A., 2007. Causes and Effects of Flood Hazards in Turkey. In International Congress of River Basin Management. Antalya, Turkey, 2007. Chatterjee, M., 2010. Resilient Flood Loss Response Systems for Vulnerable Populations in Mumbai: A Neglected Alternative. Thesis. New Brunswick, New Jersey: The State University of New Jersey. Cooks, T., 2015. Factors Affecting Emergency Manager, First Responder, and Citizen Emergency Preparedness. Thesis. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Walden University. Department for Environment, F.&.R.A., 2014. The National Flood Emergency Framework for England. Strategic Framework. London. Drobot, S. & Parker, D.J., 2007. Advances and challenges in flash flood warnings. Environmental Hazards, vol. 7, pp.173–78. Go Fly Fishing UK, 2016. The River Test. [Online] Available at: http://www.goflyfishinguk.com/fly-fishing-locations/chalk-streams/river-test.php [Accessed 29 June 2017]. Henry, S.T., 2010. Flash Flood Scenario Modelling for Preparedness and Mitigation: Case Study of Barcelonnette, France. Thesis. Enschede, Netherlands: ITC Enschede. Jonkman, S.N. & Dawson, R.J., 2012. Issues and Challenges in Flood Risk Management—Editorial for the Special Issue on Flood Risk Management. Water, vol. 4, pp.785-92. Krishnaswamy, K.N., Sivakumar, A.I. & Mathirajan, M., 2009. Management Research Methodology: Integration of Principles, Methods and Techniques. Mumbai: Pearson Education India. Lumbroso, D., Stone, K. & Vinet, F., 2011. An assessment of flood emergency plans in England and Wales, France and the Netherlands. Journal of Natural Hazards, vol. 58, no. 1, pp.341-63. Marrelli, A.F., 2007. Collecting Data Through Case Studies. Performance Improvement, vol. 46, pp.39-44. McNulty, A., 2013. The experience of flooding in the UK: A research study. Research Paper. London: The British Red Cross Society. Middlemis-Brown, T.J., 2011. Assessing and augmenting emergency response: a study of the current methods and potential changes to flood response in the state of Iowa. Thesis. Iowa City, Iowa: University of Iowa. Mohammad-pajooh, E. & Aziz, K.A., 2014. Investigating factors for emergency preparedness among residents of Kuala Lumpur. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, vol. 2, pp.3683–709. Morita, M., 2014. Flood Risk Impact Factor for Comparatively Evaluating the Main Causes that Contribute to Flood Risk in Urban Drainage Areas. Water, vol. 2, pp.253-70. Okay, N., 2005. The risk profile and emergency management system of Turkey. WBI- Natural Emergency Risk Management Program – Final Project. Perwaiz, A., 2008. Flood preparedness and emergency management: people-centred approach in integrated flood risk management. Annual Flood Report. MRCS. Price, R.K. & Vojinovic, Z., 2008. Urban flood emergency management. Urban Water Journal, vol. 5, no. 3, pp.259–76. Şahin, D., 2013. Flood Risk Management in Turkey. Dakar: Emergency and Emergency Management Presidency. Sayers, P. et al., 2013. Flood Risk Management: A Strategic Approach. Strategic Paper. Paris: UNESCO. Southampton City Council, 2014. Southampton Local Flood Risk Management Strategy: Main Strategy Report (2014 – 2019). Strategy Report. Southampton: Southampton City Council. Sperry, P., 2013. Community Participation in Emergency Planning and the Expectation Gap: Analysis and Recommendations. PhD Thesis. Richmond, VA : Virginia Commonwealth University. Stewart, R.M., 2007. Community Perspectives of flood risk and social vulnerability reduction: the case of the Red River Basin. PhD Thesis. Winnipeg, Canada: University of Manitoba. Tas, M., Tas, N., Durak, S. & Atanur, G., 2013. Flood emergency vulnerability in informal settlements in Bursa, Turkey. Environment & Urbanization, vol. 25, no. 2, pp.443–63. Visit Hampshire, 2017. River Test. [Online] Available at: https://www.visit-hampshire.co.uk/explore/rivers-and-canals/river-test [Accessed 29 June 2017]. Wahyuni, D., 2012. The Research Design Maze: Understanding Paradigms, Cases, Methods and Methodologies. Journal of applied management accounting research, vol. 10, no. 1, pp.69-80. Yuksel, I., Arman, H., Goktepe, F. & Ceribasi, G., 2011. Flood management to prevent flooding damages in western Black Sea region in Turkey. International Journal of the Physical Sciences, vol. 6, no. 29, pp.6759-66. Read More