Individual and International Response to Disasters - Essay Example

Due Individual and International Response to Disasters Introduction In a fast globalizing worldwhere the hitherto impenetrable distances have become no more of a threat to the engagements that add value to human life irrespective of the locations, individuals and countries have taken it upon themselves to reach across borders with in-hand assistance that are of urgent necessity. The response towards major humanitarian disasters such as the deadly tsunami that struck Asia in December 2004 leaving approximately 200,000 people dead, scores of hundreds missing and property worth millions of dollars in damages has, no doubt, been massive (UN/ISDR par 4). From donations to volunteer services outpouring from all corners of the world, the responses with respect to the 21st century humanitarian crises without a sense of denial, have been commendable but not sufficient. Yet, the role of the media, an integral component of communication parameters, appears to be less than equal to the task of coercing the entire process with the right buttons; evidence points to synergies directed in the aftermath rather than in the preventive mechanisms. By definition, a disaster [according to the United Nations] refers to a sudden, adverse, disruptive event to the normal functioning of the society with intolerably widespread losses beyond the ability of the affected using the available resources (UN DHA/IDNDR 27). Whether man made or natural, disasters are catastrophic, instantaneous, indiscriminate in character, and more so, occur without warning thereby making adjustments efforts difficult. To be sure, man has known disasters for ages. Human suffering induced by floods and/or famines are but tales that have defied generational with deleterious damages that enjoins precious life in a long list of loses. Though helpful, the technological improvements have more than detached man from nature and made the modern era disaster occurrences even more frequent and perilous with partly irreparable consequences. Individual and international agencies/organizations respond to disasters as a show of care gesture and/or to assist in situations where facilities and resources are genuinely inadequate in addressing the humanitarian needs of the affected populations. The assistance normally ranges from immediate to long-term efforts designed to save lives of those in danger and subsequently lessen or alleviate altogether any form of suffering (“23 Principles of Humanitarian Donorship” par 3). It is worth mentioning that no single actor can successfully meet the facets of a relief/recovery without help. Indeed from the survivors’ needs spanning from health risks [nutrition and emergency shelters, for instance], to livelihood reconstructions, international disaster responses would be verily incomplete without the combinative effort from various specialized actors beginning with the affected government entities, intergovernmental organizations [the UN agencies, to be precise], nongovernmental organizations [both the domestic and the international], the Red Cross, and more importantly the support of the affected civilian populations. Nonetheless, while these actors respond uniquely in some way to humanitarian disasters, not all stretch their efforts to the ultimate objective, thus making disasters rightly multi-phased emergencies where actors only make contributions towards a desired end. Coordinated collaboration among actors is thus vital in combining specific knowledge, skills, experiences as well as technologies. While it is almost certain that these resources will ultimately meet towards the course discussed herein, quite a number of factors [argued below] determine their supply. Factors that Influence Individual and International Response to Disasters Extreme events such as the 9/11 attacks, the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, and the more recent Hurricane Sandy in the United States did produce catastrophic impacts with long-term disruption of socio-economic systems. With the exception of the 9/11 attacks, these disasters have more than tested individual and governmental abilities to organize and subsequently execute effective response relief efforts. To begin with, disasters are often classified as "low-probability events" that sometimes compete for attention with the prioritized daily undertakings in vain. From the general public right to the elected officials and organizational leaders, disaster preparedness is just but a low key priority characterized by apathy (Drabek (b) 176). In most cases disasters are considered improbable events with infrequent intervals. As such, the impetus to make elaborate, time-consuming, and expensive preparations is often nonexistent; a factor that overlaps into the response mechanisms (Dynes, Quarantelli, and Kreps 72). Drabek further notes that the common statistical probability is that disasters are taken to be "elsewhere occurrences " (Drabek (a) 4). Consequently, the expenses and efforts put out for preparations are perceived as investments with negligible certainty of return (Barton 159). Enjoined in the foregoing disaster preparedness is the Ambiguity of Responsibility; another critical factor that hampers individual as well international disaster response. Noteworthy, tasks associated with disaster responses are always spread out among various entities crossing jurisdictional and functional boundaries (Drabek (c) 105). Indeed, it would be quite difficult, particularly for individuals, to get involved in disaster response without knowing exactly what role to play. As Quarantelli notes, many organizations are armed with paper plans whose function are more limited to dust gathering in archives (16). A study by the Washington State University more than laid the facts bare over two decades ago; besides the mentioned plans being too limited to few events, quite a number are completely unworkable even in the events purportedly covered. As such, implementers find it hard to put work approved procedures that sometimes are too restrictive to allow response in certain scenarios. Worsening the response mechanisms is the myth of maladaptive behavior (Quarantelli and Dynes 67). Yet, it is almost common knowledge that persons in the impact zones are often stunned and rendered helpless by disasters beyond their imagination, thus would only respond through effective leadership. Of particular concern is the looting aspect (Buerk, et al. 644). A case in point is the PSA Air Crash in San Diego, California, on the 25 September 1978, where there were widespread unverifiable rumor of looting at the crash site (Drabek (b)146). Such rumors/myths still guide quite a number of organizational as well as individual responses to disasters, especially when there are strong instincts that certain valuable assets may be lost. Clearly, no organization, let alone volunteer individuals would be willing to put their best foot forward in circumstances of civil disorders, however grave, unless there are enough armed forces to maintain order. To certain extents, the restraint would be well in order, particularly in situations of armed conflicts. The UN organizations as well as the Red Cross are known to intervene in such human crafted disasters, such as the case of Darfur conflicts, only with protection in hand. While all kinds of disasters call for more or less similar rescue-efforts, at least in the immediate aftermath, it is important to note that certain kinds of disasters demand certain specialized responses. Depending on the nature of a disaster, the immediate response may not require the efforts of the ordinary public or even disaster organizations. The March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan is still fresh in many people’s minds. To be certain, unless specialized knowledge in handling such disasters is affirmed, it is highly doubtful as to whether much support akin to the tornado disasters would emanate from the international community. The United States, a world leader in quite a number of areas is itself in the process of rethinking how to respond to such a nuclear disasters should it happen within its jurisdiction (Wald par 1-2). The complexities of cultural and language differences are also fundamental parameters in cross border disaster response by emergency providers (Shiu-Thornton, et al. 466-467). Needless to say, communication is one of the vital elements in dealing with various concerns and issues in disaster management. Language barrier not only present a challenge of managerial aspect of organizational responses, but also limits the very importance of information dissemination, particularly where such information is essential in preventing the destructive effects of disaster aftershocks. Indeed as it is, language and cultural differences have been strong impediments inhibiting the implementation of organizational plans aimed at rehabilitating and reconstructing affected communities, particularly those that follow strict adherence to certain unique codes of religion. As such, organizations and individuals with strong links with religion find it most difficult to volunteer their services in certain parts of parts of the world where their codes of duty seem to be in conflict with indigenous people’s values and ethics. The aspect of political culture and public policy also tends to limit individuals and international involvement in cross border disasters. Accordingly, well or poor response to devastating disasters is directly related to how emergency management/disaster policy is crafted and implemented (McEntire and Mathis 24). Essentially, politics establishes and controls public policy. Failures in public policy or its implementation normally guides political debates right into political campaigns. An occurrence of a disaster brings out related policy squarely into the political arena, with clear demarcations on who should be involved and where. Finally, disaster preparations and response efforts are pegged much on the available economic resources (Aleskerov et al. 256). Almost everything dealt with in this world involves commitment of financial resources. The Role of the Media in Disaster management The images that defined the Boston catastrophic blasts on the 15th April 2013, for instance, were radiated across the world within seconds courtesy of a powerful interactive online presence that kept the news flowing as millions streamed in to convey their aftershock feelings (Parsons Par 2-3). The two Boston Marathon explosions that ended the lives of 3 leaving behind a trail of injuries tuned out to be a "live-tweeted disaster" with reports that kept changing with every minute updates. With reference to this particular disaster alone, the media presence played a fundamental role in reaching out to the larger public with safety messages —informing them [the people] to stay away from the crime scene and avoid congregating in large groups. There is no doubt that first hand evidence videos were also incorporated in police investigations. Through the media [communication], disaster response personnel right from the federal level to the authorities at the local level got a fair share of coverage that enabled them to act appropriately. Though criticized for sensational reporting in certain instances, the role of the media as first responders gives meaning to the complexities at hand with a clear view of forming objectives criticisms that contribute in shaping up superior future responses (Guion, Scammon and Borders 23). Work cited Aleskerov, Fuad, Arzu Say I., Aysegul Toker, Levent Akin H., and Gulay Altay. “A Cluster Based Decision Support System for Estimating Earthquake Damage and Casualties.” Journal of Disaster Studies and Policy Management 29 (2005): 255–276. Print. Barton, Allen H. Communities in Disaster: A Sociological Analysis of Collective Stress Situations.Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 1969. Print. Buerk, Charles A., Batdorf John, Cammack Kirk, and Ravenholt Otto. The MGM Grand Hotel Fire Lessons Learned From A Major Disaster. Arch Surg 117.5 (1982): 641-644. Print. Drabek, Thomas E. (a). Emergency Management: The Human Factor. Emmitsburg, Maryland: National Emergency Training Center, 1985. Print. Drabek, Thomas E. (b). Human System Responses to Disaster: An Inventory of Sociological Findings. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1986. Print. Drabek, Thomas E. (c). The Professional Emergency Manager: Structures and Strategies for Success. Boulder, Colorado: Institute of Behavioral Science, Univ. of Colorado, 1987. Print. Dynes Russell , Enrico Quarantelli L., and Gary Kreps A. A Perspective on Disaster Planning. 3rd ed. Report Series No. 11. Newark, DE: Disaster Research Center, Univ. of Delaware, 1981. Print. Guion, Deirdre T., Debra  Scammon L., and Aberdeen Borders L. "Weathering the Storm: A Social Marketing Perspective on Disaster Preparedness and Response with Lessons from Hurricane Katrina." Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 26.1 (2007): 20-32. Print. McEntire, David A. and Sarah Mathis. “Comparative Politics and Disasters: Assessing Substantive and Methodological Contributions.” Pp. 178-195 in McEntire, David A. (ed.) Disciplines, Disasters and Emergency Management: The Convergence and Divergence of Concepts, Issues and Trends from the Research Literature. CC Thomas: Springfield, Il, 2007. Print. Parsons, Chris. Boston Marathon explosions: How Twitter reacted To an Unfolding Disaster. Yahoo News 15 Apr. 2013. Web. 6 July 2013. Quarantelli, Enrico L. Human Resources and Organizational Behaviors in Community Disasters and Their Relationship to Planning. Preliminary paper No 76. Newark, DE: Disaster Research Center, Univ. of Delaware, 1982. Print. Quarantelli, Enrico L., and Russell Dynes R. “When Disaster Strikes (It isn't much like what you've heard about)." Psychology Today 5 (1972): 66-70. Print. Shiu-Thornton, Sharyne, Joseph Balabis, Kirsten Senturia, Aracely Tamayo, and Mark Oberle. “Disaster preparedness for limited English proficient communities: Medical interpreters as cultural brokers and gatekeepers.” Public Health Reports 122.4 (2007): 466-471. Print. United Nations, DHA. (1992). International Agreed Glossary of Basic Terms Related to Disaster Management. Geneva: United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs. United Nations, ISDR. Building Safety Should Become a Priority in Countries Vulnerable to Natural Hazards. UN/ISDR Press Release, 2006. Web. 5 July 2013. Wald, Mathew. U.S. Rethinks How to Respond to Nuclear Disaster. New York Times 14 April 2013. Web. 7 July 2013. “23 Principles and Good Practice of Humanitarian Donorship.” Good Humanitarian Donorship Initiative, 2013. Web. 7 July 2013. Read More