Disaster Preparedness and Management by Michael Beach - Book Report/Review Example

Summary of chapters 4 The book Disaster Preparedness and Management by Michael Beach talks about the Disaster Cycle. It discusses disaster planning on a personal level, including coming up with a personal or family disaster plan. It also talks about Institutional as well as governmental planning with the difficulties involved, and the successes as well as failings. Other issues discussed include Attitude and Awareness, violence, ethical considerations and compassion in light of the actualities of disasters as well as their effects. Basic preparedness steps Every municipality faces emergencies and disasters. In the 21st century, we are more reliant on communications, technology, and transportation. Consequently, we are more negatively affected by severe weather, epidemics and, floods. We are not resistant to these threats. Municipalities are often the first to take action in an emergency. Nevertheless, a large-scale emergency might need more resources as well as personnel than primary responders can offer (Auf 10). So as to respond in an effective as well as coordinated way in an emergency, it is important that municipalities have a good emergency management program Disaster and Emergency Management comprises of four distinct but interlocking phases: Mitigation, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery. Mitigation entails taking corrective measures to ascertain that a region of potential danger is identified. These measures are taken so as to reduce or eradicate the risk and possible impact on the community (Michael 5). On the other hand, preparedness activities can assist in ensuring that properly trained staff in addition to other resources is identified and accessible to respond. The Response phase entails the community’s actions to tackle the current risk. Additionally, the Recovery phase entails the community’s efforts and residents to go back to normal. The Municipalities must plan for the following: Disaster Risk Reduction (Disaster Mitigation) Planning: Disaster Risk Reduction Plans ought to decrease the risks to which susceptible communities are exposed to tolerable levels. In planning their Risk Reduction program, Municipalities must apply their minds and come up with cost-effective as well as innovative risk reduction strategies. The greater part of these plans should be related to the Integrated Development Plan (IDP) as programs and project (Auf 13). Disaster Preparedness (Response & Relief) Planning: Disaster Preparedness Plans must address response and relief activities to be executed in case a disaster hit a community that is not mainly susceptible to risks and find it tolerable to live with such risks. Disaster Impact Assessment and Recovery Planning: Disaster Impact Assessment and Recovery Planning should center on assessing the effect of a disaster; identifying suitable reconstruction, as well as rehabilitation measures, and examining the effectiveness of the reconstruction as well as rehabilitation measures (Michael 7) At the municipal level the emergency management activities include: • ensuring the formation of an efficient emergency management • carrying out a hazard, risk as well as community susceptibility assessment; • making sure the plan is upheld and exercised yearly; • carrying out public emergency management teaching, awareness as well as education programs; and • offering leadership and guidance during an emergency state Emergency plan Citizens rely on and anticipate that their local government should offer an effective, harmonized response that will reduce any injury, losses or damage to property, people, or the environment. Planning in advance ensures an efficient and effective response. When an emergency happens in the community, regularly police, ambulance and fire personnel respond (Michael 12). When the emergency rises past the ability of these primary responders, the municipality is required to activate extra personnel, as well as resources. Writing an emergency plan will assist in clarifying responsibilities and roles, offer direction to responders, define the authority scope, identify resources, as well as emergency contacts, , and discover operational concepts during an emergency. Risk Assessment Appropriate mitigation together with preparedness activities can only come after risks are sufficiently identified and evaluated. Carrying out a risk assessment bases on a review of the hazards features such as their location, frequency, intensity, and probability; the potential for social, physical, economic as well as environmental impacts, exposure, and vulnerability, while taking into consideration municipal capacity (Auf 15). The role of the city, state and federal agencies in responding to emergency crisis The initial First Disaster Response is the responsibility of local governments emergency services with the aid from close municipalities, the state as well as volunteer agencies (Michael 19). In a disastrous disaster if the governor appeals, federal resources can be mobilized through the Homeland Securitys Department of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for rescue, food, electrical power, water, shelter as well as other basic needs. In case of a Major disaster, the President then determines guarantees extra federal aid. The incident must be more than the state can handle alone. When declared, funding should come from the Presidents Disaster Relief Fund, which is managed by FEMA together with disaster aid programs of other contributing federal agencies (Michael 21). Recovery phase of disaster places the sternest strain on finances on state or local government. Damage to infrastructure and public facilities, usually not insured, can overpower even a big city. A governors appeal for a main disaster declaration could connote an infusion of federal funds, but he/she should also commit important state funds as well as resources for recovery efforts. In general, federal assistance as well as funding is offered to meet a precise emergency need or to assist in preventing a major disaster from happening (Auf 20). Hurricane Katrina Agencies failure in their response to Hurricane Katrina Hurricane Katrina was the largest natural disaster in the United States, affecting 92,000 square miles and destroying a greater part of a major city. Over 1,800 individuals died, and tens thousands left destitute and with no basic supplies. The Katrina evolved into a range of related crises, with two main causes. The chief cause was the hurricane itself, but no less significant was the failure of man-made levees meant to guard a city constructed below sea-level. These factors lead to a sequence of cascading problems that make Katrina a complex crisis (Benoit 2). Hurricane Katrina happened four years subsequent to the attacks of 9/11, three years after the consequent creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), an year after the DHS had come up with a National Response Plan. But in spite of the heightened attention to homeland security, the response to Katrina hurricane was a failure. The world observed as government responders appeared unable to provide basic protection from the devastation of nature. The unfortunate response came up from a failure to handle several risk factors (Benoit 5). The risks of a main hurricane striking New Orleans had been considered for long, and there was adequate warning of the danger of Katrina that emergency declarations were made prior to the landfall. But responders were unsuccessful to convert this information into a preparation level suitable with the scope of the imminent disaster. The isolated authority nature in the US intergovernmental response system further destabilized the response, as federal responders did not succeed to know the need to engage more aggressively. In any case, most of the key institutional capabilities to handle the response at each level of government were insufficient (Benoit 7). Particularly, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had been destabilized during the Bush government. The DHS was as well an inexperienced organization, uncertain of how to organize its authority, as well as resources. A main failing of DHS leadership was incapacity to understand Katrina as an occurrence of national importance on par with 9/11. Instead, they acted as if it was just a routine normal disaster till it was very late (Benoit 11). As a disaster takes on a bigger scale, added responders will be required, and as the disaster creates additional tasks, a larger range of capacities will be needed. The Katrina network was so great that there was a letdown to understand completely all of the actors really involved (partly due to a large charitable element), the skills they provided, and how to employ these capabilities. One research counted more than 500 different groups that participated in the weeks subsequent to landfall (Benoit 16). These organizations acted in response to an essential goal: decreasing the suffering as well as loss of life that outcome from the hurricane. Constant with this overarching objective, there were several specific goals in the response stage: e.g., delivering materials; evacuation; recovering bodies in addition to giving mortuary services; restoring public safety; providing medical services; restoring communications as well as power; search and salvage; and providing provisional shelter. A network was associated with every specific goal. There were, consequently, manifold task-specific networks within the wider Katrina network though membership of these networks were predisposed to go beyond a good pact from task to task (Benoit 24). Hurricane Sandy overview On the October 29, 2012 evening, Sandy caused a landfall in southern New Jersey. It was the second-biggest Atlantic storm recorded whose effects were felt in 24 states. The storm destroyed the East Coast, mainly the heavily occupied New York, Connecticut and New Jersey region, with strong winds, heavy rain and record storm gushes, and with heavy flurry in West Virginia as well as the Appalachian Mountains. During Sandy’s immediate outcome, over 23,000 citizens sought shelter in temporary covers, and over 8.5 million consumers were left with no power (Gregory 4). The storm flooded many roads as well as channels and obstructed transportation corridors, adding to fuel scarcity across the New York City area. Eventually, the storm led to tens of billions of dollars in spoils, damaged or shattered thousands of homes, in addition to killing not less than 162 people in the US. Coastal societies in the Mid-Atlantic were amongst the most hit by the hurricane. Flooding brought problems for little towns and large cities alike, counting New York. Sections of Manhattan lost electric power as the storm crashed into the Big Apple. Regions close to New Jersey, Atlantic City, were inspired by the increasing water level. Best practices used during Hurricane Sandy In the middle of the catastrophe, though, Americans came as one to assist friends, family, and neighbors. Primary responders found the way dangerous circumstances to rescue people in need. Other people accepted to lend a helping hand (Gregory 30). Local and State governments took a foremost role to organize their society for the tragedy and marshal once the hurricane hit. The American Red Cross at first mobilized over 1,000 adversity workers in societies up and down the Eastern Coast. Neighboring Red Cross sections offered shelters for those who needed housing. In the meantime, the Salvation Army sent lots of mobile feeding units in 7 states to serve up meals (Gregory 32). The Institute worked with neighboring emergency administration officials to settle on where assistance was required most. Additionally, the Red Cross as well as Salvation Army, neighborhood faith-based and society organizations played fundamental roles in the disaster response to Sandy. It was surely a severe hurricane that will take long to be forgotten. Luckily, America remains a flexible nation. NYC response to Hurricane Sandy All the multi-level governments, as well as agencies, were involved in the response following Hurricane Sandy. Responding to the sternly spoiled transportation systems, power, and fuel shortages, FEMA came up with task forces correspondingly to the energy, fuel, and transportation distribution to refurbish these important needs. Operations response of Hurricane Sandy’s organizational structure was set up as a geographic structure (Gregory 45). It was organized by branches of resources with segments for each affected region. In addition to the Federal, State, together with local responders, there were also several Non-Governmental Organizations that were significant to the response efforts. An NGO called Team Rubicon assembled the first responders, military veterans and medical professionals who were deployed to global disaster zones. Proctor & Gamble emergency response team and the Red Cross also assisted in response to that disaster (Gregory 47). Effectiveness of the response The response to Hurricane Sandy was so some extent effective. In efforts to improve helping the survivors, functionality, as well as swiftness, must be contrasted without damagingly affecting the Whole Community needs. FEMA took various pro-active steps in achieving this such as coming up with new expedited programs for the distributing of aid to assist survivors repair homes, get shelter, and obtain aid as well as insurance payments quickly (Gregory 50). Recommendations Even though the preparation together with the response efforts for Hurricane Sandy was considered adequate, there are improvement areas that could have managed the situation better. Enhancing communication with the incident management as well as top leadership positions were among the challenges FEMA faced. Owing to the high volume of higher leadership involved, direct coordination for management system and leadership should be employed to serve better serve the individuals affected by the decisions (Gregory 51). Responding to Hurricane Sandy FEMA together with its other partners faced challenges employing the response organizational structure. FEMA utilized an organizational structure that comprised of geographical branches together with divisions and an Area Coordination Group in charge of the two hardest-hit states designed for bigger incidents. This structure implementation caused anxiety among program employees in the fields since they were hesitant to decentralize their powers. Moreover, there was confusion over responsibilities, roles, and authority over resources and jurisdictions (Gregory 60). Works Cited Auf, der H. E. Disaster Response: Principles of Preparation and Coordination. St. Louis: Mosby, 1989. Print. Beach, Michael. Disaster Preparedness and Management. Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis Co, 2010. Internet resource. Benoit, Peter. Hurricane Katrina. New York: Childrens Press, 2012. Print. Gregory, Josh. The Superstorm Hurricane Sandy. N.p., 2013. Print. Read More