Problems Encountered in Emergency Preparedness Protocol and Planing regarding Floods - Research Proposal Example

PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED IN FLOOD EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROTOCOL AND PLANNING Student’s Name: Code + Course name Professor’s name University City, State Date Rationale Emergency teams have encountered numerous problems in the effort to respond to a flooding emergency. The intricacies at the emergency preparedness and planning stage and continue further to the response phase. Issues associated with emergency logistics have turned out to be one of the greatest challenges that the emergency staff encounter when responding to a flooding emergency. The challenges emanate from the fact that extreme events such as floods have the potential of creating chaos out of normal events. Consequently, emergency teams find it difficult to deliver important items such as medical supplies, water, and food to the affected areas despite the existence of a solid framework to avail the items to the affected areas. For instance, floods destroy both virtual and physical infrastructure. In most cases, emergency teams lack sufficient knowledge on the challenges and nature of emergency supply chains thereby leading to an improper design of the emergency preparedness protocol and planning. To be precise, emergency planners lack adequate knowledge on the interaction between formal and informal supply chains as well as their operation. The result is failing to understand appropriate methods of coordinating and analysing the flow of nonpriority and priority goods to the affected areas. Literature Review Emergency teams of aid organisations and agencies encounter serious logistical challenges while responding to extreme events. Floods are one of the extreme events that result in significant damages to property and loss of life (Jonkman & Dawson 2012). The logistical challenges have an adverse impact on the response and recovery operations because of their consequent adverse influence on the supply chain of nonpriority and priority emergency goods. The absence of scientific methods to analyse logistics systems in the event of extreme conditions has contributed significantly towards the ineffective coordination of emergency efforts and resources by emergency teams. Some of the problems encountered by the emergency teams in responding to flooding emergencies include the magnitude of the requirements, destruction of communications infrastructure, inadequate training and understaffing, poor coordination between state and federal logistics systems, and poor prepositioning of resources. Other challenges include poor distribution and handling of donations, procurement delays, and limited asset visibility. On some occasions, members of the emergency team also find it challenging to rescue victims that suffer from psychological problems for the fear of the death of their loved ones or loss of lifetime property (Burke 2011). The winter 2015/2016 floods in the UK resulted in massive destruction of property thereby subjecting victims to intense psychological distress (Smith 2016). Poor institutional and legal frameworks have also resulted in inadequate preparation of flood management organizations in Turkey. The result has been the failure of the emergency team to implement effective response and recovery operations thereby escalating the number of fatalities in past flooding emergencies (Gurer & Ozguler 2004). The Magnitude of Requirements The magnitude of devastations accounts for majority of failures in logistics systems despite the advance preparation of emergency teams. For instance, the magnitude of devastation caused by hurricane Katrina in the USA destroyed the existing supply chain systems thereby impeding response and recovery efforts from emergency teams. At the time of occurrence of the disaster, the magnitude of the devastations overwhelmed government and volunteer organizations after identifying the amount of resources required to respond to the disaster (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007). An interview with state officials and local residents during the natural disaster indicated that the level of preparedness of the American Red Cross towards the disaster was insufficient to deal with the disaster requirements following its occurrence. The American Red Cross (ARC) had deployed response materials to the Gulf Coast that it considered adequate to deal with the material requirements of the disaster. Within a short time and few days before the occurrence of the flooding emergency, ARC had deployed 500,000 ready meals. Moreover, the society had identified fifteen sites to set its large kitchens. The society intended to use the large kitchens as the feeding locations for the victims of the disaster. The Society had also set up several shelters and deployed vehicles and staff to the area in advance. The donations that the company raised to deal with the disaster exceeded $2 billion. The Society deployed 220,000 volunteers and staff in advance to deal with the disaster. In the aftermath of the incidence, it was apparent that the available logistics was insufficient to deal with the requirements of the victims of the New Orleans flood (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007). Consequently, the organization witnessed a rapid growth in the number of victims that required its services. The additional demand for its services compelled the organization to encounter the challenges of shelter and food since the available materials were inadequate to cater for the needs of all victims. The consequence of the failed logistics system was public criticism from the public about the failure of the organization to establish a robust system of dealing with natural disasters. The response from critics communicated the fact that the US Government was unable to prepare adequately for a disaster that the nation had anticipated for years. The reality was that even though ARC had planned for the catastrophe, the magnitude of devastation overwhelmed the prepositioned resources thereby resulting in the failed response. ARC had prepared for a standard catastrophe using existing data without the forethought that the catastrophe would have a more devastating effect than anticipated (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007). Even though the organization has the resources required to prepare for an emergency of any kind, the devastating effect of hurricane Katrina was one of its kind. As a result, the organization had not prepared for a disaster of such magnitude. Lack of Training and Understaffing Apparently, the effective handling of natural disasters requires adequate training on the part of the members of the emergency team. Besides having the skills required to deal with the needs of the victims of the disaster, it is also imperative that members of the emergency team should have adequate skills of dealing with the catastrophe. During the hurricane Katrina catastrophe, major restructuring was still taking place at the Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) in the endeavour to integrate it into the Department of Homeland Security. The Agency had 500 vacancies out of its 2,500 positions. This indicated that the Agency encountered understaffing as a major challenge during the catastrophe. Moreover, out of its ten regional directors, eight operated in an acting capacity. The Agency had to seek assistance from other federal agencies to fill its vacant positions (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007). Agencies tasked with the responsibility of managing emergencies find it difficult to implement emergency operations because of the lack of the necessary skills required to deal with the challenges and needs of victims. Flooding emergencies present a similar challenge. Hiring staff that do not have the experience of using emergency teams makes it difficult to implement response and recovery operations effectively (Moynihan 2009). The effective implementation of response and recovery operations requires the use of highly trained staff that have the experience of working with emergency teams. In the Louisiana flood emergency, the understaffing at FEMA had resulted in the deployment of some employees to local emergency operation centres without adequate experience in dealing with emergency teams. Inadequate staffing causes several problems associated with the distribution of supplies. It is also evident that inadequate staffing can also cause inaccurate record keeping of inventory that yields an imbalance between prepositioned supplies and the actual needs of the victims. In order to achieve the seamless flow of emergency operations in the event that a flood incidence occurs, it is imperative to train each new group of emergency personnel that offers to help in the situation. However, the dire situation at hand associated with dealing with the victims offers little time to train volunteers thereby increasing the vulnerability of the emergency process to faulty implementation of emergency operations. Failure of the Communication Infrastructure Natural disasters such as flooding incidences destroy critical communications infrastructure following their occurrence. The disaster leaves a significant portion of the individuals in the affected area with no access to telephone lines or electricity. In the event of the failure of telecommunications infrastructure, the entire emergency response and recovery encounters numerous failures in agency coordination efforts (Dilmaghani et al. 2006). Search, rescue, and logistics operations also fail in such cases. The failure of the operations emanate from the fact that emergency responders are unable to coordinate their activities both internally and externally because of the failure of the collapse of the communications infrastructure and the power loss. The devastating effect that floods have on communication and power infrastructure compel members of the emergency team to rely on satellite phones as their only mode of communication. However, the limited availability of satellite phones implies constrained efforts of responding and recovering from floods. In some cases, satellite phones arrive late thereby influencing negatively on the coordination of the search and rescue operations. Prior to the arrival of satellite phones, helicopters serve as the main channel of communication back and forth the emergency centres. Therefore, in order to request for additional supplies, members of the emergency team on the ground have to write the request by hand and hand it over to the crew in the helicopter for the physical delivery of the request to the emergency centres. Apparently, the use of hand-written and delivered requests implies that officials would not have a clear picture about when the emergency centres would fill the requests. The delay thwarts the efforts of the emergency personnel on the ground thereby painting the picture that the concerned emergency department is not robust enough to deal with emergencies affecting the public. In such a situation, no one would be aware of whether the deployed supplies have arrived at the destination or the officer that received the supplies to enable the efficient allocation of the supplies to the victims. Flooding emergencies also destroy internet-based emergency systems since the disaster submerges the critical infrastructure required to implement the system such as computers under water (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007). The collapse of the system renders the system incapable of providing instant feedback on the amount of supplies required to handle the existing demand on the ground. The reestablishment of the system takes several days thereby implying that the officials did not distribute the supplies to the target areas. It is also proper to acknowledge the massive role played by the media in communicating to the entire nation the actual state of events on the ground. As a result, the media enables emergency responders from the emergency centres to understand the specific needs that the victims require on the ground (Iqbal et al. 2014). This avoids incidences whereby emergency centres supply inappropriate goods to victims without having a clear understanding of the situation on the ground. However, this is only possible where disaster is not so catastrophic to the point of limiting the access to the affected areas by the media personnel. In some instances, the situation is so critical that the media team cannot access the affected area. Consequently, the media reports would not have facts about the situation on the ground thereby making it difficult for emergency officers to supply the right goods to the victims. Poor Prepositioning of Resources In most cases, weather forecasts predict the occurrence of natural disasters such as flooding incidences. This results in the implementation of immediate efforts of prepositioning resources to the affected areas. Even though the emergency officials strive to exceed the projected amount of supplies required to cater for the needs of the victims on the ground, this is not the case always since the actual needs exceeds the already prepositioned resources (Klibi et al. 2013). In some cases, state officials delay the deployment of supplies to the affected areas as they await the official declaration of the federal government to avoid using state funds. Inefficient deployment of resources also emanates from the inability of the stores on the ground to deal with the strong winds and currents associated with floods. In the event that the emergency team is preparing for a hurricane, there is a high likelihood of the storage facilities failing to counter the force of the gushing winds and currents. Fear of falling victims to disasters is the other constraint that cause the poor prepositioning of resources. Even though the federal government and state government through the emergency agencies may decide to deploy critical supplies in advance, some truck drivers may consider the disaster a threat to their lives and decide to vacate the target areas before the disaster strikes (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007). Such decisions may render the rescue operations ineffective especially if they occur a day or some few hours before the actual occurrence of the disaster. This necessitates the immediate deployment of alternative supplies by the responsible organizations in order to contain the situation. However, the short-term interval required to respond to such a case implies that the disaster would strike before the deployment of adequate supplies to the affected area. Consequently, the available supplies would not be sufficient to meet the demands of the victims. In some cases, the selection of staging points by emergency officers is poor as evidenced by the fact that some points are too far away from the affected areas. This makes it difficult to avail the supplies to the victims in time. In such a case, the emergency centres would have to restart the deployment of the supplies once again rather than embarking on distributing the supplies as it would have been the case according to the initial plan. The improper identification of staging points is a failure of all officials at all levels of the emergency response plan. Limited Asset Visibility The occurrence of flooding disasters has the impact of obstructing asset visibility at both ends of the value chain. The magnitude of the flooding disaster makes it difficult for emergency officials to estimate the type and quantity of critical supplies required by victims on the ground (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007). The limited availability of resources also makes it almost impossible for the emergency officers on the ground to estimate the amount of supplies required to meet the demand. At the other end of the value chain, officials from the emergency centres are also unable to determine the exact resources required on the ground, where to distribute the resources, and the amount of resources remaining and already deployed to the target areas. In essence, asset visibility is a major factor that determines the success of the response and recovery operations following the occurrence of a flooding emergency. Response teams to flooding emergencies have not perfected the art of using the Global Positioning System (GPS) to track the movement of goods thereby enabling the effective distribution of supplies to the affected areas. In many cases, truck drivers do not have a means of direct communication with their destinations following the destruction of critical communications infrastructure at the destination point. As a result, emergency officers on the ground are unable to have basic information about the drivers of the trucks and the expected arrival times. Procurement Challenges It is evident that procurement delays are responsible for delays in the distribution of critical supplies following the initial response by the emergency team. Critical supplies entail goods required to meet the emerging needs of the victims (Cosgrave 2014). Most of these goods were either not enlisted in the initial supply or the initial supply did not have the required amount (Berger & Garyfalakis 2013). In the event of a flooding emergency, the delivery of small quantities of supplies is fast. However, the main challenge concerns the delivery of large quantities of supplies. In some cases, the delivery of large quantities can take several weeks thereby having a negative impact on the delivery of critical supplies to victims in the recovery operations. Delays in delivering large quantities of supplies emanated from the fact that emergency operations hire general logistics staff that are unaware of the specific supplies required in the operations as well as the exact sources of the supplies. In some cases, the emergency officers decide to purchase some critical supplies from the local shops in order to deal with the shortage of supplies. However, the local market is incapable of delivering the supplies in the desired quantities thereby posing another procurement challenge. The other factors that contribute towards procurement delays include the bureaucratic mind set at the centre of the emergency, improper purchase agreements with suppliers, and inadequate training on the part of the logistics staff. Poor Planning for the Distribution and Handling of Donations Following the occurrence of a flooding emergency, emergency agencies set up strategic collection points. The collection points act as sources for the supplies distributed to warehouses in the affected areas for classification and distribution to victims. In most cases, the number of volunteers and other staff at the collection points and local distribution centres are insufficient to deal with the massive influx of emergency supplies (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007). This was indicator of improper donations planning for the emergency operations at the points. Flood Emergency Management in the UK In the UK, the Environment Agency (EA) is responsible for implementing the risk-based approach to coastal risk and flood management activities. The UK Government has availed flood risk maps that enable individuals and households to determine whether they live in flood prone areas. The area offices of the Agency are responsible for conducting a more detailed hazard mapping at the local level. The existing policy recommends data sharing between the Agency and the Met Office. The Agency is responsible for maintaining 45% of the flood risk assets. According to the policy, other asset owners should be responsible for maintaining their assets. It is the responsibility of private owners, internal drainage boards, and local authorities to maintain 55% of the remaining flood assets. The policy also recommends local partnerships in the management of flood risk activities and plans (National Audit Office 2014). Flood Emergency Management in Turkey The Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs and the Directorate General for Water Management are at the heart of Turkey’s flood management system. The country implements a structural approach in the management of flood risks. At the onset of the flood risk management process is the preparation and implementation of measures aimed at preventing floods. Thereafter, the Ministry and the associated stakeholders at the provincial and local level coordinate the response and recovery operations in the event of a flooding emergency. In the response to a flooding emergency, AFAD is responsible for the evaluation of the emergency and provision of emergency needs in conjunction with other stakeholders. Before the incident, the flood management operations include flood preparedness, the management of the flood risk, and mitigation. During the incident, the stakeholders implement response operations. Post incident operations include recovery and reconstruction (Sahin 2015). Research Methodology The research presents the initial findings of a study conducted on the emergency staffs from the Environmental Agency (EA). The main objective of the study is to determine the key problems and obstacles that emergency responders and managers encounter in the flood preparedness protocol and planning. The other objectives of the study include examining policies associated with the management of the flood risk and determining the roles played by different stakeholders in flood preparedness planning. Finally, the study also intends to identify key recommendations that local administrations can implement to reduce the risks associated with the flooding disaster. The study targets the flood management systems of the UK and Turkey. The study intends to utilise a unified multidisciplinary approach involving social sciences and transportation engineering to understand the problems that emergency responders and managers encounter while implementing response and recovery operations following the occurrence of a flooding emergency. In the data collection process, the study intends to interview 22 respondents from each of the flood emergency management systems of the UK and Turkey. The interviewees include key organizational actors from the central and local governments as well as actors from volunteer groups and non-governmental aid organizations. The study targets actors that have participated in the recent flooding incidences in both countries since such actors have first-hand experience on the policies associated with the management of the flood risk and the challenges encountered in the implementation of response and recovery operations. All respondents should have played an active role in the distribution or handling of critical supplies associated with the flooding emergencies. The study will employ in-depth telephone and face-to-face interviews on the dynamics associated with the procurement process, supply chains, problems encountered and the lessons learnt. The interviews will also include other aspects such as the suggested solutions to the observed challenges and the policies implemented to deal with flooding emergencies in the UK and Turkey. In order to bolster the primary data collected from the respondents, the research team will also collect secondary data from official reports of the flooding emergencies. Prior to embarking on the data collection process, the researcher acknowledges the issue of confidentiality of the individual accounts of the incidences. Consequently, the researcher will read the consent form to the interviewees and embark on the data collection process after receiving approval from the respondents. In order to meet the confidentiality requirement, the researcher will ascertain the presentation of data without the disclosure of the interviewee’s specific affiliation and identity as well as any other personal information that may compromise the confidentiality requirement. The study will categorise interviewees from government agencies as either central or local whereas the respondents from non-profit and voluntary organizations would fall under the “volunteers” category. Reference List Berger, K & Garyfalakis, E 2013, ‘Procurement policies in disaster relief: Analysis of sourcing practices applied by humanitarian organizations in the field of disaster response.’ Burke, S 2011, ‘Response and recovery after the floods’, Special Report. Cosgrave, J 2014, ‘Responding to Flood Disasters: Learning from previous relief and recovery operations,’ ALNAP Lessons Paper, London: ALNAP/ODI. Dilmaghani, R B, Manoj, B S & Rao, R R 2006, ‘Emergency communication challenges and privacy’, In Proceedings of the 3rd International ISCRAM Conference, B. Van de Walle and M. Turoff, Eds. Newark, NJ. Gurer, I & Ozguler, H 2004, ‘Turkey: Recent Flood Disasters in Northwestern Black sea Region,’ WMO/GWP Associated Programme on Flood Management. Holguín-Veras, J, Pérez, N, Ukkusuri, S, Wachtendorf, T & Brown, B 2007, ‘Emergency logistics issues affecting the response to Katrina: a synthesis and preliminary suggestions for improvement’, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (2022), pp.76-82. Iqbal, M J, Ali, F M, Khursheed, M B & Saleem, S 2014, ‘Analysis of role of media in disaster reporting in Pakistan’, European Scientific Journal. Jonkman, S N & Dawson, R J 2012, ‘Issues and challenges in flood risk management—editorial for the special issue on flood risk management.’ Klibi, W, Ichoua, S & Martel, A 2013, ‘Prepositioning emergency supplies to support disaster relief: a stochastic programming approach,’ Faculté des sciences de l'administration, Université Laval. Moynihan, D P 2009, ‘The response to hurricane Katrina,’ International Risk Governance Council, Geneva, pp.1-11. National Audit Office (NAO) 2014, ‘Strategic flood risk management’, Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs and Environment Agency. Smith, B 2016, ‘UK Winter 2015/2016 floods: One of the century’s most extreme and severe flood episodes,’ Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Available at: http://www.ceh.ac.uk/news-and-media/news/uk-winter-20152016-floods-one-century%E2%80%99s-most-extreme-and-severe-flood-episodes Appendix The Interview Questions Welcome to the Interview! The purpose of the interview is to identify the problems and challengers that the emergency staff encounter in emergency preparedness and planning of flooding emergencies. The interview also intends to identify the flood risk management structure and policies. The survey is the individual work of the researcher in partial fulfilment of the academic programme. The interview questions consist of four sections. 1. Background Information 2. Flood Emergency Management Policies 3. Stakeholder Roles in Flood Preparedness Planning 4. Key Challenges in Flood Preparedness Planning and Protocol Answering the interview questions will take five to ten minutes. The researcher will read the enlisted choices for each question and circle a choice based on your feedback. In cases where the choices do not represent your understanding regarding the question’s response, please feel free to provide your response. The interviewer will record the response. Please note that the data collected from the interview is confidential. The study will limit the utility of the responses to statistical observations, analysis, and presentation without disclosing the identity of the respondents. The survey focuses on the challenges encountered during the response and recovery options in the event of a flooding emergency. The objective of the survey is not to criticise your ability or inability to execute your responsibilities effectively during the emergency. Background Information 1. What is your level of engagement in the emergency preparedness protocol and planning? Local level State level Federal level Volunteer 2. Are you? Manager Junior agent Other (Specify) 3. Estimate how much time you spend on training new skills on disaster preparedness and planning 0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 4. With respect to three above, please indicate how you enhance your skills on disaster preparedness and planning. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5. Do you refer to specific flooding incidences in learning about the effective ways of dealing with the emergency? Yes No 6. If yes in five above, can you give rough details of real cases of flooding emergencies recorded in the country? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7. Can you give examples of other flooding catastrophes across the globe besides the ones witnessed in country? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….... Flood Emergency Management Policies 8. Do you use flood risk models to in preparing and planning for flooding emergencies? Yes No 9. With reference to eight above, have the models been effective in predicting where flooding will occur. Yes No 10. Can you cite at least one specific case where a model predicted the occurrence of a flooding emergency correctly ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11. Has the government availed flood risk maps to all households? Yes No 12. What is the approach to the management of flood assets employed by your agency? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13. Does your agency share the responsibility of maintaining flood assets with other agencies? Yes No 14. If yes in thirteen above, what other agencies take part in the maintenance of flood assets? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 15. In the event of a flooding emergency, does your agency work on its own or in collaboration with other agencies? Independently Collaboratively Stakeholder Roles in Flood Emergency Planning 16. If your agency works collaboratively, how does it share responsibilities with other organisations in the response and recovery operations? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 17. Can you list the specific roles that your agency performs in the event of a flooding emergency? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Key Challenges in Flood Preparedness Planning and Protocol 18. In the event of a flooding emergency, does your organization encounter challenges associated with the magnitude of the requirements? Yes No 19. If yes in eighteen above, can you give a personalised account of the challenges? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 20. In the event of a flooding emergency, does your organization encounter challenges associated with the collapse of communication and electricity infrastructure? Yes No 21. If yes in twenty above, can you give a personalised account of the challenges? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 22. In the event of a flooding emergency, does your organization encounter challenges associated with inadequate training and understaffing? Yes No 23. If yes in 22 above, can you give a personalised account of the challenges? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 24. In the event of a flooding emergency, does your organization encounter challenges associated with poor integration between the central and local logistics systems? Yes No 25. If yes in 24 above, can you give a personalised account of the challenges? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 26. In the event of a flooding emergency, does your organization encounter challenges associated with inefficiencies in the prepositioning of resources? Yes No 27. If yes in 26 above, can you give a personalised account of the challenges? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 28. In the event of a flooding emergency, does your organization encounter challenges associated with poor planning in the distribution and handling of donations? Yes No 29. If yes in 28 above, can you give a personalised account of the challenges? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 30. In the event of a flooding emergency, does your organization encounter challenges associated with limited asset visibility and procurement delays? Yes No 31. If yes in 30 above, can you give a personalised account of the challenges? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Thank you for participating in the interview. Read More