Disaster and Emergency Planning in the UK - Case Study Example

Disaster and Emergency Planning An emergency is any unexpected action that threatens the life security of citizens in a given country or region. These unexpected actions require urgent actions to be taken so as to prevent injury or loss of life, equipment or damage to the environment (Moore, 2006). A disaster can be defined as the man-made or natural event which causes physical damage, destruction or severe changes to the natural environment (Few and Mathies, 2006). It is an event that has significant negative effects on society and the environment. Emergencies can be prevented by careful considerations, planning and implementation of response arrangements by the government or by the cooperation and preplanning by the interagency bodies in charge of disaster management (Wilkinson, 2007). The emergency response arrangements in England are outlined in the Civil Contingencies Act 2004. The act defines emergency as “an even or situation which threatens serious damage to human welfare in a place in the UK, the environment of a place in the UK, or war or terrorism which threatens serious damage to the security of the UK”1. This Act outlines the tasks that should be performed and the manner in which co-operation should be carried out in case of an emergency (Wilkinson, 2007). There are several potential disasters that are bound to take place in the UK. Such disasters include aircraft crashes, other transport accidents, dangerous substance incidents, major crowd incidents, flooding, and other minor incidents (O’Brien, 2008). Preplanning and Interagency Cooperation The Civil Contingencies Act gives two types of responders to an emergency: Category 1 responders and Category 2 responders (Great Britain: National Audit Office, 2002). Category 1 responders are those who are directly and centrally involved in emergency planning and response. They can be individuals or organizations that are listed in the Civil Contingencies Act. Category 1 responders are subject to all activities entailed in civil protection. These responders may be agencies such as police, ambulance, fire, Health bodies, Coastguard, local authorities, fire and government agencies. The main civil protection responsibilities of Category 1 responders are: Risk assessment: this is the process which enables the responders to create a framework for disaster and emergency planning, response and recovery. Business continuity management: this involves: Emergency planning Maintenance of public awareness as well as making arrangements to inform, warn and advice members of the public about an emergency situation Provision of assistance and advice by the local authorities to voluntary organizations and the commercial sector Category 2 responders are also listed in the Civil Contingencies Act (Great Britain: National Audit Office, 2002). They are not likely to be at the core of emergency planning, however, their work in emergency situations is involves directly planning for incidents in their sectors. They are required to co-operate in their planning and response activities with other Category 1 and Category 2 responders. Public Utilities, government agencies such as the Health and Safety executive and transport organizations are some of the listed category 2 responders. The Civil Contingencies Act outlines an integrated emergency management approach that consists of six activities: Anticipation: in this phase of emergency management activities, Category 1 responders are required to be aware of threats and hazards which have the potential of happening in their locality. Assessment: this requires the responders to be ready to modify their assessment of risk and make appropriate plans. Prevention: this are the actions that help in preventing a similar crisis from causing too much damage Preparation Response Recovery Local Arrangements for Civil Protection In disaster management, it is important to have local arrangements that can be utilized to help people on the ground (Moore, 2006). Local authorities can mobilize and organize emergency services for the sole purpose of civil protection. Local response is an important foundation for the emergency response process in the UK. This local response is based on the local authorities, government agencies, non-governmental agencies and volunteer groups. Some of the key organizations that are involved in disaster management include the Red Cross and the United Nations under its organs such as UNDP, WFP, UNICEF and UNHCR. These bodies provide humanitarian assistance in terms of food, health facilities, and settlement facilities to victims of various disasters across the world. Other NGOs have also been established to help in tackling disasters as well as planning early in anticipation of a disaster (Silvers, 2007). Response Management on the Incident Ground The aim of disaster management is to know what to do when a disaster occurs and being equipped with the right tools to do it effectively (Wilson, 2000). Disaster preparedness minimizes adverse effects of disasters through effective precautionary measures that ensure a timely, appropriate and efficient organization and delivery of response and relief action. In the UK, response management on the incident ground is organized by the Incident Command System (ICS) (Silvers, 2007). The ICS creates a framework to help the Incident Commander (IC) deploy the available and necessary resources in a timely, safe and efficient manner. The IC’s role is a monitoring one. Under the IC is the Sector Commander who is in charge of the deployment of the required resources to the area of disaster. He is also responsible for tactical planning as well as the health and safety of the response team. Then there is an operations commander who supervises and co-ordinates operations in specific sectors. Next is the command team which works under the operations commander to ensure that the strategic emergency response program is going on smoothly. Strategic Governance Emergency Response Structures There are different agencies and organizations that provide response to an emergency in the UK. There are departments within the Central government which play the role of providing strategic decisions licked with emergencies (Great Britain: National Audit Office, 2002) One of these departments is the Lead Government Department (LGD) which has the responsibility of situation assessment, ministerial briefing, media handling and the provision of co-coordinated support t local responders. The other government departments combine effort with the LGD to provide support to the responders. There is also the Cabinet Office whose duty during an emergency situation is to engage with the central, regional and local partners in the preparation for emergency (O’Brien, 2008). The Cabinet office is responsible for the coordination of the central government’s response to disasters. The cabinet office maintains a state of readiness all the central emergency management facilities so that it becomes easy to respond and recover from a crisis. There are also Regional Coordinating Groups and Regional Civil Contingencies Committees which offer support to response and recovery events across a specific region. Case Study: England has experienced some worst flooding in the summer of 2007 (Roaf, 2009). To be specific, the city of Hull was amongst the worst affected with floods. The floods brought extensive and material loss, as well as human casualties. Hull city is topographically vulnerable and is guarded by a pump system unable to cope with the most severe floods (Gustin, 2010). The citizens of Hull city have ultimately felt that the government has neglected them and is doing nothing to prevent the effects of the floods. They feel let down by the government in terms of the provision of mitigation against flooding and the disaster response effort which took place in 2007. In order to tackle disaster, particularly flooding, the government has in the recent years upgraded the pumping system (Gustin, 2010). Flooding occurred mainly because the drainage system was full to capacity as were all waterways, there was no place to pump to. The emergency response of the UK government to flooding has created a mood of resentment within sections of affected citizens who felt they were overlooked in one way or another. Lack of action in the face of scientific warnings that floods were likely has cost dearly in terms of life and economic losses (Haddow, Bullock and Coppola, 2007). In England, despite the fact that the metrological department warned the government in the spring of likely widespread flooding in the summer, no additional mitigation measures were undertaken and residents of Hull city were not properly prepared for crisis that the government knew was probably on its way (Coppola, 2007). The lack of coordination between agencies and the uncertainty over responsibility for overall flood response, the problem seems more likely to be rooted in a poorly specified chain of command and network of government responsibility. The government component in disaster preparedness which includes administration, emergency management, public health, and other services agencies is useful in tackling disasters. Emergency and disaster response planning at the government level is necessary (Dasgupta, 2007). The UK government is required to perform arrange of tasks and functions when tackling disasters. The beginning of a disaster should not be the time hen the government is planning to tackle the disaster, planning should begin early in anticipation of the disaster. In the case of flooding, the government should take note of the early warnings of the metrological department. The government must know in advance what they will need and how they will be able to tackle the disaster in case it happens (Few and Mathies, 2006). Emergency management is aimed at reducing injuries, loss of life and damage to property and the environment that are taken before, during and immediately after a disaster event (Cullingworth and Nadin, 2001). The process of beginning to respond to the disaster should begin as soon as it becomes evident that a disaster is probable and lasts until the emergency is declared to be over. The process of limiting injuries, loss of life, and further damage to property and environment include several actions that should be carried out by the government (Kahn and Barondess, 2008). Response to disaster may include such immediate services as first aid, search and rescue, and shelter. In addition response may also involve the rapid improvement of critical infrastructure such as the opening of transportation routes, improving communications and electricity, and ensuring food and clean water provision to allow recovery to take place, reduce further injury and loss of life. Al these factors will speed the return to a normally functioning society (Proverbs and Soetanto, 2004). Positive and Negative of England’s Emergency Response Arrangements One of the positive aspects of the emergency management system in the UK is its broadness, that is, its focus on a wide range of disasters and emergency events. The emergency management mechanism in the country is also very well managed, organized and financed. This enables it to efficiently carry out emergency management activities effectively. One of the negative aspects of emergency management in the UK is the command control structure in the emergency management hierarchy that sometimes undermines operations. This system of command makes it hard to operate during small-scale emergency situations. The emergency management framework is also not adaptive to new risks. This makes it hard to make response and recovery strategies when a new crisis hits the country. How to Improve It is important to note that response to a disaster begins as soon as the occurrence of a disaster is recognized by officials with the authority to commence the response effort (Cullingworth and Nadin, 2001). Every disaster has specific unique indicators, and before the beginning of disasters, the government must establish means of detecting disaster indicators (Doyle, 1996). There is also need to make the emergency management structure more adaptive in order to efficiently deal with new disaster situations. In addition, the emergency management partners must work together to find an effective command system which does not undermine small-scale operations. Conclusion The emergency management system in the UK covers a wide range of hazards. The system incorporates preparedness, mitigation, recovery and response and its goal is to reduce risk from natural and man-made interruptions. There exists a regulatory framework that governs disaster and emergency management in the country. There are a number of measures that the framework has taken in order to improving the current response mechanism of the emergency management professionals. There is also a system of informing and warning the public about an imminent emergency situation. The aim of these systems is to ensure that normalcy is restored. Though there are some positive aspects to the emergency response system in UK, there are a number of negative aspects that need to be addressed. These include the command control structure in the emergency management hierarchy that sometimes is detrimental to operations. This hierarchical system is not effective in dealing with small-scale disasters and these needs to be changed in order to prevent deaths, destruction and loss of property through small scale emergency situations such as floods. The emergency management team also needs to have an adaptation mechanism that would enable it to deal with new disasters and emergency situations. References Cullingworth, J and Nadin, V (2001). Town and country planning in the UK. London, Routledge. Pp 216-217. Dasgupta, R (2007). Disaster management and rehabilitation. Manchester, Mittal Publications. Pp 45-50. Doyle, J.C. 1996. Improving Performance in Emergency Management. Disaster Prevention and Management, Vol. 5(3) pg. 32 Few, R and Mathies, F (2006). Flood Hazards and Health: responding to present and future risks. Manchester, Earthscan. Pp 145-150. Great Britain: National Audit Office (2002). “Facing the challenge: NHS emergency planning in England”. London, Stationery Office. Pp 20-30. Great Britain. Emergency Preparedness: Guidance on Part 1 of the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, its Associated Regulations and Non-Statutory Arrangements Gustin, F (2010). Disaster and recovery planning. The Fairmont Press, Inc. pp 217-220. Haddow, G, Bullock, J and Coppola, P (2007). Introduction to emergency management. London, Butterworth-Heinemann. Pp 303-309. Kahn, L.H. and Barondess, J, A. 2008. Preparing for Disaster: Response Matrices in the USA and UK. Journal of Urban Health, Vol. 85(6) pg.910 Moore, T (2006). Tolley’s Handbook of Disaster and emergency management. London, Butterworth-Heinemann. Pp 145-155. O’Brien, G. 2008. UK emergency preparedness: A holistic response? Disaster Prevention and Management, Vol 17(2) pg.232 Proverbs, D and Soetanto, R (2004). Flood damaged property: a guide to repair. London, Wiley-Blackwell. Pp 9-18. Roaf, S (2009). Adapting buildings and cities for climate change: a 21st century survival guide. London, Architectural Press. Pp 32-40. Silvers, J (2007). Risk management for meetings and events. London, Butterworth-Heinemann. Pp 53-60. Wilkinson, P. 2007. Homeland security in the UK: future preparedness for terrorist attack since 9/11. London, Taylor & Francis. Pp 116-120. Wilson, H.C. 2000. Emergency Response Preparedness: Small Group Training. Part 1 – Training and Learning Styles. Disaster Prevention and Management, Vol. 9(2) pg. 105 Read More