Traditional Phases of Disaster Management 1. Mitigation (Pre-event)
2. Preparedness
4. Recovery
3. Response (Post-event)
Mitigation • Mitigation: a sustained action to reduce or eliminate risk to people & property from hazards & their effects • Mitigation activities address either or both components of risk • Probability (likelihood) • Consequence
• Mitigating either one reduces the threat
1
Mitigation: Natural vs. Man-made Disasters • Natural Disasters • Ability to limit probability of a hazard largely based on the type of disaster • Tornado or hurricane vs. flood or wildfire
• Mitigation efforts tend to focus on consequence management
• Man-made Disasters • Much greater range of opportunities to minimize both probability & consequence
Preparedness • Preparedness: a state of readiness to respond to a disaster, crisis, or any other type of emergency situation • Preparedness activities can be categorized as the human component of hazard management • Most common: • Training • Public Education
• They do little to prevent a disaster, but are very effective at ensuring that people know what to do once one has happened
National Response Plan (NRP) • Provided the national framework for disaster management • Replaced the Federal Response Plan in DEC 2004 • Introduced new terminology to the disaster management sequence, but did not necessarily define them
• NRP replaced by the National Response Framework (NRF) in 2008
2
Phases of Disaster Management – According to the NRP 1. Prevention (Pre-event)
2. Preparedness
3. Response
5. Mitigation
4. Recovery (Post-event)
NRP - Significance of Changes • Moving Mitigation to the end of the cycle implies that it is a post-event activity • Alters an already widely understood & accepted concept • May result in unnecessary confusion during a crisis
Significance of Changes (cont.) • Introduces the new term & concept, prevention • Defined as “actions taken to avoid an incident or to intervene to stop an incident from occurring, which involves actions taken to protect lives & property.”
• Based on the definition, is the NRP focused more on terrorism vice the traditional all-hazards approach?
3
NRF vs. NRP: Significance of Changes 1) Document title more accurately reflects its true nature • Provides guidelines, rules of engagement & an organizational framework for everyone involved in federal disaster response, not just specific steps like those found in Emergency Operations Plans (EOPs)
NRF vs. NRP: Significance of Changes (cont.) 2) NRF does attempt to redefine the phases of emergency management •
Makes no direct reference to the emergency management cycle Refers to terms only
• • •
•
Prevention Mitigation
More in line with an all-hazards approach than the NRP terrorism-focused approach
NRF vs. NRP: Significance of Changes (cont.) 3) Adjustments made to general terms that better accommodate the involvement & partnership of nonfederal participants •
Emergency support functions (ESFs) better defined
4
NRF vs. NRP: Significance of Changes (cont.) 4) Commits the federal govt. to the development of specific emergency response plans based on the 15 incident scenarios identified by the Homeland Security Council •
This last change is the most controversial •
•
Some feel that flexibility is sacrificed & problems may arise when real situations do not fit the expected pattern Also seen by some as departing from the allhazards approach
FEMA Mitigation Planning Process 1. Identify & organize resources 2. Conduct a risk or threat assessment & estimate losses 3 Identify 3. Id tif mitigation iti ti measures that th t will: ill • •
Reduce the effects of the hazards &; Create a strategy to deal with the mitigation measures in priority order
4. Implement the measures, evaluate the results, & keep the plan up-to-date
Risk • Three questions to ask when considering risk: 1) What can happen? 2) How likely is it? (probability) 3) What are the consequences?
• Risk = the probability of occurrence x the consequences
5
Risk (cont.) • Probability most difficult to determine • Often based more on expert judgment than concrete evidence • Can use historical data to calculate probability b bilit
Risk (cont.) • Example of probability estimates • Certain: >99% chance of occurring in a given year (One or more occurrence a year) • Likely: 50%-99% chance of occurring in a given yyear ((One occurrence every y 1 to 2 yyears)) • Possible: 5%-49% chance of occurring in a given year (One occurrence every 2 to 20 years) • Unlikely: 2-5% chance of occurring in a given year (One occurrence every 20 to 50 years) • Rare: 1%-2% chance of occurring in a given year (One occurrence every 50 to 100 years) • Extremely Rare:
