Emergency management around the world: on common ground
You might think that emergency management around the world would be very different, but it actually has more in common than you might realise, according to Michael R. Gregory, CEM, author of Waiting For the Next Disaster
A couple of years back I was offered a contingent contract to work on the emergency management program for a foreign country. It was to be a major upgrade to the existing system, bringing the country in line with the applicable emergency management standards. While the contractor that was to hire me did not get the contract for the project, as part of my due diligence, I did a fair amount of research into emergency management around the world, so I could avoid the tendency to see things in an American ethnocentric perspective.
What I found was both enlightening and encouraging from an overall emergency management profession perspective. I found that, in fact, my American point of view of emergency management was not that far from many other countries. The stories that are found on my blog Waiting for the Next Disaster and on other websites and listserves show evidence that this perspective continues to expand and grow. An example is the daily report Around the World Today authored by Arthur Rabjohn, CEM, R3 Manager- Europe & Africa at WorleyParsons LLC, as well as International Association of Emergency Managers (IAEM) Europa President and IAEM Chairman of the Board. Reading the report reveals similar problems and challenges from all corners of the globe, from emergency response to program management.
It is especially interesting to note that when countries around the world have taken the initiative to improve their own emergency management capabilities, they move even
closer to that perspective. The point of view, as it turns out, is not American, but global.
The twists and turns also turn out to be global. For example, the change in focus after 9/11 from emergency management as the overall coordination and facilitation body to a primarily security focus was not only evident in the United States, but in many other countries around the world. I believe that the USA is finally in a state of change which will move us back to the viewpoint that "homeland security" is a part of emergency management, not the other way around. I see the same thing happening in many other countries, especially those with major natural disaster considerations.
The "all hazards"approach is the way to go.An example of the emergence of the all-hazards approach is in Indonesia. As reported in the Jakarta Post, the capital city of the province of Bali has created the Denpasar Disaster Management Agency. The Agency "has already tackled six disasters since it was established in December 2008, ranging from contagious diseases to floods and fires." The article continues "The agency, the only one of its kind in the province, is responsible for all pre-disaster, disaster and post-disaster activities. The agency coordinates during pre-disaster and post-disaster periods while assuming full command of city resources when a disaster strikes."
An example of the similar global perspective is the United Kingdom. The "Management
and Co-ordination of Local Operations" system uses the Bronze/Operational (immediate "hands-on"), Silver/Tactical (ensure that the actions taken by bronze are coordinated), and Gold/Strategic (multi-agency management) levels. While differing in terminology, the basic principles are the same as the US ICS system. The UK Resilience website www.ukresilience.gov.uk would be familiar territory to any American emergency manager.
The terminology differences are important to consider. After all, one of the principles of
NIMS/ICS is consistent, standard terminology. However, it is enough of a challenge to
come up with one standard in the US. While we are moving toward that goal, there are
still issues of how NFPA 1600, ISO and EMAP interface, what is public and what is
private, certification vs. accreditation, etc. It would be a monumental challenge to try to
come up with an international standard.
Yet, that is in fact what many are working on around the globe, and should be at least a
target on our radar. Damon P. Coppola, MEM, author of Introduction to International Disaster Management, argues in his paper The Importance of International Disaster
Management Studies in the Field of Emergency Management that "there are a great
number of highly successful emergency management systems found in the many
industrialized nations of the world, and a handful in the developing world, that we stand
to learn from considerably. Their lessons become our lessons only when we pay
attention." He cites The Netherlands, Japan, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, and India as examples.
We need to continue to strive to improve emergency management programs around the world, and to continue to promote emergency management as a profession. We also need to continue to talk to each other around the world. The more we talk, the more we find how much we have in common, the more we can help each other and the profession, and ultimately, the more we can help the people that we are entrusted to protect.
Michael R. Gregory, CEM can be reached at his blog waiting-for-the-next-disaster.blogspot.com/ and presenting Situation Assessment: The Elusive Common Operating Picture at CPM 2009 West.
Arthur Rabjohn, CEM can be reached at arthur.rabjohn@worleyparsons.com
Damon P. Coppola, MEM, can be reached at dcoppola@gwu.edu
