Comparing The Political Nature Of Emergency Management And The Future Of Disaster Policy

According to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), there are many factors that will affect the direction of emergency management in the coming years. These can be classified as global challenges, global opportunities, national challenges, national opportunities, professional challenges, and professional opportunities. Global Challenges include some issues like global climate change, increasing population and population density, increasing resource scarcities, rising income inequality, and increasing risk aversion. Global Opportunities has to do with increased scientific understanding of the hazards and societal responses, as well as revolutionary technologies. National Challenges involves increasing urbanization and hazard exposure, interdependencies in infrastructure, continued emphasis on growth, rising costs of disaster recovery, increasing population diversity, terrorist threats, low priority of emergency management, legal liability, and intergovernmental tensions. Due to these factors that will affect the direction of emergency management in the coming years, there is need for us at emergency management division to adjust operational plans to meet these challenges and especially changes emanating from constant changes expected in technology and other threats we face.

As Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma successively lashed the gulf coast starting in late August 2005, nature’s fury exposed serious weaknesses in the United States’ emergency response capabilities. Not all emergencies pose this magnitude of challenge. In the United States, the initial—and usually major—responsibility for disaster response rests with local authorities. This “bottom-up” system of emergency management has a long history and continues to make sense in most circumstances. Core Challenges for Large-Scale Disaster

In order to help the people further, FEMA absorbed other services thanks to the Executive Order 12127 in which President Carter merged many of the separate disaster-related responsibilities to FEMA such as The Federal Insurance Administration, The National Fire Prevention and Control Administration, The National Weather Service Community Preparedness Program, The Federal Preparedness Agency of the General Services Administration, The Federal Disaster Assistance Administrations activates from HUD, Civil defense responsibilities were also transferred to the new agency from the Defense Department’s Defense Civil Preparedness Agency. FEMA receiving the power and leadership to direct other operations and creating them as one was a move to give the people in need a service for whatever crisis that is affecting that said area. FEMA has a long history from being created in 1979 and since then they have grown to be stronger with more power to do things for an area such as Flint Michigan.

Every year, there are approximately 150,000 deaths and 200 million people affected by natural disasters and humanitarian crises (Thomas, 2003). Natural disasters alone, which include various occurrences, cause substantial disruptions such as the temporary displacement of more than five million people. According to the Fritz institute, statistics show that uprooted people from humanitarian crises such as civil conflict and war is greater, with an average of 13 million refugees and 20 million internally displaced people each year. As the biggest worldwide participants in the relief effort in the global community, disaster relief organizations are the forerunners of the help supplied to people affected by catastrophic events.

Emergencies and disasters happen every single day. They all vary in location and severity, but all of them have the potential to leave devastating and long term problem in the infected area if there are not proper steps in place to react quickly. For much of the United States history, there appeared to be no major go to organization in America’s greatest time of need. This paper briefly describes the history of these organizations and how FEMA came to be the USA’s primary reliance in their time of need.

This chapter provides an overview that describes the basic types of hazards threatening the United States and provides definitions for some basic terms such as hazards, emergencies, and disasters. The chapter also provides a brief history of emergency management in the federal government and a general description of the current emergency management system—including the basic functions performed by local emergency managers. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the all-hazards approach and its implications for local emergency management.

But it doesn’t look like FEMA is going anywhere. Inspector General Richard Skinner wrote a 2009 report in which he said, “Removing FEMA from DHS at this point would cause considerable upheaval, to both FEMA and the department.” (11)

Government at all levels plays an important role during disaster management. Actions and roles of each government agencies are spelled out in the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the National Response Framework (NRF). But before we go into details on the roles of governments, let me first of all explain what constitute emergency and emergency management, just to give clearer understanding some of these terms. Then I will examine the roles of governments at all level including first responder actions, mutual support, lead and support roles.

In “Wither the Emergency Manager,” Niel R. Britton comments on Drabek's “Human Responses to disaster: An Inventory of Sociological Findings.” Britton describes six positive and negative issues in emergency management as it is today. In this paper, we will discuss the implications on emergency management as a field and on the individual manager.

The burden of emergency management has grown great deal in the last few decades. We have seen an increase in natural disasters, a new threat of terrorism on our front door and an increase in manmade disasters. All of these have tested emergency management in a number of cities and towns across the nation. It is not always disasters that present problems for emergency managers. We have to look beyond our traditional view of emergency management of helping us during times of disasters and view what issues they consider may affect their emergency response. Issues that emergency management see that are moving into the critical area are issues of urbanization and hazard exposure, the rising costs of disaster recovery, and low priority of emergency management.

In the United States, people who live in poverty are already one of the most vulnerable populations and it is this population that is heavily impacted by public policy relating to natural disasters. Often, public policies relating to disaster preparedness and recovery are not discussed until after a natural disaster takes place which is too late to do any good for the people affected and who are devastated almost beyond comprehension. The role of government in disaster preparedness and recovery became a “hot button” issue especially after Hurricane Katrina when the federal and local governments seemed to protect/help those who already had resources and not those with little to no resources. According to a Gallup Poll by Jones & Carroll (2005), forty-nine percent of respondents said that FEMA was most helpful to them while thirty-one percent of respondents said that nothing was helpful to them during recovery from Hurricane Katrina. This information indicates that there is a gap in services disaster relief policies and programs that needs to be filled.

A know-do gap is described as the disconnect between knowing what to do in any given circumstance or situation, and turning that knowledge into action. The process of turning that knowledge into action is referred to as knowledge translation, and is a significant focus of this paper. Much of the know-do gap literature centers around the difficulties faced by businesses in achieving adequate knowledge translation. However, some of this information has useful applications for governments in encouraging individuals and families to prepare for emergencies. In The Knowing-Doing Gap, Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert Sutton examine some of the sociological factors of managing people and how to ensure they turn knowledge into action. These sociological factors offer insight into effective methods of managing the broader public and their level of emergency preparedness. I will discuss how one of their theories can motivate people to take action to ensure they are prepared.

Through the years, many countries have adopted the same guidelines when it comes to emergency management. The system is ever changing with the types of hazards countries have to deal with, and so is the knowledge to mitigate them. As counties adopt this universal system, it provides them with an easier way to give and receive outside aid before, throughout and after an event or disaster. Although very similar there seems to always be some differences around the world. Emergency management and disaster response in France is very similar to the United States. Because of these similarities each country

Hurricane Katrina exposed huge issues in the United States disaster preparedness and response programs. In 2005, the structure for homeland security was unable to manage catastrophic events like Hurricane Katrina. Unified management of national response

On August 29, 2009, Hurricane Katrina struck the United States Gulf Coast. It was a Category 3 Hurricane, according to the Saffir Simpson Scale. Winds gusted to up to 140 miles per hour, and the hurricane was almost 400 miles wide . The storm itself did a tremendous amount of damage, but the storm’s aftermath was cataclysmic. Many claimed that the federal government was slow to meet the needs of the hundreds of thousands of people affected by the storm. This paper will examine the four elements of disaster management – preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation – as well as an analysis on the data presented.