Basic Principles of Emergency Management Rick Bissell, PhD UMBC Department of Emergency Health Services

Core Tasks Minimize injuries, deaths, suffering and losses due to sudden destructive events. – Prevent or decrease events – Minimize destructiveness – Prepare and provide a coordinated response to events – Prepare and provide a coordinated after-event recovery program

New Addition DHS/FEMA has added “Protection” as a new core task. – Helps merge emergency management and “homeland security” approaches to protecting the public. – What all might “protection” mean?

Brief History Organized response to disasters may have started with the initiation of the Red Cross in the Crimean War (1850s). Focus on response. Civil Defense/Civil Protection: Europe and US in WWII and Cold War. Gradual development of “emergency management” in disaster-prone US 1979 formation of FEMA

Learning in the 1950s Post-WWII relief of large groups of the starving and dispossessed: management Cold War: funding for research – Sociologists: complex social sequelae, and complex response coordination issues – Economists: long-range downstream impacts of disasters – Political scientists: short-term policies fail to address bigger problems

Multi-disciplinary EM Multiple actor types: SAR, law enforcement & traffic management, first aid and EMS, hospitals (clinics), public health, housing, food, water, power, roads maintenance, transportation, communication, logistics, supplies, social services, mental health, etc.

Barriers to Management Stove piping (economic and cultural) Cross-disciplinary misunderstandings, trust issues, and the reality of the political animal Event-specific characteristics

Phase Scheme Mitigation Preparedness (Protection) Response Recovery Brings understanding that functions are time- related

Functional Approach 1.Transportation 2.Communications 3.Pub Wks & Eng 4.Firefighting 5.Emergency Mgmt 6.Mass Care 7.Logistics/Resource Sup 8.Health&Medical 9.Search & Rescue 10. Oil and Hazmats 11. Ag & Nat. Resources 12. Energy 13. Pub. Safety & Sec. 14. L-T Recovery 15. External Affairs

Legal Issues Assumption that legal responsibility lies first with locality, then county, then state, then feds. This adds an additional few layers of confusion. Feds can’t act unless requested by states. Assumption that locals “manage” the response resources even if they come from feds or other states. Conflict. Posse comitatis

Management Disconnects No central authority over all actors Presumption that lowest jurisdiction has primacy (and fewest capabilities) Actors move in and out of activities Tasks change, sometimes rapidly

Incident Command/Mgmt System Fire service base – Standardized vocabulary and command structure – Prescripted communications pathways – Presumption of authority over personnel and finances – Poorly integrates volunteers or those in other power structures. Government centric. – Applies well to some types of scenarios and phases but not others – Ignores up- and downstream complexities

EM Models US: Each jurisdiction has an EMA up and down governmental levels. EMAs own few resources but are supposed to coordinate many. Europe (not universal): Central/national gov organizes EM (CD/CP). Military is often used as a response agency, but not prep/mitigation. EM can command resources. LA: military CD. FDs may be a part of CD.

Conclusions Many tasks, phases, and disciplines make EM very challenging. Response is only part of the challenge, but receives most attention. Recovery is most expensive, but poorly coordinated. Mitigation would be the most efficient, but is often ignored or underfunded. Preparedness often leaves out non- government players. Challenging.