This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: y agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector in the new system. Katrina exposed the significant range of unmet needs that government relief programs do not address. Traditional voluntary organizations such as the Red Ross, NOVOAD, etc., new NGOs such a Save the Children, Mercy Corps, etc. and the business sector have stepped up to meet these needs in Katrina and are positioned to do more in future disasters. How these resources are managed and distributed is the question. Should Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) be created for these sectors or should these sectors create their own resource management and distribution system to address response and recovery needs that the government cannot address? There may be other choices as well as but this is the basic question that must be addressed in order to effectively use these resources in future events and in pre-disaster programming. Hazard mitigation has been lost in the scramble after the Sept 11 attacks. In recent years, initiatives such as FEMA's Project Impact have been discontinued and funding for mitigation actions have been all but eliminated. Reducing the impacts of future disasters is a basic principle of EM and at this time there is very little interest, leadership or evidence that the current EM system is engaging in mitigation.
Issues, Principles And Attitudes Oh My! Examining Perceptions from Select Academics, Practitioners And Consultants on the Subject of Emergency Management Carol L. Cwiak, North Dakota State University In summary, leadership cuts across all four of these issues. Presidential leadership that makes EM a priority would be a start but Governors, Mayors, County Executives, voluntary agencies, NGOs and CEOs must also provide the leadership in their sectors needed to make EM a priority. 3-6 Concur ~ 3-9 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Somewhat Concur ~ Paragraph 1: No...wrong. Info is out of date. Paragraph 2: Disagree: not a one-time fix; system will always be under revision to some extent. Paragraphs 3-5: Agree. 3-10 II The single most important issue facing us is the creation of an accepted definition for emergency management as a profession. Traditionally, emergency management has been a second career for retirees from emergency services and the military, giving rise to the belief that "anyone can do it". There is no definition of minimum requirements for education and experience and job descriptions vary significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In most cases, emergency managers are not managers at all and serve as technicians. Their focus is on the tactical planning related to the emergency plan and not on the strategic issues related to community resilience and program development. I would suspect that most current emergency managers are not aware of the body of social science literature that exists on emergency management and have had no formal training in emergency management beyond FEMA courses. It is time that we recognize the difference between technicians with specialized skills and managers who have program responsibility. On the political side, a second major issue is coming to terms with the dual mindset created by the development of homeland security. We are encouraged to view homeland security as something separate and apart from emergency management, a view that encourages the development of separate organizational structures. It also creates a focus on field operational mechanisms and equipment. The current emphasis in NIMS is clearly on ICS and field operations. This conflicts directly with experience and social science research that the problem in disasters is usually not at the operational level but at the tactical (EOC) and strategic levels. It is the inability of local governments to adapt to the requirement to manage significant inflows of resources that generates problems. Until we can integrate homeland security issues back into emergency management as part of multi-hazard planning, there will continue to be confusion over lines of authority and responsibilities in catastrophic events. 3-7 Concur ~ 3-6 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Somewhat Concur ~Paragraph 1: I agree with need for strategic focus and enhanced education. Paragraph2: Do not agree. EM is one component of HS. The current context is HS and EM must adapt to it. 3-10 II I can't believe I am about to say this but actually what most practitioners are missing is a good dose of business sense. More and more we find that contrary to what the public might think about the open faucets of funds those only pay for the "toys" (all the terrorism equip, etc) and leave nothing for staff lines, staff training, public materials, etc. I think the practitioner needs to become better able to obtain funds from non-government grants, public/private partnerships, etc to fill in
Issues, Principles And Attitudes Oh My! Examining Perceptions from Select Academics, Practitioners And Consultants on the Subject of Emergency Management Carol L. Cwiak, North Dakota State Univer...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 04/14/2008 for the course EM EM-2212-26 taught by Professor Arlenemacgregor during the Spring '08 term at Mass Maritime.
- Spring '08
- The American