75,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Englisch
The first book devoted to a critically important aspect of disaster planning, management, and mitigation
Technology and Emergency Management, Second Edition describes best practices for technology use in emergency planning, response, recovery, and mitigation. It also describes the key elements that must be in place for technology to enhance the emergency management process. The tools, resources, and strategies discussed have been applied by organizations worldwide tasked with planning for and managing every variety of natural and man-made hazard and disaster. Illustrative case studies based on their experiences appear throughout the book.
This new addition of the critically acclaimed guide has been fully updated and expanded to reflect significant developments occurring in the field over the past decade. It features in-depth coverage of major advances in GIS technologies, including the development of mapping tools and high-resolution remote sensing imaging. Also covered is the increase in computer processing power and mobility and enhanced analytical capabilities for assessing the present conditions of natural systems and extrapolating from them to create accurate models of potential crisis conditions. This second edition also features a new section on cybersecurity and a new chapter on social media and disaster preparedness, response, and recovery has been added.
- Explores the role of technology in emergency planning, response, recovery, and mitigation efforts
- Explores applications of the Internet, telecommunications, and networks to emergency management, as well as geospatial technologies and their applications
- Reviews the elements of hazard models and the relative strengths and weaknesses of modeling programs
- Describes techniques for developing hazard prediction models using direct and remote sensing data
- Includes test questions for each chapter, and a solutions manual and PowerPoint slides are available on a companion website
Technology and Emergency Management, Second Edition is a valuable working resource for practicing emergency managers and an excellent supplementary text for undergraduate and graduate students in emergency management and disaster management programs, urban and regional planning, and related fields.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 510
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2017
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
COVER
TITLE PAGE
CONCEPT
Book Organization
Technical Information
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
ABOUT THE COMPANION WEBSITE
1 THE NEED FOR TECHNOLOGY IN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Technology and Disaster Management
1.2 Technology as a Management Tool
1.3 Using Technologies
1.4 Completing a Needs Assessment
SUMMARY
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
2 COMPUTER NETWORKS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
INTRODUCTION
2.1 What Is a Network?
2.2 Types of Networks
2.3 The Internet
2.4 Communication Technologies
2.5 The Internet and Emergency Management
2.6 IoT and Emergency Management
SUMMARY
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
3 CYBER SECURITY
INTRODUCTION
3.1 Sources of Attacks
3.2 Attack Vectors
3.3 Overview of Malware
3.4 Securing Cyber Systems
3.5 Securing Data
3.6 Cyber Security Attack Recovery
SUMMARY
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
4 SOCIAL MEDIA AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
INTRODUCTION
4.1 Situational Awareness, Emergency Communications, and the Public Realm
4.2 What Is Social Media?
4.3 Types of Social Media Used in Disasters
4.4 Mass Alert Systems
4.5 Mass Media and Social Media Use in Virginia Tech Shooting Response
4.6 What Is a Disaster?
4.7 Usage Patterns of Social Media Over Time
4.8 Social Media’s Growth and the Role of Traditional Sources
4.9 Use of Social Media for Preparedness and Planning
4.10 Use of Social Media Before and During Mass Emergencies
4.11 Issues Arising from the Use of Social Media by Emergency Managers During Events
4.12 Using Social Media to Establish Information on Damages and Recovery
4.13 The Advantages and Fallbacks of Geotargeting
4.14 Social Media Companies’ Contribution to Emergency Response
4.15 Concerns About and Limitations of Social Media Usage in Disasters
4.16 The Future of Social Media in Disasters
4.17 Looking Forward
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
5 GEOSPATIAL TECHNOLOGIES AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
INTRODUCTION
5.1 Geospatial Technologies and Emergency Management
5.2 GT Across the Human–Hazard Interface
5.3 Our Resources
5.4 Understanding Our Hazards
5.5 Dissemination and Hazard Communication
5.6 Summary
5.7 Conclusions
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
6 DIRECT AND REMOTE SENSING SYSTEMS
INTRODUCTION
6.1 Data Collection
6.2 Weather Stations
6.3 Water Data Sensors
6.4 Air Sensors
6.5 Evaluating the Technology
6.6 Remote Sensing
6.7 Using and Assessing Data
6.8 Trends in Remote and Direct Sensing Technology
SUMMARY
KEY TERMS
ONLINE RESOURCES
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
7 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS
INTRODUCTION
7.1 Emergency Management Information Systems and Networks
7.2 Evaluating Information Systems
7.3 Federal, State, and Local Information Systems
7.4 Using Data
7.5 Evaluating Databases
7.6 Using Emergency Management Databases
7.7 Management Roles in Decision Support Systems
7.8 Obtaining Data from Public Federal Data Sources
7.9 The Future of Decision Support Systems: The Intelligent Community
SUMMARY
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
8 WARNING SYSTEMS
INTRODUCTION
8.1 Warning Systems
8.2 Detection and Management
8.3 Issuing Warnings
8.4 Types of Warning Systems
8.5 Response
SUMMARY
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
9 HAZARDS ANALYSIS AND MODELING
INTRODUCTION
9.1 Modeling and Emergency Management
9.2 Using a Hurricane Model (SLOSH)
9.3 Using the ALOHA Chemical Dispersion Model
9.4 Hazards United States—Multi Hazard Model
9.5 Evacuation Modeling
9.6 Centralized Hazard Modeling Initiatives
9.7 Evaluating Hazard Models
SUMMARY
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
10 OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS AND TECHNOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
10.1 Barriers in Implementing Technology in Emergency Management
10.2 The Role of the Emergency Manager in Using Technology
10.3 Using Technology to Overcome Organizational Boundaries
10.4 Pitfalls of Technology
10.5 Managing the Technology
SUMMARY
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
11 TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
11.1 Using Technology for Information Exchange
11.2 Distance Learning
11.3 Managing the Technology
SUMMARY
KEY TERMS
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
References
FIGURE CREDITS
INDEX
END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
List of Tables
Chapter 05
Table 5‐1 Example of Resources for Hazard Zonation and Past Events
Table 5‐2 Examples of Spatial Data on Hazard Zonation Perception
Table 5‐3 Examples of Hazard Data in Google Earth Formats
Chapter 06
Table 6‐1 A Summary of Current Remote Sensing Programs that Collect Optical, Radar, and Lidar Imagery, Along with Emergency Management Applications
Chapter 07
Table 7‐1 EPA Public Water System (SDWIS) Report for Chattanooga, TN
List of Illustrations
Chapter 01
Figure 1‐1 The role of technology in the emergency management process.
Figure 1‐2 Digital images used in post Katrina needs assessment September 2005.
Chapter 02
Figure 2‐1 Network diagram.
Figure 2‐2 WAN connecting two LANs.
Figure 2‐3 TCP/IP encapsulation/decapsulation.
Figure 2‐4 Internet backbone.
Figure 2‐5 Dial‐up.
Figure 2‐6 Digital Subscriber Line.
Figure 2‐7 Cable Internet access.
Figure 2‐8 WiMax network.
Figure 2‐9 Cellular network architecture.
Figure 2‐10 ZigBee wireless sensor network.
Chapter 04
Figure 4‐1
Wikimap
wildfires in San Diego County, CA, 2007.
Figure 4‐2 Crisis response as a social system: high‐level schematic of conventional and new ICT‐enabled information pathways.
Chapter 05
Figure 5‐1 Google Earth overlay of Tuscaloosa census blocks with posttornado aerial imagery, 2011.
Figure 5‐2 A comparison of administrative scales with flooding in Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans, 2005.
Figure 5‐3 Census data on child population change by parish for the impacted region (2000–2010). http://www.nola.com/katrina/index.ssf/2011/02/child_population_in_new_orlean.html.
Figure 5‐4 Example of spatial video to collect and map the built environment context.
Figure 5‐5 Example of spatial video geonarrative in a postdisaster environment (Curtis et al., 2015).
Figure 5‐6 An example of overlay with historical wildfire burn perimeters and current residential development.
Figure 5‐7 Google Earth aerial imagery pre‐ and post‐Katrina for a section of one New Orleans neighborhood. (a) Imagery from August 16, 2005, and (b) imagery from March 22, 2010.
Chapter 06
Figure 6‐1 A Flood Risk map generated using the WV Flood Tool (http://www.mapwv.gov/flood/map) depicts flood risk in terms of economic loss. The basemap is shaded relief terrain generated from a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) obtained using remote sensing technology.
Figure 6‐2 A weather station manufactured by Measurement Engineering Australia©. Note: These systems use solar energy to operate sensors that directly record atmospheric conditions through a data logger. Recorded data can be transmitted through the Internet.
Figure 6‐3 The Geospatial Multi‐agency Coordination (GeoMAC) online Web application. Note: GeoMAC can be used to view historic fire perimeters in relation to Wildland–Urban Interface (WUI) boundaries throughout the United States. The map depicted in Figure 6‐3 was generated for southeastern Idaho and reveals several fires that occurred in close proximity to or within WUI boundaries.
Figure 6‐4 Comparison of wavelength, frequency, and energy for the electromagnetic spectrum.
Figure 6‐5 A burn severity map of the 2013 Table Rock fire in the Linville Gorge Wilderness Area near Boone, NC. Note: It was generated using a combination of multispectral Landsat images acquired prefire and postfire. The mapping reveals how severely soil and vegetation have been burned.
Figure 6‐6 Imagery obtained from Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper preflood (left) and postflood (right) show areas inundated by heavy rains near St. Louis Missouri.
Figure 6‐7 A MODIS image acquired from the NASA Terra satellite on January 12, 2017, depicts dust storms along the West coast of Africa.
Figure 6‐8 Drought in Southern Africa was detected by comparing a MODIS image acquired by Terra in December 2015 to December averages from 2000 to 2015. Locations are identified where vegetation greenness is less than normal.
Figure 6‐9 A very high spatial resolution image. Note: It was captured by the commercial satellite Worldview‐2, which provides a look at the Zaatari Refugee Camp in Jordan on January 13, 2014. Monitoring the growth of Syrian refugee camps in neighboring countries has helped organize effective aid distributions.
Figure 6‐10 A hillshade image created from a 50 cm pixel resolution. DigitalGlobe sample image acquired over Washington, DC.
Figure 6‐11 A NOAA GOES‐East satellite image of severe weather acquired on April 28, 2014.
Figure 6‐12 Imagery acquired over the Great Salt Lake by Landsat 4 Multispectral Scanner (MSS) and Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM) capture long‐term changes associated with causeway construction (a), causeway replacement (b), and water pumping and lake level decline (c).
Chapter 07
Figure 7‐1 GIS road files shown on a high‐resolution image of Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Chapter 08
Figure 8‐1 Rain and stream gaging diagram.
Figure 8‐2 The Fort Collins ALERT system.
Figure 8‐3 The Emergency Alert System (EAS) was not activated during the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Figure 8‐4 Warnings are a critical first step in the evacuation of areas around nuclear power plants.
Chapter 09
Figure 9‐1 US Geologic Survey WaterWatch Stream Flow Map of monthly stream flow compared to historical stream flow for the month of the year (United States) http://waterwatch.usgs.gov/index.php?id=mv01d. The Web site allows the user to select a location on the map and produce a list of all stations in the state or stations near the point selected.
Figure 9‐2 HURREVAC Decision Support Tool. See http://b29b4ca90ed6e8cc2b38‐bda0e469385589e4e71d5c43df4e22e8.r24.cf1.rackcdn.com/HURREVAC_Users_Manual_2016.pdf for more details on HURREVAC.
Figure 9‐3 SLOSH storm surge basins. See http://slosh.nws.noaa.gov/slosh/ for more information on SLOSH.
Figure 9‐4 Sample output of the SLOSH model for Hurricane Ike.
Figure 9‐5 ALOHA footprint for a chlorine tank release.
Figure 9‐6 East Baton Rouge Parish with HAZUS‐MH flood risk zones.
Figure 9‐7 Significant wildland fire potential for October 2016 (http://www.predictiveservices.nifc.gov/outlooks/month1_outlook.png).
Chapter 11
Figure 11‐1 Drought monitoring map of the United States.
Figure 11‐2 Cumulative wind history from Hurricane Matthew (October 19, 2016).
Figure 11‐3 Hurricane storm surge model output (October 4, 2016). Note: ADCIRC projections for storm surge locations and impact from Hurricane Matthew, as seen from the CERA Web site on October 4, 2016.
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
iii
iv
xiii
xiv
xv
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
Technology and Emergency Management
Second Edition
John C. Pine, Ed.D.
Research ProfessorDepartment of Geography and PlanningAppalachian State University, Boone, NC, USA
This edition first published 2018© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
First Edition published: 2007
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
The right of John C. Pine to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with law.
Registered OfficeJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
Editorial Office111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print‐on‐demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of WarrantyIn view of ongoing research, equipment modifications, changes in governmental regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to the use of experimental reagents, equipment, and devices, the reader is urged to review and evaluate the information provided in the package insert or instructions for each chemical, piece of equipment, reagent, or device for, among other things, any changes in the instructions or indication of usage and for added warnings and precautions. While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data
Names: Pine, John C., 1946– author.Title: Technology and emergency management / John C. Pine, Dr. John C. Pine, Professor, Department of Geography and Planning, Appalachian State University in Boone, North Carolina.Other titles: Technology in emergency management.Description: Second Edition. | Hoboken : Wiley, 2018. | Revised edition of the author’s Technology in emergency management, c2007. | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Identifiers: LCCN 2017018770 (print) | LCCN 2017034826 (ebook) |ISBN 9781119234227 (pdf) | ISBN 9781119235521 (epub) | ISBN 9781119234081 (paperback)Subjects: LCSH: Emergency management–Technological innovations. | Emergency management–Data processing. | Information storage and retrieval systems–Emergency management. | Emergency communication systems.Classification: LCC HV551.2 (ebook) | LCC HV551.2 .P56 2017 (print) | DDC 363.34028/4–dc23LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017018770
Cover Design: WileyCover Image: © BlackJack3D/Gettyimages
CONCEPT
The Emergency Management Institute within the Federal Emergency Management Agency initiated the development of this publication in support of disaster science and emergency management academic programs in higher education institutions. Individuals working in disaster and emergency agencies wanted a better understanding of technology tools and their application to emergency management. Universities and colleges had developed a broad curriculum that was intended to prepare individuals for a career in emergency management in public, private, and nonprofit organizations. The scope of this book was developed in collaboration with representatives from disaster planning, response and recovery agencies, and the staff of the Emergency Management Institute.
The first edition of Technology in Emergency Management in 2007 provided an introduction to a rapidly developing set of resources for disaster preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery. Much has changed since that time and this second edition provides a solid base for the many technologies that have become a critical part of emergency management within many organizations. This second edition not only clarifies the current state of the use of technology in emergency management but also provides a foundation for understanding the many emerging technologies that will be used by agencies in the future.
Book Organization
The book is organized to introduce the role of technology in emergency management and provide a context for addressing specific technologies and their use by agencies in emergency preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery. The tools and resources examined in this book have been applied throughout the world as public, private, and nonprofit organizations attempt to deal with ever changing hazards and disaster impacts. It is hoped that by clarifying what technologies are being applied to the threats and impacts of disasters we can ensure that our citizens, businesses, and infrastructure are protected.
Technical Information
Technology and Emergency Management includes 11 chapters and is approximately 300 pages in length. The book includes many photographs and graphics and data tables. Each of the chapters clarifies the learning outcomes and intended outcomes along with goals and outcomes for the reader. Case studies are used throughout each chapter to demonstrate how various technologies were used in dealing with hazards and disasters. Terms are clearly defined and questions are posed throughout the book to focus on the application of technology in various situations. Today, there has been extensive research on the nature and use of technologies in disasters. An extensive reference list is included with each chapter to clarify the source for many of the concepts introduced in the text and to support further reading.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
John C. Pine was Director of the Research Institute for Environment, Energy & Economics (RIEEE) and is Research Professor, Department of Geography and Planning, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC. He joined the Appalachian faculty in 2009 after serving 30 years at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge where he directed a graduate and undergraduate Disaster Science and Management Program. He also served as a Professor in the Department of Geography and Anthropology and the Department of Environmental Sciences conducting research on disasters and emergency management. His research and publications focus on emergency preparedness and operations, risk assessment, and disaster recovery. He has worked with many federal, state, and local entities to identify tools and strategies to enhance community preparedness and ensure the resilience of communities impacted by disasters. His recent publications include Hazards Analysis: Reducing the Impact of Disasters from Taylor Francis Publishers in 2014, which utilizes many of the technologies addressed in this text. He serves on the board of directors for the New River Conservancy, a multistate conservation agency. His publications have been included in The Journal of Disaster Studies, Policy and Management, Disasters, Journal of Race and Society, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, Oceanography, Journal of Emergency Management, Natural Disaster Review, Journal of Environmental Health, and the Journal of Hazardous Materials. He received his Doctorate in Higher Education Administration and Public Administration from the University of Georgia, Athens, in 1979.
Office Address: 124 North Forrest Ave. Lookout Mountain, TN 37350, USAE‐Mail: [email protected], Phone: (828) 262–2764 (Office)Web Site: http://www.rieee.appstate.edu
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
Dr. Andrew CurtisDepartment of Geography, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA
Dr. Jacqueline W. CurtisDepartment of Geography, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA
Josh KastrinskyCoastal Resilience Center of Excellence, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Dr. John J. KieferDepartment of Political Science, University of New Orleans, New Orleans, LA, USA
Dr. Burke McDadeDepartment of Geography and Planning, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC, USA
Dr. Jessica MitchellDepartment of Geography and Planning, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC, USA
Dr. Cindy NorrisDepartment of Computer Science, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC, USA
Dr. John J. Walsh Jr.Program in Disaster Research and Training, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
ABOUT THE COMPANION WEBSITE
This book is accompanied by Instructor and Student companion websites:
www.wiley.com/go/pine/tech&emergmgmt_2e
The Instructor website contains:
MCQ's
Self checks,
Review questions,
Applying This Chapter
You try it
Solutions
The student website contains:
MCQ's
Self checks,
Review questions,
Applying This Chapter
You try it
1THE NEED FOR TECHNOLOGY IN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Starting Point
Go to www.wiley.com/go/pine/tech&emergmgmt_2e to assess your knowledge of using technology.
Assess your knowledge of emergency management and technology. (Determine where you need to concentrate your effort.)
What You’ll Learn in This Chapter
The definitions of focusing events and windows of opportunity
The types of technology as applied to the emergency management process
How technology can assist in emergency preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery
After Studying This Chapter, You’ll Be Able To
Examine what technology is used in emergency management.
Examine what technology tools have been applied during disasters.
How focusing events can be used to gain community support for greater emergency management resources.
Goals and Outcomes
To be able to select technology that improves disaster preparedness, response, mitigation, and recovery
To perform a comprehensive technology needs assessment for emergency management
To understand the value of encouraging a community to commit greater resources toward emergency management by using focusing events and the needs assessment
INTRODUCTION
We live in a highly connected global community where we have the potential to observe the nature and extent of disasters firsthand. We can receive and transmit information within seconds and can communicate from anywhere, at any time, and anyplace. Technology allows those engaged in emergency management to utilize resources from local, regional, and national organizations reflecting public, private, and nonprofit entities (Hodgkinson and Stewart, 1991). Technology may be used by those involved in emergency management in decision making, communication, hazard situational awareness, operational functioning, and public safety. Technologies have been developing at a fast pace and have had a dramatic impact on emergency management in communities, at regional and national levels.
We can only imagine the new ways that technology will evolve and be used in the future. Technology has allowed us to use a broader range of information resources and enhance resource acquisition and allocation. We, thus, have been able to make use of new tools and technologies and become more efficient and allow the public, public safety, and healthcare personnel to anticipate ad meet community needs in disasters (Cutter et al., 2015). Technology has enabled us to better analyze complex issues, enhance our decision making, and communicate in times of crisis. The key is to recognize that technology is critical in all stages of disaster management and supporting rapid scientific assessment of usable knowledge to decision makers (Alcántara‐Ayala et al., 2015).
1.1 Technology and Disaster Management
Emergencies and disasters are extreme events that cause significant disruption. Effective response efforts in a disaster require timely information and deliberate decision making. Effective action requires coordinated application of resources, facilities, and efforts beyond those regularly available to handle routine problems. Disasters arise from both natural and human‐caused events. Fortunately, we now have more technology tools and systems available for our use than ever before so that communities, organizations, and individuals manage effectively in a disaster. Technology provides a means of applying scientific concepts, methods, and principles to achieve desired outcomes (NRENaissance Committee, 1994). Technology supports the emergency management process including the following:
Organizational and personal communication;
Timely observations of the nature and extent of events;
Enhancement in capabilities to estimate and model potential outcomes of disaster events;
Recording the changing nature of response and recovery events;
Communicating with multiple organizations and individuals simultaneously;
Analyzing events to understand how disasters evolve and change over time;
Connecting individuals and organizations so as to enhance communication;
Extending how public and private organizations may access information as disaster evolve;
Using mapping and geo‐positioning systems (GPSs) to support situational awareness; and
Taking advantage of hazard modeling technology to enhance our understanding of both the threats associated with hazards and their potential impacts.
Technology enables individuals and organizations to contribute to the emergency management process in new ways and with productive impacts (Kara‐Zaitri, 1996). For example, we can identify the location of those in need for timely and effective emergency response. We can communicate simultaneously with multiple partners to enhance our capacity to cope with evolving complex situations. We have the tools not only to communicate with an unlimited audience but also to engage this audience in community and organizational decision making. Technologies allow both individuals and organizations to communicate and share information and make informed decisions as a disaster unfolds (Fischer, 1998). We can incorporate new information with existing data and visualize our analysis results in different and useful forms (Steering Committee, 1996). Technologies thus allow us to expand our individual and organizational capacities to more effectively prepare, mitigate, respond, and recover from disasters. Science‐driven applications of technology allow disaster risk management to help communities become more resilient and reduce the human and economic impacts of disasters (Alcántara‐Ayala et al., 2015).
1.1.1 Focus on Current and Emerging Technology
Alcántara‐Ayala et al. (2015) suggest that there is a lack of a comprehensive assessment of disasters limiting our understanding of disaster risk research, practice, and experience. This text is intended to examine the current state of technology and emergency management and clarify how technology may be used to support those engaged in all phases of disaster management.
Technologies are being used in innovative ways and are impacting our capacity to manage effectively in times of crisis (Cutter et al., 2015; Hodgkinson and Stewart, 1991). Becoming more aware of the application of technology in emergency management allows individual citizens and organizations to cope in times of crisis and minimize or avoid the adverse effects of disasters.
Research on the weather–climate nexus has also advanced our understanding of the global oceanic forcing of drought and flood conditions across continents. Public health surveillance systems and disease outbreak detection have been enhanced with the use of the Internet and social media such as Twitter, providing real or near‐real time health surveillance (Brownstein et al., 2009; Chunara et al., 2013).
Despite our great success in understanding of the dynamics and processes behind hazards, there are still many challenges related to hazards science. Specifically, we need to reduce uncertainties in forecasting of hazard events, local resolution of models, and prediction of lead time, among others (Alcántara‐Ayala et al., 2015). Technology provides us with many tools and resources to allow us to reduce uncertainties.
In this chapter, we will gain insights on how technology contributes to the emergency management process and how to prioritize what technology tools are needed, and understand what resources are required for the effective use of technology.
1.2 Technology as a Management Tool
We use technology to manage our personal time and our organization. We also use technology to manage disasters and hazards. Hazards are events or conditions that have the potential to create loss. Technology can be used to prepare for, respond to, recover from, and mitigate future disasters. We prepare for disasters before they happen, often without definite knowledge that they will happen. We respond to disasters when they happen and recover from disasters after they happen. During and after recovery and preparation, we try to mitigate disasters. To mitigate a disaster means that we try to lessen the effects of the disaster. For example, to mitigate a levee collapse, the Army Corps of Engineers would try to strengthen it with sandbags or use barges to prevent the water from flooding an area. To mitigate the effects of a hurricane, many home and business owners board up their property to prevent damage. Throughout the entire emergency management cycle, technology is a key contributor to building resilient communities. Technology helps us in many ways. We can be better prepared by recording weather data in remote locations. We can do this by using satellites. We can also process information in new ways. We can directly observe disaster events. In an emergency response, computer applications allow us to access detailed information, such as data about hazardous chemicals, in more assessable ways (Pine, 2014). In mitigation and recovery, we use technology to model disasters and devise an emergency response plan. Technology is especially important in conducting mitigation activities. Mitigation activities include boarding up homes before a hurricane, evacuating an area, and other actions that reduce losses.
Alcántara‐Ayala et al. (2015) stress that scientific assessments of disaster risks can contribute to our enhancement of knowledge on risk at scales ranging from local to global. Bessis et al. (2011) stress that during an emergency response information management becomes crucial.
Technology gives us the ability to receive and send information quickly. Information is critical for all involved in the emergency management process. Weather, chemical, security, and transportation information are just a few types of essential data. Quick access to information is important not only to emergency managers, but also to citizens. The quicker emergency managers can give orders to evacuate or to shelter in‐place, the more lives are saved. Technology ranges from individual sensors that record information to internal and external organization networks, including the Internet, to the Emergency Broadcast System. Communication devices are ever‐changing, from vehicle‐mounted applications to remote satellite systems and real‐time video teleconferencing. The frequency of natural disasters has steadily increased from 405 per year in 1980 to 650 in the 1990s, 780 in 2000–2009, and 800 events in 2010s (Wirtz et al., 2014).
1.2.1 Response to Complex Disaster Events
Kapucu and Garayev (2013) note that the complex nature and great impacts of disasters proves to be a major factor for a single organization to tackle on their own and reveals the need for a collaborative approach to management. Organizations find themselves involved in a networked governance that involves shared goals and responsibilities as well as the need for a coordinated and unified action to produce desired community results. Networked governance is a combination of interorganizational interactions spread across a timeline and greatly influenced by the structure of the network, the organizational relationships, and contextual factors (Birkland, 1997; NII 2000 Steering Committee, 1996).
Networks are dynamic structures comprising multiple organizations often located in geographically different sites. A network is a set of two or more devices, typically called nodes, which are connected in some way to allow communication between them (see Chapter 2). They are multisite groups of organizations with different informal preferences, norms, and values or mandated by legal or regulatory arrangements coming together for a common goal and relying mainly on common interfaces and communication (Isett et al., 2011). Networks are generally characterized by a flexible administrative structure but impacted by issues pertaining to leadership, trust, accountability, and performance measurement (Ward and Wamsley, 2007).
Kapucu and Garayev (2013) found that information communication technology, network relationships, and network complexity all contribute to the overall effectiveness of collaborative networks and impact the sustainability of the network. They note that “emergency management networks are effective to the extent that agency relationships are enhanced for more sustainable relationships” (p. 325).
Further, the exposure of people, assets, and infrastructure in hazard‐prone areas affects vulnerability (UNISDR, 2013). Changing population patterns and human‐induced environmental changes increase the adverse impacts of disasters (Pelling and Blackburn, 2013) so as to create the frequency of billion dollar events.
1.2.2 Ease of Use of Technology
Technology needs to be easy to use for anyone in the emergency management process. It should not be viewed as an “expert system” only available to a select few. Ongoing training for officials will be critical in the effective use of technology in crisis situations.
Singh et al. (2009) stress the importance of information sharing in response to catastrophic events. Given the interdependence of organizations in disaster response, organizations can benefit from sharing information quickly in a secure environment. They stress the need for information quality including timeliness, security, accessibility, completeness, accuracy, coherence, relevance, validity, and format.
We have seen improvements in hazard modeling and geo‐referenced tools and spatial information (Birkland, 2014; Emrich and Cutter, 2011). We thus have great tools for evidence‐based hazards analysis to base our emergency preparedness programs. Disaster risk data associated with vulnerability and exposure are a key research and policy issue. Data reflecting our assets and human capital is not widely available and must be developed beyond baseline effort to allow officials to make sound decisions (Gall et al., 2009; Kron et al., 2012; Wirtz et al., 2014).
Information technology is widely used extensively and effectively throughout the United States as explained by Reddick (2011). This national study of emergency managers identified a wide range of technologies used in emergency preparedness and response. All the technologies were viewed as very helpful but the lack of financial resources and support from public officials was a significantly limiting factor on state and local capabilities. Organizational performance was enhanced where public agencies utilized e‐government technology and had robust information networks and capable support staff.
1.3 Using Technologies
Also, not every new technology will be applicable for every hazard nor will every new technology be applicable to every emergency management organization. For example, you may live in California and appreciate earthquake risks and be concerned about preparing for earthquakes. Another emergency manager may live in Texas and be concerned about the next hurricane. You may wish to understand how to utilize hazard modeling and remote sensing technologies that clarify possible hazards and provide current information for an emergency response. We thus need to use technology effectively within our own region to support emergency management activities. In a survey of state emergency management agencies, information technology was viewed as very helpful and effective in the emergency planning and response phases (Reddick, 2011). Communication technologies, database resources, mapping sciences, and hazard modeling were seen as very helpful in times of disaster. Figure 1‐1 diagrams the role of technology in the emergency management process.
Figure 1‐1 The role of technology in the emergency management process.
Information technologies have been widely adopted not only in networks and communication devices but also in interconnected objects that provide information from environmental sensing associated with buildings, transportation networks, community utilities, business transactions, and the analysis of information to provide information for situational awareness. The range and extensiveness of things that are now connected allows for the manipulation and control of our systems so that if there is a system failure, immediate action may be possible for immediate action (Gubbi et al., 2013). The Internet of things allows the technology to make critical infrastructure elements and services including administration, education, healthcare, public safety, real estate, transportation, and utilities more aware, interactive and efficient (Belissent, 2010). One ends up with a smart home or office environment, smart business transactions, an array of smart city utility services, smart agriculture, and transportation. Information and communication technology reflecting business, information, and social processes and able to interact with the environment to exchange data and take action without direct human intervention. The system may be user‐centric but also has the capacity to operate within a large network so as to store and analyze information on an ongoing basis (Zanella et al., 2014).
FOR EXAMPLE
When Technology Fails
In May 2006, a strong earthquake with a magnitude of 6.0 hit near Tonga, a group of 170 islands. The Pacific Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii issued a tsunami alert. Tonga, however, failed to receive the warning due to power outages. Although a tsunami did not occur there, the inability to receive the warning was troubling and is forcing the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center to create additional methods for sending warnings.
1.3.1 Technology in a Changing Environment
Emergency management is an ever‐changing process and is not static. We respond to emergencies in an effort to reduce losses which are defined as loss of property and loss of life. As we saw with Hurricane Katrina (2005) and later for Hurricane Sandy (2012), natural hazards can create great losses. As we saw with the terrorist attacks of 9/11, human‐caused hazards can cause substantial direct and indirect losses as well. Emergency managers try to reduce any and all potential losses. To do this, we have to prepare for disasters, have a good response plan when there is a disaster, and reduce our vulnerability to hazards. Emergency management is based on a systems approach, which means that each organization has a unique role in reducing losses and contributing to an effective local response. In addition, public agencies at all levels have to all work together to successfully prepare for and respond to hazards.
To reduce losses, emergency managers and agencies have to achieve a high degree of performance. Any misstep could cost lives. Technology not only enhances emergency response capabilities in times of crisis, but also helps in a wide range of preparedness activities. Technology has also had major effects on all organizations, allowing emergency managers to clarify the nature and extent of a potential hazard. In addition, technology can help us understand risks from hazards locally, regionally, and nationally. Further, technology such as remote sensing can be used to clarify the nature of a hazard over time.
1.3.2 Examples of Technology
Chemical sensors help us detect harmful chemicals. After the devastating tsunami of 2005, the Pacific Rim countries have installed a tsunami warning system for a timely emergency response. There are several software programs that help model what would happen if an area were hit by a disaster. For example, before Hurricane Katrina, emergency managers simulated what a Category 5 storm would do to New Orleans. The software modeling program showed public officials that the city of New Orleans would flood. These modeling programs help responders know what the outcome of different hazards could be, and therefore know what planning should address. GPS software can help in effective response effort and track supplies, getting the supplies to their target destination very quickly. They can pinpoint where to direct emergency personnel for rescue operations or postdisaster cleanup of chemical containers, boats, or building debris.
1.3.3 Communicate Quickly
With cell phones, the Internet, e‐mail, and satellite phones, we can now communicate in any type of disaster, regardless of the damage to the area’s infrastructure. We can also quickly send large amounts of information instantaneously through e‐mail. Plus, we can quickly warn people to evacuate through the use of information on Web sites and e‐mails in addition to the traditional media of television, radio, and newsprint.
1.3.4 Develop a Better Understanding of Hazards
With our advanced equipment, we can better understand how hazards occur. For example, with the tsunami sensor system in place in the Pacific Rim, we can gain a better understanding of tsunamis and increase our ability to predict and warn residents of a tsunami.
1.3.5 Improve Response
With the enhanced ability to communicate quickly, we also know when response activities are not going well. For example, during Hurricane Katrina we all saw that there were problems getting supplies to New Orleans. Based on that information, public and nonprofit agencies were able to adapt their efforts to get supplies to the hurricane victims.
1.3.6 Increase Coordination
With increased communication and an increased ability to predict hazards, it is easier for emergency managers to work with first responders in their own community. It is also easier for emergency managers to work with state emergency management agencies and the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
1.3.7 Improve Efficiency
Computers and other forms of technology have made all organizations more efficient, which has led to a reduction in the number of people needed in each organization.
1.3.8 Training
Improve training and risk communication programs. With software programs, it is very easy to scan the results of surveys on training and risk communication programs and evaluate the results. This evaluation process leads to improvements in the programs.
The National Research Council noted in 2005 that many technology issues are human in nature and not just issues associated with the technology resources used by public agencies. They note that “better human organization, willingness to cooperate and a willingness of government at higher levels to listen to those at local levels are critical factors in making better use of information technology for disaster management” (p. 2).
1.4 Completing a Needs Assessment
FOR EXAMPLE
Training
For the use of technology to be effective, staff members must be trained. Research has indicated that many tools that are available to emergency managers and staff, such as software modeling programs, are not used because the staff is not properly trained on how to use it. FEMA and state emergency management agencies offer different types of training. Not only should staff members be trained initially on the technology, but refresher courses should also be held periodically.
1.4.1 Nature of a Needs Assessment
Participants in the emergency management system from public agencies, nonprofit and profit business organizations, and the general public all make use of technology. Each agency has its own perspective, role, needs, and capabilities, which enables the emergency management system to function. Understanding the players in the system is critical to effective use of technology. Not every emergency management organization has a budget for all the software and computers that they would like to have. Nonetheless, there are certain items that every organization should have:
Satellite phones. During Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans infrastructure was badly damaged. Mayor Ray Nagin was cut off from all communications and could not contact anyone at the state and federal level to update them on the situation. Mayor Nagin’s staff ended up breaking into an office supply store and taking satellite phones so they could communicate their needs. This is just one example of why every emergency manager needs satellite phones.
Web sites. Web sites are a great way to warn people of hazards, provide information on hazards, and outline mitigation strategies. For large jurisdictions, you can give specific neighborhood information. For example, some neighborhoods may be in the hazard’s direct path and will be more affected than those neighborhoods outside the hazard’s path. Web‐based resources are being used today by public agencies, citizens, businesses, and nonprofit agencies in gathering information about disasters. The National Hurricane Center provides ongoing information about hurricanes for state and local emergency management agencies, businesses, and the general public to support decision making. The number of people who rely on Web sites for information is growing every day. At the very least, many people will use the Web as one of their sources for information.
Digital cameras. You may need to take photos of hazard damage and transmit them quickly over the Internet to state or federal authorities. Digital cameras were an essential resource in documenting property damage following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
Access to HAZUS‐MH. HAZUS‐MH stands for the software program Hazards US‐Multi Hazard. You can use this program to estimate losses from earthquakes, floods, and hurricane winds. The program analyzes the impact of a disaster. The program also displays estimates of damages and losses. You can request this program through the FEMA Web site (
www.fema.gov
).
You may be the emergency manager of a small community. If so, you may need only the basic equipment. Or you may be the emergency manager of a large jurisdiction and need every advantage new technology offers. Before you can submit a budget request for new technology, you must determine what you truly need.
1.4.2 Steps to Complete a Needs Assessment
Step 1: Inventory your use of technology today. How are you using technology and contributing to the emergency management system? What do you need to know to identify other means of utilizing technology?
Step 2: Determine your community’s vulnerability. For example, if you have several industrial facilities that work with hazmat, then you may need chemical sensors installed. If you live in a community that is on the transportation route for dangerous nuclear waste, you may need cameras installed along the route within your community in an effort to prevent a terrorist hijacking. If you have completed a Hazard Vulnerability Assessment (HVA), this will go a long way in determining what type of technology you need.
Step 3: Determine how to educate the community on mitigation strategies. For example, you may determine that one way to educate the public is to provide a comprehensive Web site. You may decide that you need to send e‐mail messages to residents. Or you could decide to hold several news conferences. Your strategy will most likely consist of reaching people through several different media.
Step 4: Determine how the emergency management community can better coordinate efforts between agencies (including first responders). For example, you may need satellite phones, GPS devices, or a Web portal to streamline communication and provide assistance more efficiently.
Step 5: Determine how you could be more effective in predicting hazards. For example, you may need modeling software to determine what parts of the jurisdiction would be affected by a hurricane.
Step 6: Determine how you could be more effective in responding to hazards. For example, if all traditional lines of communication are knocked out, you may need satellite phones or some other means of communication.
Step 7: Assess the threat and your needs. What is the most likely threat? What hazard would cause the most damage? What equipment and software would help you the most?
1.4.3 Implementing the Needs Assessment
Once you determine your needs, you need to prioritize them based on the greatest need. You will want to submit budget requests for new equipment and software that can be useful for all hazards. You will also want to submit budget requests for equipment that will have a direct impact should you get hit with the hazard that your community is most vulnerable to. Public organizations have been facing critical financial limitation. Expenditures for technology must be viewed as cost‐effective, especially in serving the community in nonemergency operations.
Outside the normal budget cycle, a good time to submit a request for new equipment is when there is a focusing event. A focusing event is a national disaster resulting in large losses that receives extensive media coverage. Hurricane Katrina is a focusing event. The tsunami in the Pacific Rim is a focusing event. These events give you a window of opportunity to advocate for better and newer equipment. A window of opportunity is the chance to argue that a focusing event could occur locally if certain precautions are not taken. During this window of opportunity, you will need to make the argument that such a disaster “could happen here.” Because this window of opportunity will not be open for long, you must take advantage of it as soon as you can. Once decision makers are over the shock of the magnitude of the disaster, they will turn their attention to the annual necessities for the community. For example, decision makers know they have to fund the school bus system, as this is a definite need. Your job is to convince decision makers to prepare for a disaster that may or may not happen.
1.4.4 Impacts of Implementing Innovation
Technology innovations have resulted in more than just new devices; they have also resulted in changes in human interactions. The changes, especially those in communications, provide more information for decision making and provide key linkages between response agencies, the public, and local enterprises. This would be a positive impact if it were not for the possibility of inaccurate, incomplete, or misdirected information. So often our developments in technology suggest that there is a quick fix for whatever our problems are (Quarantelli, 1997). A focus on gadgetry leads us in the wrong direction; we need to view technology as simply a tool with strengths and limitations. Technology brings us unprecedented amounts of information that can clarify problems or confuse us. For example, a geographic information system on a personal computer can provide us with extensive information about a jurisdiction; however, the emergency manager may need simple directions from one location to another as provided by many Internet sites, such as MapQuest or Google Earth. The key is to find the fit between technology and our emergency management needs.
The Internet provides a great resource to the emergency management community by allowing agencies to communicate in real time and in a manner that fosters coordinated outcomes and accurate activities. Internet‐based system can link and integrate federal, state, local, and nonprofit agencies and facilitate resource allocation and task tracking. Because it is digital, it maintains a historical memory (data files) for evaluating agency response and coordination.
The photo in Figure 1‐2, from New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, illustrates several applications of technology and emergency management. First, the Red Cross, local government damage assessment teams, and insurance adjusters linked photos of residents, businesses, and critical infrastructure to datasets documenting property damage from disasters. Second, the high watermarks on the house were used by a survey team to document high water elevations in the city; the high water levels were used by digital surveying equipment. Finally, digital images such as this photo of a home are used by the media, public officials, and many other organizations to document in printed and online documents and presentations the social, economic, and environmental impacts of disasters.
FOR EXAMPLE
Focusing Event: 9/11
One of the many tragedies of 9/11 was the fact that so many firefighters had faulty communications equipment, and they did not hear the directive to vacate the World Trade Center. If they had heard these instructions, there is no doubt that more lives would have been saved. The 9/11 Commission issued their report months later and urged all municipalities to ensure their communications equipment is maintained and always works properly.
Figure 1‐2 Digital images used in post Katrina needs assessment September 2005.
SUMMARY
In this lesson, you have defined focusing events and windows of opportunity. You have assessed different ways that technology can help you be more effective in all phases of emergency management. You have evaluated how to perform a needs assessment and how to ask your community for more resources. Technology provides tools to link local, regional, and national resources. A technology needs assessment is critical because agencies in the emergency management system have different technology needs and financial resources. Once you know your needs, you can ask for the tools that will help you mitigate and respond to hazards more effectively.
KEY TERMS
Focusing event
A disaster resulting in losses that receives extensive media coverage as well as public attention by citizens, agencies, and public and private officials.
Hazard
An event or physical condition that has the potential to create loss (economic, social, or environmental).
Mitigate
To take an action that may reduce vulnerability to a hazard.
Network
A set of two or more devices, typically called
nodes
, which are connected in some way to allow communication between them.
Technology
The application of scientific methods or objects to achieve a practical purpose.
Window of opportunity
A chance to compare areas that have been impacted by a disaster event with other similar areas allowing emergency managers the opportunity to explain that the “same situation could happen here” and to gain support to provide resources to enhance emergency preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation at a local, regional, or national scale.
ASSESS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
Go to www.wiley.com/go/pine/tech&emergmgmt_2e to evaluate your knowledge of using technology. This website contains MCQ’s, self checks, review questions, applying this chapter and you try it.
References
Alcántara‐Ayala, I., Altan, O., Baker, D., Briceño, S., Cutter, S., Gupta, H., Holloway, A., Ismail‐Zadeh, A., Díaz, V. J., Johnston, D., McBean, G., Ogawa, Y., Paton, D., Porio, E., Silbereisen, R., Takeuchi, K., Valsecchi, G., Vogel, C., Wu, G., & Zhai, P. (2015).
Disaster Risks Research and Assessment to Promote Risk Reduction and Management
. Paris, France: International Council for Science and the International Social Science Council.
http://www.icsu.org/
(accessed May 10, 2017).
Belissent, J. (2010).
Getting Clever About Smart Cities: New Opportunities Require New Business Models
. Cambridge, MA: Forrester Research.
Bessis, N., Asimakopoulou, E., & Xhafa, F. (2011). A next generation emerging technologies roadmap for enabling collective computational intelligence in disaster management.
International Journal of Space‐Based and Situated Computing
,
1
(1), 76–85.
Birkland, T. A. (1997).
After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing Events
. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Birkland, T. A. (2014).
An introduction to the policy process: Theories, concepts and models of public policy making
. Abingdon: Routledge.
Brownstein, J. S., Freifeld, C. C., & Madoff, L. C. (2009). Digital disease detection—harnessing the Web for public health surveillance.
New England Journal of Medicine
,
360
(21), 2153–2157.
Chunara, R., Aman, S., Smolinski, M., & Brownstein, J. S. (2013). Flu near you: An online self‐reported influenza surveillance system in the USA.
Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
,
5
(1), e53.
http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn‐3:HUL.InstRepos:11708633
(accessed May 5, 2017).
Cutter, S. L., Ismail‐Zadeh, A., Alcántara‐Ayala, I., Altan, O., Baker, D. N., Briceno, S., Gupta, H., Holloway, A., Johnston, D., McBean, G. A., Ogawa, Y., Paton, D., Porio, E., Silbereisen, R. K., Takeuchi, K., Valsechhi, G. B., Vogel, C., & Wu, G. (2015). Global risks: Pool knowledge to stem losses from disasters.
Nature
,
522
, 277–279.
Emrich, C. T., & Cutter, S. L. (2011). Social vulnerability to climate‐sensitive hazards in the southern United States.
Weather, Climate, and Society
,
3
(3), 193–208.
Fischer, H. W. (1998). The role of the new information technologies in emergency mitigation, planning, response and recovery.
Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal
,
7
(1), 28–37.
Gall, M., Borden, K., & Cutter, S. L. (2009). When do losses count? Six fallacies of natural hazards loss data.
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
,
90
(6), 799–809.
Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., & Palaniswami, M. (2013). Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions.
Future Generation Computer Systems
,
29
(7), 1645–1660.
Hodgkinson, P. E., & Stewart, M. (1991).
Coping with Catastrophe: A Handbook of Disaster Management
. London: Taylor & Frances/Routledge.
Isett, K. R., Mergel, I. A., LeRoux, K., & Mischen, P. A. (2011). Networks in public administration scholarship: Understanding where we are and where we need to go.
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
,
21
, 157–173.
Kapucu, N., & Garayev, V. (2013). Designing, managing, and sustaining functionally collaborative emergency management networks.
The American Review of Public Administration
,
43
(3), 312–330.
Kara‐Zaitri, C. (1996). Disaster prevention and limitation: State of the art tools and technologies.
Disaster Prevention and Management
,
5
(1), 30–39.
Kron, W., Steuer, M., Löw, P., & Wirtz, A. (2012). How to deal properly with a natural catastrophe database—analysis of flood losses.
Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
,
12
(3), 535–550.
NII 2000 Steering Committee. (1996).
The Unpredictable Certainty: Information Infrastructure Through 2000
. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
NRENaissance Committee. (1994).
Realizing the Information Future: The Internet and Beyond
. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Pelling, M., & Blackburn, S. (Eds.). (2013).
Megacities and the Coast: Risk, Resilience and Transformation
. London: Earthscan.
Pine, J. C. (2014).
Hazards Analysis: Reducing the Impact of Disasters
. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press/Taylor Francis Group.
Quarantelli, E. L. (1997). Problematical aspects of the information/communication revolution for disaster planning and research: Ten non‐technical issues and questions.
Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal
,
6
(2), 94–106.
Reddick, C. (2011). Information technology and emergency management: preparedness and planning in US states.
Disasters
,
35
(1), 45–61.
Singh, P., Singh, P., Park, I., Lee, J., & Rao, H. R. (2009). Information sharing: A study of information attributes and their relative significance during catastrophic events. In K. J. Knapp (Ed.),
Cyber‐Security and Global Information Assurance: Threat Analysis and Response Solutions
. Hershey, PA: IGI Publishers.
Steering Committee. (1996).
Computing and Communications in the Extreme: Research for Crisis Management and Other Applications
. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
UNISDR. (2013).
The Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction
. Geneva: UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). Available at:
http://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2013/en/home/GAR_2013/GAR_2013_2.html
(retrieved on October 16, 2014; accessed April 24, 2017).
Ward, R., & Wamsley, G. (2007). From a painful past to un uncertain future. In C. B. Rubin (Ed.),
Emergency Management: The American Experience 1900–2005
(pp. 207–242). Fairfax, VA: Public Entity Risk Institute.
Wirtz, A., Kron, W., Löw, P., & Steuer, M. (2014). The need for data: natural disasters and the challenges of database management.
Natural Hazards
,
70
, 135–157.
Zanella, A., Bui, N., Castellani, A., Vangelista, L., & Zorzi, M. (2014). Internet of things for smart cities.
Internet of Things Journal, IEEE
,
1
(1), 22–32.
2COMPUTER NETWORKS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Cindy Norris
Department of Computer Science, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC, USA
Starting Point
Go to www.wiley.com/go/pine/tech&emergmgmt_2e to assess your knowledge of computer systems.
(Determine where you need to concentrate your effort.)
What You’ll Learn in This Chapter
Components of a network
Categories of networks based upon the distance spanned
What the Internet is and its protocols and implementation
Wired communication technologies
Wireless communication technologies
Internet of Things concept and implementation
How the Internet has changed emergency management
What a Smart City is and what technologies support it
After Studying This Chapter, You’ll Be Able To
List the types of networks based upon the distance spanned.
Explain the difference between an access network and a backbone network.
