D. Administrative Resilience: Evaluating the Adaptive Capacity of Administrative Systems That Operate in Dynamic and Uncertain C
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ADMINISTRATIVE RESILIENCE: EVALUATING THE ADAPTIVE CAPACITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS THAT OPERATE IN DYNAMIC AND UNCERTAIN CONDITIONS by Thomas W. Haase B.A., Chadron State College, 1998 J.D., University of Pittsburgh, 2001 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh D. 2009 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS This dissertation was presented by Thomas W. Haase It was defended on December 7, 2009 and approved by Dr. Kathleen M. Carley, Ph.D., Professor, Carnegie Mellon University Dr. Siddhartha Chandra, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh Dr. William N. Dunn, Ph.D., Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Louise K. Comfort, Ph.D., Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh ii ADMINISTRATIVE RESILIENCE: EVALUATING THE ADAPTIVE CAPACITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS THAT OPERATE IN DYNAMIC AND UNCERTAIN CONDITIONS Thomas W. Haase, J.D., Ph.D. University of Pittsburgh, 2009 Copyright © by Thomas W. Haase 2009 iii ABSTRACT An administrative system‟s capacity to take effective action can be undermined by the uncertain and rapidly changing conditions that are often generated by disruptive events. Resilience has been identified as the most practical approach to overcoming this administrative problem. Resilience has multiple definitions, one of which is “[t]he capacity of a system, community or society potentially exposed to hazards to adapt, by resisting or changing in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure. This is determined by the degree to which the social system is capable of organizing itself to increase this capacity for learning from past disasters for better future protection and to improve risk reduction measures” (International Strategy for Disaster Reduction 2005, p. 4). This study argues that, in contrast to conventional administrative systems, resilient administrative systems have the capacity to successfully respond to disruptive events because they possess the organizational stability to maintain the effectiveness of the community in which it operates and the organizational flexibility needed to adapt to uncertain and rapidly changing conditions. This study advances a framework for administrative resilience, which can be used to evaluate the resilience of administrative systems. Through the use of a nested case study that employed a mixed-methods design, the framework was used to investigate the administrative response system that operated in Indonesia after the Great Sumatran Earthquake and Tsunami of 26 December 2004. The study generated a number of findings. First, the system was a system of iv sub-systems, and the organizations that operated in the domestic sub-system possessed extremely low levels of resilience. The consequence was that the domestic sub-system could not formulate an effective response to the constraints present in the post-tsunami environment. Second, it was the inclusion of the organizations in the international sub-system, which brought with them high levels of resources, technology and experience, as well as the interactions exchanged between international and domestic organizations, which improved the resilience of the overall administrative system. These findings indicate that policy makers can promote the development of administrative resilience through the development and implementation of socio-technical infrastructures that facilitate administrative action. v TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................................................................................. XIX 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 THEORETICAL PROBLEM: UNCERTAIN CONDITIONS AS A CONSTRAINT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION ...................................... 2 1.2 THEORETICAL INQUIRY: ADMINISTRATIVE RESILIENCE AS A RESPONSE TO CONDITIONS OF UNCERTAINTY..................................... 5 1.3 THEORETICAL QUESTIONS: EXPLORING THE ELEMENTS AND DYNAMICS OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESILIENCE ..................................... 7 1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY: CONTRIBUTING TO THE UNDERSTANDING OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESILIENCE ...................... 15 1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY ................................................................ 16 2.0 THE FOUNDATIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESILIENCE .......................... 18 2.1 UNCERTAINTY AND RAPIDLY CHANGING CONDITIONS AS CONSTRAINTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION .................................. 18 2.2 THE RESILIENT ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM ......................................... 21 2.3 EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION MAKING IN UNCERTAIN AND RAPIDLY CHANGING CONDITIONS ................................................ 24 2.3.1 The Traditional Model of Decision Making ................................................ 25 2.3.2 Non-Traditional Models of Decision Making .............................................. 26 2.3.3 Harnessing the Complexity of Uncertain Environments ........................... 31 2.4 THE FRAMEWORK OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESILIENCE .................... 32 vi 3.0 RESEARCH METHODS FOR THE INVESTIGATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESILIENCE ........................................................................ 39 3.1 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................ 39 3.2 THE NESTED CASE STUDY AND MIXED METHODS DESIGN ............. 41 3.2.1 The Nested Case Study .................................................................................. 41 3.2.2 Mixed Methods Design .................................................................................. 47 3.2.2.1 Content Analysis ................................................................................. 47 3.2.2.2 Descriptive Statistics ........................................................................... 47 3.2.2.3 Network Analysis ................................................................................ 48 3.2.2.4 Semi-Structured Interviews and Surveys ......................................... 48 3.3 THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS AND UNITS OF OBSERVATION ................... 49 3.4 DATA COLLECTION, DATA CODING AND DATA ANALYSIS ............. 49 3.4.1 Data Collection ............................................................................................... 49 3.4.2 Data Coding.................................................................................................... 51 3.4.3 Data Analysis.................................................................................................. 52 3.5 THREATS TO VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY .......................................... 54 3.5.1 Construct Validity ......................................................................................... 55 3.5.2 Internal Validity ............................................................................................ 57 3.5.3 External Validity............................................................................................ 58 3.5.4 General Issues of Reliability ......................................................................... 59 3.5.4.1 Network Data....................................................................................... 59 3.5.4.2 Semi-Structured Interview Instrument ............................................ 60 3.5.4.3 Survey Instrument .............................................................................. 61 4.0 INDONESIA AS A FIELD STUDY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RESILIENCE . 63 vii 4.1 WHY SELECT INDONESIA AS A FIELD STUDY? .................................... 64 4.1.1 Indonesia’s Susceptibility and Vulnerability to Disaster ........................... 64 4.1.1.1 Natural Disaster Hazards ................................................................... 65 4.1.1.2 Man-Made Disaster Events ................................................................ 66 4.1.1.3 Disaster Events and Consequences .................................................... 67 4.1.2 Indonesia’s Perspective on Disaster Management ..................................... 71 4.1.3 Indonesia’s Disaster Management System .................................................. 73 4.1.4 Indonesia’s Disaster Management System in Disaster ............................... 77 4.1.4.1 Characteristics of the Disaster ........................................................... 77 4.1.4.2 Consequences of the Disaster ............................................................. 80 4.1.5 Indonesia’s Capacity to Adapt in Uncertain Conditions ........................... 84 5.0 COMPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM .. 87 5.1 COMPOSITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM .................................... 88 5.1.1 Full Administrative System .......................................................................... 88 5.1.2 Core Administrative System ......................................................................... 90 5.2 RATE OF ENTRY INTO THE ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM ................... 92 5.2.1 Domestic Administrative Sub-System ......................................................... 92 5.2.1.1 Entry by Date ...................................................................................... 92 5.2.1.2 Entry