Disaster, Crisis and Emergency
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNDERSTANDING THE TERMINOLOGIES: DISASTER, CRISIS AND EMERGENCY Hajer Al-Dahash 1, Menaha Thayaparan an U ayangani Kulatunga School of the Built Environment, he University of Salford, he Crescent, Salford, M5 4W , UK Despite the fact that there is a difference .et3een the ter s disaster, crisis and e ergency, they are closely interconnected, interdependent and overlap significantly. (ith a .lurred line .et3een the definitions of these ter s, the ainstrea literature uses the ter s disaster, crisis and e ergency interchangea.ly and in co .ination such as 5disaster crisis anage ent6 and 5crisis and e ergency anage ent7. The ai of this article is to syste atically and critically revie3 the argu ents and counterargu ents a.out the definitions of disaster, crisis, and e ergency to date. A co prehensive literature revie3 in the relevant field has .een conducted in order to i prove understanding of these pheno ena. A qualitative conceptual content analysis has .een carried out to esta.lish the differences and si ilarities .et3een disaster, crisis and e ergency. The analysis reveals that the sudden nature of the event and the da age caused are the co on features of all three ter s, though e ergency is not al3ays of a sudden nature. Further, any co on features have .een identified .et3een disaster and crisis, so that they can .e used interchangea.ly up to a certain e9tent. The ter e ergency does not share any co on features 3ith the other t3o ter s and has so e contradictory features. Also, the authors conclude that .oth crisis and e ergency 3ould lead to disaster if the event 3ere neglected or is anaged. Key 3ords: disaster anage ent, crisis anage ent, e ergency anage ent, definitions INTRODUCTION It is 3idely ackno3ledged that preventing crises or disasters poses a challenge in anaging such pheno ena, .ecause of their co plexity and chaotic nature. Therefore, understanding the ter s disaster, crisis, and e ergency ay lead to ore effective strategies to reduce or stop the severity of their i pacts on society and .usiness, despite their co plexity. Frequently, these ter s are used interchangea.ly, .ut they actually could ean three very different pheno ena (Lighthouse 0eadiness Group, 2015). To help i prove understanding of such pheno ena, an atte pt has .een ade to untangle the concepts related to disaster, crisis and e ergency. Accordingly, the paper is structured as follo3s: Firstly to define disaster, crisis, and e ergency .y revie3ing key literature. Secondly, the nature of disaster, crisis, and e ergency and their features have .een e9plained. Finally, the ain research question of the paper: >3hat are the differences and the si ilarities .et3een disaster, crisis, and e ergency?“ is ans3ered .y highlighting the differences and the si ilarities .et3een these ter s. This study is an integrative revie3 of the literature to syste atically and critically evaluate the argu ents and counterarguments a.out 1 [email protected] Al-Dahash, H F, Thayaparan, M and Kulatunga, U (2016) Understanding the Ter inologies: Disaster, nd Crisis and E ergency. In : P ( Chan and C ) Neilson (Eds.) Proceedings of the 32 Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 Septe .er 2016, Manchester, UK, Association of 0esearchers in Construction Manage ent, 1ol 2, 1191-1200. Al-Dahash, hayaparan and Kulatunga disaster, crisis and e ergency to date, in order to enhance the current .ody of kno3ledge in this area. This integrative revie3 is used to relate concepts and relevant argu ents in order to advance and synthesise kno3ledge a.out these three ter s. In doing so, the study reveals the nature of co plexity in understanding the ter inologies and contri.utes to i proving the usage of such ter inologies 3ithin the ainstrea literature. LITERATURE REVIEW To identify the key research areas pertaining to disaster, crisis and e ergency, a co prehensive literature has .een carried out. The definitions of each of the ter s have first .een analysed follo3ed .y the cross analysis .et3een the ter inologies. Disaster Definitions The ter disaster has .een defined differently .y various scholars due to the syste .y 3hich they are e9plained and .ased on their causes and consequences. The United Nations Office for Disaster 0isk 0eduction (UNISD0, 2009) confir s that disasters occur as a result of a co .ination of haCards, vulnera.ilities and a lack of easures, 3here using special easures for planning, coordinating and utilising appropriate resources 3ill ini ise the adverse i pact of disasters (Ale9ander, 2003). Disasters are largely defined as sudden unforeseen events 3ith natural, technological or social causes that lead to destruction, loss and da age (Ale9ander, 2005.E )orgustin, 2012; Iyer and Mastorakis, 2006; Parker, 1992; UNSD0, 2009). Cutter (2003) states that disasters are nor ally on a singular large scale, and are high i pact events. So e scholars have defined disasters as situations 3hich over3hel local capacity to 3ithstand, cope and recoverE necessitating e9ternal assistance and involving various stakeholders (Guha-Sapir, 1os, Felo3, and Ponserre, 2014; Lighthouse 0eadiness Group, 2015; Moe, Geh.auer, SenitC, and Mueller, 2007; Coppola, 2015; Parker, 1992). Further, definitions of a disaster vary .ased on ti e and space, for e9a ple, disasters are considered as events concentrated in ti e and space, in 3hich a society or one of its su.divisions undergoes physical har and social destruction, so that all or part of the essential functions of such a society are i paired ((ilson and Oyola-He aiel, 2001; FritC, 1961; Lindell, 2013; UNSD0, 2009). Further ore, disaster is defined as >a dyna ic echanis that .egins 3ith the activation of a haCard and flo3s through the syste as a series of events, in a logical sequence to produce a loss to life, property and livelihood .y negatively influencing the e ergency syste s (Iyer and Mastorakis, 2006; Fis3as and Choudhuri, 2012). Faker and 0efsgaard (2007, 332) concentrated on syste s6 .reach clai s that institutional syste s charged 3ith the responsi.ility to anage disaster situations face ultiple challenges, including the need for quick action and the accurate targeting of aid in an environment 3here infor ation quality and quantity is highly unpredicta.le“. Operationally, disasters e9ceed the capacity of nor al, 3orkday syste s to cope 3ith the effectively. Te porary syste s of a different character ust therefore .e su.stituted. Ho3ever, disregarding the nu .er of studies on the su.Iect of disasters and disaster anage ent, it see s that there is no universal definition of disaster used .y all scholars and institutions (Shaluf, Ahmadun, and Said, 2003). The differences in the definition of a disaster are due to various causes and consequences and also appear to .e affected .y the geographic, econo ic and political situation of the respective countries (Eshghi and Larson, 2008) aking it practically i possi.le to sum arise in .rief (Ale9ander, 2005a). 1192 Disaster, crisis and emergency Crisis Definitions This section analyses the definitions provided .y various authors for the ter 7crisis7. A crisis is Ka disruption that physically affects a syste as a 3hole and threatens its .asic assu ptions, its su.Iective sense of self, and its existential coreK (Pauchant and Mitroff, 1992, 15). A crisis is stated as an a.nor al situation 3hich presents a high risk to .usiness and ay trigger rapid pu.lic policy changes, since it dra3s pu.lic and edia attention and threatens pu.lic trust (Sa3alha, )raisat, and Al-Ludah, 2013; Shaluf et al ., 2003; Ale9ander, 2005.). Footh (1993), cited in Moe and Pathranarakul (2006, 402), indicate that, >a crisis is a situation faced .y an individual, group or organiCation 3hich they are una.le to cope 3ith .y the use of nor al routine procedures and in 3hich stress is created .y sudden change“. Ale9ander (2005.) also argues that >the significance of crisis is its une9pectedness and uncontrolla.ility 3hich disrupts and/or i pedes nor al operations“. Further, Shaluf et al ., (2003) agree 3ith 0o.ert and LaItha (2002) and Darling's (1994) vie3 that each crisis situation is unique and so anagers adIust and respond differently to each situation. In addition, the sa e situation ay .e a crisis at one ti e .ut not at another (Darling, 1994). According to Lighthouse 0eadiness Group (2015), a crisis is a >ti e of intense difficulty, trou.le, or danger and can .e personal, or confined to a s all population, like a fa ily, or a co pany dealing 3ith a very serious pro.le “. Crises often have past origins, and diagnosing their original source can help to understand and anage a particular crisis or lead to an alternative state or condition (FaraC and, 2001). In an organisational conte9t, crises are usually ne3 situations to the organisation, often defined as une9pected, definitely unstructured and outside the typical operational fra e3ork of the organiCation (Feall, 2007). They are also characteriCed .y an excessive a ount of inco plete and conflicting infor ation. Emergency Definitions A third ter inology investigated in this paper is 5e ergency6. E ergency is any natural or an- ade situation that ay result in su.stantial har to the population or da age to property (Shen and Sha3, 2004, 2110). E ergency can .e defined as >an i inent or actual event that threatens people, property or the environment and 3hich requires a co-ordinated and rapid response. E ergencies are usually unanticipated, at least in ter s of exactly 3hat happens and 3hen and 3here they take place. Ho3ever, they can, and should, .e planned for“ (Ale9ander, 2005., 159).