Improving Societal Security by Preparing Non- Standards Events: Perspective on Korea s Crisis and Emergency Management

Transcription

1 , pp Improving Societal Security by Preparing Non- Standards Events: Perspective on Korea s Crisis and Emergency Management Younhee Kim 1, Hakkyong Kim 2 1 National Civil Defense and Disaster Management Training Institute Tajosan-Gill, Chunan-Si,Chungchungnam-Do, Korea Ykim5@Korea.kr 2 Dept. of Convergence Security, Sungshin Women s University 2, Bomun-Ro 34Da-Gil, Seongbuk-Gu, Seoul, Korea Corresponding Author : pocol@sungshin.ac.kr Abstract. Serious events including the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan and the tragic Sewol ferry incident in Korea are surly challenges against traditional response capacities. These unforeseen events can be called non-standards events, and when these events do occur, they will have a potential to cause serious impacts to greater numbers of people. Therefore, preparing the nonstandards events are getting more important, particularly to improve societal security in modern society. For this reason, the discussion of changes in emergency management is described and Korea s emergency management systems and its issues of preparing for the non-standards events are presented in this paper. Finally, this research suggests horizontal approach for promoting emergency management capacities not only for traditional emergency management steps but also simulation exercises practices in order to build better societal security for the future. Keywords: Societal Security, Disaster, Plan and Procedure, Response exercise, 1 Introduction Today, risk is omnipresent and most human activities give rise to risk. Beck argues that we live in a Risk Society, where uncertainty, complexity, and multiplicity of new technologies are increasing at an unprecedented rate, and it is impossible to predict their hazards and potential consequences precisely [1]. In this context, risk becomes recognized as one of the most important organizing principles and influential concepts in contemporary society. Emergency events are evolving rapidly, and the world has experienced these changes through a series of non-standards events. Some examples of failing traditional emergency management methods would be the Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and the 2011 tsunami in Japan. In those events, we all witnessed the total failure of the existing emergency response systems. For this reason, the emergency management community extended the scope of the contingency plan to include the ISSN: ASTL Copyright 2015 SERSC

2 total failure scenarios such as telecommunication, electricity, and supply chains failures. It is clear that the current crisis and risk management strategies need to be changed, due to the non-standard events. In this context, this paper is basically to discuss the changes of emergency management. Further, Korea s emergency management systems and its issues of preparing for the non-standards events will be discussed. Finally, this research suggests the horizontal approach for promoting the emergency management capacities not only for traditional emergency management steps but also simulation exercises practices to in order to build better societal security for the future. 2 Perspective Changes of Emergency Management Emergency management is defined as the discipline and profession of applying science, technology, planning and management to deal with extreme events that can injure or kill great number of people, do extensive property damage, and disrupt community life [2]. Although there are some variations, this definition is widely accepted. The wildly known steps of crisis management are 1) identifying vulnerability, 2) calculating risks by multiplying the frequencies and impacts, 3) making a contingency plan based on the highly-ranked risks, and 4) finally exercising and testing the plan are the key steps of traditional crisis management. As a matter of fact, many organizations and even national governments follow these steps, and made some guidelines to set up the emergency management system. For example, the United States of America developed the national emergency management documents such as Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program and National Response Framework which follows the typical strategies of crisis, emergency and risk management. Borodzicz argues that new kinds of disasters and crisis are emerging, caused by changes in the way we live [3]. Natural phenomena such as earthquakes, floods, wind, drought and tsunami are not at all new, but higher levels of population density, travel and mechanized forms of food production and a reliance on technology to facilitate modern life styles, mean that when these events do occur, they will have a potential to cause serious impact to greater numbers of people. He also argues that we have been witnessed of black swans, system failure, human irrationality, and rapid population growth. With these phenomena, the traditional emergency management approach has been challenged in many ways. The challenges are mostly caused by non-standards events which demonstrate that the risk in our ear cannot be foreseen, and hence, it is hard to manage or even eradicate. In this light, crisis and risk management strategies need to be changed. The traditional strategies of the crisis and emergency management won't work for the nonstandard crisis situations. Generally, we believe that training emergency management personal, educating people and testing the contingency plan are the key success factors in order to survive in crisis situations. However, these types of traditional methods are no longer directly applied to the current risk-averse society and this can be another risk to societal security. 102 Copyright 2015 SERSC

3 In this context, the perspective changes on crisis and risk management have great impacts to policy makers. Indeed, many countries are facing the challenges of preparing unforeseen crisis and emergencies as well as unknown risks. It is clear that responding to unforeseen events and promoting a societal security are now the main focuses of emergency management, and policy makers should consider the paradigm changes in crisis and emergency management. 3 Current Practice of Emergency Management System in Korea Traditionally, Korea is exposed to the different types of natural disasters such as typhoons, flood, heatwave and drought as well as the various human-induced disasters. This has been a driving force of various emergency management programs in Korea to prevent and mitigate these hazards. The disaster and safety basic law was enacted in In this light, Korea is the one of the countries where manages the crisis and emergencies by a disaster type. Korea states the disaster types such as natural and social disasters in the disaster and safety basic law. Korea prepares the national emergency management system and contingency plan, based on disaster types. Korea now faces a few but hard challenges for the current national emergency management system as we experienced the weakest link of existing system when the complex disasters occurred such as the Sewol Ferry sinking, the landslide of Wumean Mountain, and the Mauna resort collapse. However, the current practices of Korean crisis simulation exercises are still restricted to familiarizing people with necessary skills and locations, mechanistically, in a rote fashion - namely, by adhering to a pre-arranged scenario script through repeated rehearsals [4]. In other words, most of the Korean crisis simulations are very controlled, with no allowance for digression and applying a very detailed scenario script for the purpose of an error-free exercise. Moreover, the exercise scenario scripts are distributed to exercise players in advance so that they can become fully briefed about what will happen and what they are expected to do in exercises. However, the precise details of the incident should not be revealed because the exercise should be as realistic as possible for the exercise players taking part. Otherwise, learning may well be inhibited because the participants are already aware of the expected outcomes [5]. In this sense, it is doubtful whether, or how, the current practices of Korean simulations actually equip people to deal with unexpected situations, which are not part of the exercise scenario scripts, although nearly all of the crisis simulation exercises in Korea are evaluated as Successful in the media. These practices can produce open systems paradox [6]. A crisis is an open system, where there are numerous equally but different possible trajectories by which a crisis can develop into a disaster. In contrast, a pre-arranged scenario script is a closed system, where every move and action is prescribed and fixed, without allowing any flexibility. Accordingly, worst case scenarios are seldom taken into account, although a valuable exercise in preparing for a crisis need to work on them [7]. For example, crisis simulation exercises with a very detailed, predetermined scenario script cannot cope with possible variables, such as traffic congestion or adverse weather which might influence the late arrival of emergency services, and nor can Copyright 2015 SERSC 103

4 they consider human variables, such as mistakes, errors, and conflicting views about disaster response [8]. It is not feasible to predict every single worst case scenario, stipulate its response in a plan, and test it through simulations. Too much dependence on predetermined rules and procedures might rather cause crisis simulation paradoxes. For this reason, crisis responses need to be improvised to some extent, based on circumstances, time constraint, and resources available case by case. 4 Promoting the Cooperation among Emergency Management Stakeholders: A Horizontal Approach According to Sylves, emergency management is by its very nature an intergovernmental and intercommunity [2]. Especially, disaster response requires cooperation and coordination with different level of governments and other organizations including volunteer organizations and private sectors. The failure of prompt response in local comminutes makes the losses and damages bigger and severe. The characteristics of response create intergovernmental fragmentation issues. Due to the fragmentation of disaster responsibilities, designing the effective and efficient disaster management system as a national level is critical yet hard to develop. In this context, the collaboration and cooperation among emergency stakeholders are getting more important and indeed emphasized. Undoubtedly, these two factors can be critical success factors for effective emergency management. Local community is a place where the emergency and disasters happen. In the United States, the tiered response principle is presented in the National Response Framework, and this means that local community is responsible for the initial responses for emergencies and disasters. Hence pre-disaster activities including preparing and planning under normal situations are critical for local communities. Here, the horizontal approach is considered significant in improving the collaboration and cooperation, as the local governments are responsible for first responses in local area. The research argues that the horizontal approach, presented and promoted in many disaster response plans and frameworks, is the key success factors for better cooperation and collaborations for non-standards events. Naturally, emergency management has the characteristics of the fragmentations of responsibilities among the different divisions and ministries as a government level. 5 Conclusion It is inevitable to face numerous challenges through various unforeseen and nonstandards events, and this has been great impacts to the emergency management. Under these circumstances, the real questions to answer is how do we prepare the upcoming not only standards event but also non-standard events in the future. Since Korea experiences the tragic disasters from the past, now it is time to prepare for the non-standards events. In this context, the horizontal approach is suggested as a tool to promote the cooperation and collaboration among various emergency management 104 Copyright 2015 SERSC

5 stakeholders. The horizontal approach can be applied to the regional and the local level to enhance the capacities of emergency management by conducting crisis simulation exercises with various organizations and entities where exist in that regions. This approach eventually contributes to improve the adaptive behaviors which are the great portions of successful preparedness steps to manage the nonstandards events in the future. References 1. Beck, U.: Risk Society: Toward a New Modernity, Sage Publications, London (1992) 2. Syleves R.: Disaster Policy & Politics: emergency management and homeland security, CQ press, USA (2008) 3. Borodzicz, E. P.: Risky Business: Crisis Simulations Examined in the Context of the Safety People, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Birbeck College, University of London (1997) 4. Kim, H.: Improving simulation exercises in Korea for disaster preparedness, Disaster Prevention and Management, 22(1), (2013) 5. Freimuth, V. S., Hilyard, K. M., Barge, J. K., and Sokler, L. A.: Action, Not talk: A Simulation of Risk Communication during the First Hours of a Pandemic, Health Promotion Practice, 9(4), 35S--44S (2008) 6. Toft, B.: Limits to the mathematical modelling of disasters, In Hood, C. and Jones, D. (Eds.), Accident and Design: contemporary debates in risk management (pp ), UCL press, London (1996) 7. Punch, M. and Markham, G.: Policing Disasters: the British experience, International Journal of Police Science and Management, 3(1), (2000) 8. Lee, J. and Kim, H.: A Critical Review on Current Simulation Methodology, International journal of contents, 7(1), (2011) Copyright 2015 SERSC 105