Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Thomas Jefferson Week 11 Resilience Emergency Management Discussion | Abc Paper
+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

# Week 11 – Resilience
-Overview

Resiliency is the ability to “bounce back” from an event – in our case a disaster or MCI – physically, emotionally, financially.  This week we will read about and discuss the principles behind it, identify strategies to promote it, talk about family and neighborhood resiliency and identity some very real obstacles.  We will identify essential critical infrastructure and key resources.

– Reading List

Attached Files:

Chandra Building Community Resilience to Disasters Chap 7.pdf (109.178 KB) 
Johnston, D. M., & Paton, D. (2006). Disaster Resilience – An Integrated Approach chap 10.pdf (127.868 KB) 
Johnston, D. M., & Paton, D. (2006). Disaster Resilience – An Integrated Approach chap 2.pdf (95.649 KB) 
What is Resilience-Dept of State.html (133.604 KB)

McEntire: Disaster Response and Recovery 2nd ed, Chapter 13 – McEntire Ch. 13.PDF
.
Chandra, A. (2011). Building Community Resilience to Disasters : A Way Forward to Enhance National Health Security. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation  Chap 7
Johnston, D. M., & Paton, D. (2006). Disaster Resilience : An Integrated Approach. Springfield, Ill: Charles C Thomas.  Chap 2 & 10
What is resilience?  US Dept of State – one page article – see attached.  url –  The United States Department of State. (n.d.) What is resilience? Retrieved from:            http://www.state.gov/m/med/dsmp/c44950.htm
What is Disaster Resilience?   –   This is an excellent website and the PDF is helpful, but focus now on the home page – http://www.gsdrc.org/topic-guides/disaster-resilience/concepts/what-is-disaster-resilience/
Check this brief but very informative note from HUD – the Dept of Housing and Urban Development.
https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr-edge-tr…
FOCUS POINTS
The McIntire chapter is an excellent overview of the concept of resilience. The other three chapters (attached) expand a bit and put the concept into practical terms.    You will about real-world examples – the good, the bad and the ugly.
– Discussion board question
* Define the term “resilience.” What attitudes, behaviors, and activities can be expected (or are proven) to enhance personal resilience? Neighborhood resilience? Community resilience? Are these activities complimentary, collaborative, or deleterious? Explain.
Remember, you do not start your own thread.  Simply add to the one I start:

Resilience is nothing more than the ability to return to normal. For a baseball struck by a bat-wielding Phillies right fielder, that means the ability to regain its normal shape.  For an American community such as a small town in southern California after an earhquake, it might mean re-opening schools and businesses or repairing / rebuilding homes.  It might mean seeking help from FEMA for the money to build.  For a city that saw death and destruction after two pressure cookers exploded, it might mean buying into the “Boston Strong” mentality.  Individual citizens cooperate with local, state and maybe federal agencies.  Churches allow the displaced to bring sleeping bags and cots to the church fellowship hall or gym.

Your thoughts?
– APA STYLE
johnston__d._m.____paton__d.__2006_._disaster_resilience___an_integrated_approach_chap_2.pdf

johnston__d._m.____paton__d.__2006_._disaster_resilience___an_integrated_approach_chap_10.pdf

chandra_building_community_resilience_to_disasters_chap_7.pdf

mcentire_ch._13.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Copyright © 2006. Charles C Thomas. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable
copyright law.
Chapter 2
IDENTIFYING THE CHARACTERISTICS
OF A DISASTER RESILIENT SOCIETY
DOUGLAS PATON
AND
DAVID JOHNSTON
INTRODUCTION
o develop resilience, it is necessary to identify its constituent components. This chapter introduces the resources and processes that
people, communities, and social systems can utilize to facilitate their
capacity to adapt to the challenges posed by disaster, recover as quickly as possible, and use the disaster experience as a catalyst for future
growth and development. It commences with an introduction to the
circumstances that will challenge adaptive competencies.
Gregg and Houghton (Chapter 3) introduce hazards in terms of
characteristics such as their frequency, magnitude, precursory and
reaction times, and their spatial and temporal distribution. In conjunction with the assessment of how these characteristics interact with
the built and social environment over time, hazard analysis thus plays
an important role in risk assessment and in the development of effective mitigation plans and strategies by identifying the causes and consequences of hazard activity that societies will have to adapt to. An
important target of this planning derives from understanding how hazard activity impacts on those elements of the built environment that
facilitate the performance of societal functions.
Johnston, Becker and Cousins (Chapter 4) discuss how hazards can
impact on the infrastructure, services, utilities and linkages that sustain societal functions (see also Chapter 14). They present several case
T
11
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 8/5/2016 1:56 PM via PHILADELPHIA UNIVERSITY
AN: 452697 ; Johnston, David Moore, Paton, Douglas.; Disaster Resilience : An Integrated Approach
Account: s4084935
Copyright © 2006. Charles C Thomas. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable
copyright law.
12
Disaster Resilience
studies that illustrate the diverse consequences that hazard activity can
have for these lifelines. They go on to discuss how lifeline technology
and processes can be integrated to formulate strategies designed to
facilitate their sustained operation in the event of a disaster.
The development of this capacity is a costly endeavor. Building
resilience and redundancy into these systems is expensive. Because
decisions made regarding the level of capacity in these systems are
derived from estimates of risk and from cost-benefit analysis, it is possible that certain hazard parameters (e.g., magnitude, intensity, duration) could exceed planning estimates of infrastructure resilience.
Consequently, the pragmatics of structural mitigation can never guarantee continuity of functioning under all possible conditions. Thus,
under certain circumstances and in certain locations, loss of lifelines
can constitute a significant secondary hazard. Lifeline failure must be
factored into the process of estimating the parameters of societal adaptive capacity (see also Chapter 14).
While ensuring that the physical environment and lifelines are as
robust as possible, resilience, at this level, describes only the degree to
which the infrastructure required to support societal activity will continue to be available. It only contributes to societal resilience if it can
be used by people and organizations to adapt to hazard consequences
in ways that ensure their continued functioning. People and organizations must have taken steps to ensure their ability to utilize this infrastructure. If the latter capabilities are absent, there will be no return on
the investment in infrastructure resilience.
What happens when a disaster strikes is very much a function of the
quality of the mechanisms developed to facilitate the adaptive capacity of a society, its citizens and its core social functions (Paton, 2000).
The remaining chapters explore the social elements exposed to hazard
consequences and discuss what can be done to develop their adaptive
capacity. It commences with consideration of societal mechanisms
specifically developed to manage risk.
Emergency management planning takes place not during periods of
hazard activity, but rather during periods of hazard quiescence when
hazards may well be the furthest thing from peoples’ minds. To maximize the likelihood that communities can realize their resilient potential under these circumstances, Schneider (Chapter 5) argues that
emergency management agencies play a pivotal role in the community planning and development required to facilitate disaster resilience.
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 8/5/2016 1:56 PM via PHILADELPHIA UNIVERSITY
AN: 452697 ; Johnston, David Moore, Paton, Douglas.; Disaster Resilience : An Integrated Approach
Account: s4084935
Copyright © 2006. Charles C Thomas. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable
copyright law.
Identifying the Characteristics
13
Schneider outlines how, since it takes place against a backdrop of
increasing community diversity, motivating and sustaining activities
designed to anticipate, prevent and mitigate hazard consequences is
becoming progressively more complex. He continues by discussing
the need for emergency management agencies to engage people and
political and social institutions in ways that link public policies with
community sustainability (see also Chapter 7). To do this it is necessary to understand the constituent components of adaptive capacity
that can inform the substance of these policies.
Following a brief overview of current definitions of resilience,
Buckle (Chapter 6) discusses these constituents and the assessment
processes by which their availability can be estimated. He reiterates a
point made by Schneider regarding the need to stop viewing communities as homogenous entities. In addition to accommodating the
intrinsic diversity (e.g., demographic) of communities, Buckle argues
that conceptualizing resilience requires that interaction within and
between levels (e.g., individual, community, institutional, environmental) is fundamental to comprehensive resilience assessment. His
review of the elements that comprise a resilient community (e.g.,
knowledge, shared values, social infrastructure) introduces several
issues that are explored in more detail in subsequent chapters. Two of
these issues, regarding community members’ hazard knowledge and
their disaster preparedness, are discussed next.
Paton, McClure and Bürgelt (Chapter 7) discuss how, even when it
is intended to inform them about significant issues in their environment, people are not passive recipients of hazard information. People
make judgments about the information presented to them and actively interpret it within socially constructed frames of reference defined
by their expectations, experience, beliefs and misconceptions about
hazards. Facilitating preparedness, according to this view, requires
more than just making information available to people; it must meet
the needs of diverse groups, make sense to them, and assist their making decisions regarding the adoption of protective measures.
Furthermore, they argue, strategies must extend beyond information
provision to engage community members in ways that facilitate their
adoption of protective actions.
Cottrell, in Chapter 8, expands on the decision-making theme in her
discussion of the relationship between socially constructed models of
hazards, their mitigation and their management. She focuses on one
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 8/5/2016 1:56 PM via PHILADELPHIA UNIVERSITY
AN: 452697 ; Johnston, David Moore, Paton, Douglas.; Disaster Resilience : An Integrated Approach
Account: s4084935
Copyright © 2006. Charles C Thomas. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable
copyright law.
14
Disaster Resilience
specific group, women, and how culture, social networks and personal characteristics influence choices made regarding adaptive strategies
for dealing with wet season hazards in northern Australia. Cottrell reiterates issues discussed in Chapter 6 regarding how structural mitigation and infrastructure development can actually reduce the likelihood
that people will take responsibility for preparing and how beliefs
regarding when to prepare make independent contributions to the
diversity that must be accommodated within the planning process.
Both the previous chapters discussed how individual choices and
actions are embedded in the social contexts in which decisions are
made. Smith (Chapter 9) develops a framework within which this
interaction can be conceptualized and systematically studied. He
focuses specifically on how social context influences hazard and risk
perception. Smith then proceeds to discuss the value of multilevel
models for articulating these relationships.
While, on the one hand, such models constitute a more representative model of adaptive capacity, integrating these levels of analysis also
raises new challenges for risk management. Smith discusses how reconciling individual and community costs and benefits can introduce
another source of conflict into community life that has implications for
readiness planning, even when dealing with hazards with the potential
to impact all citizens.
Planning occurs during periods when issues regarding the costs and
benefits of mitigation stand out against a background of hazard quiescence. Under these circumstances, community members will be well
aware of the costs associated with risk management, but less likely to
appreciate the benefits that could arise from their adoption (particularly if dealing with infrequently occurring events). This problem is
compounded by the limited period within which systematic hazard
analysis has taken place (see Chapter 3) and during which only a limited range of the possible permutations of hazard consequences will
have made their presence felt. Consequently, equity and fairness
regarding the distribution of risk throughout different sectors of the
community and community engagement in decision making about
acceptable levels of risk and the strategies used to mitigate this risk
become increasingly important components of strategies designed to
facilitate resilience (Paton, 2005; Paton & Bishop, 1996). Strategies
based on social justice principles can inform the understanding of
processes that influence risk acceptance and responsibility for safety.
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 8/5/2016 1:56 PM via PHILADELPHIA UNIVERSITY
AN: 452697 ; Johnston, David Moore, Paton, Douglas.; Disaster Resilience : An Integrated Approach
Account: s4084935
Copyright © 2006. Charles C Thomas. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable
copyright law.
Identifying the Characteristics
15
Ensuring that this can be built into hazard reduction and readiness
planning requires that mechanisms capable of providing insight into
perceived fairness are available.
Candidates for mechanisms capable of evaluating perceived fairness
are presented by Poolley, Cohen and O’Conner (Chapter 10) in their
discussion of the role of social networks and community competence
as resilience resources. In the context of a case study of Australian
communities impacted by cyclones, they discuss not only how community and personal attributes affect adaptive capacity, but also how
disaster can constitute a catalyst for individual and community growth.
To this point, discussion has concentrated on Western populations.
Jang and LaMendola (Chapter 11) discuss how indigenous cultural
characteristics can inform understanding of adaptive capacity. In a
study of Taiwanese populations affected by an earthquake, they illustrate how elements of the Hakka Spirit predict resilience and posttraumatic growth. Jang and LaMendola discuss how this cultural predisposition contributes to resilience in two ways. Firstly, it does so
through its influence on the way in which the relationship between
people and environment is perceived. Secondly, it provides affected
populations with an intrinsic set of social and psychological resources
that facilitate their capacity to adapt to disaster.
The likelihood of a similar cultural predisposition toward positive
social-ecological relationships developing in Western populations is
low. Consequently, it becomes necessary to specifically consider the
management of social-ecological interaction when developing comprehensive conceptualizations of resilience (Mileti, 1999).
In Chapter 12, Paton, Kelly and Doherty discuss social-ecological
interaction from three perspectives: the capacity of an ecological system to adapt to the demands made upon it that are independent of
human involvement; human action as a demand on the adaptive
capacity of ecological systems; and social-ecological interaction as a
source of adaptive capacity for people and communities. Their discussion focuses on identifying factors that can inform the development
of sustainable environmental practices that both reduce natural hazard
risk and enhance peoples’ adaptive capacity.
A common thread running through the preceding chapters is the
emphasis on resilience reflecting a capacity to make choices within
social contexts. To make these choices, people need information.
While having a prominent role to play in this regard, emergency man-
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 8/5/2016 1:56 PM via PHILADELPHIA UNIVERSITY
AN: 452697 ; Johnston, David Moore, Paton, Douglas.; Disaster Resilience : An Integrated Approach
Account: s4084935
Copyright © 2006. Charles C Thomas. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable
copyright law.
16
Disaster Resilience
agement and civic agencies responsible for risk management are not
the only sources of information. Information is also available, to civic
agencies and citizens alike, from the media. In many cases, the media
are the more active source, particularly when it comes to reporting
response and recovery efforts. How issues are reported can exercise a
significant influence on peoples’ perceptions of hazard characteristics,
their consequences and how they should be managed. This confers
upon the media a substantial capability to influence peoples’ future
adaptive capacity (see also Chapter 7). The importance of the media
can also be attributed to the fact that it often delivers information that
is filtered, processed and interpreted to varying extents and with varying degrees of accuracy.
Given the implicit uncertainty associated with hazard activity and
the fact that, by definition, a disaster is an event that exceeds the
capacity of societal resources to meet all needs generated (i.e., no
response can be 100% effective), this is a fertile area for misinterpretation. Not all those who receive media coverage will be able to weave
their way through the maze of issues required to construct an objective
view of these matters. Thus, how the media treat the complexity and
uncertainty that is an implicit characteristic of the hazard context can
influence both adaptive capacity and trust in formal sources of information, advice and recommendations (e.g., civic and scientific agencies). As a result, the media can exercise a powerful influence on the
debate that occurs regarding the causes and mitigation of hazard consequences. Media coverage can also influence public perceptions of
agencies with a civic responsibility for managing hazards.
Hughes and White (Chapter 13) discuss the relationship between
the media and societal resilience in the context of wildfire hazards.
They discuss media influence from several perspectives; reporting
events, the relationship between different media and public beliefs
regarding mitigation and response, and building relationships between
civic and media agencies. The effective management of this relationship will also influence whether media coverage enhances or hinders
adaptive capacity (e.g., through its influence on the sustained adoption
of protective measures (see Chapter 7).
Fundamental to societal resilience is the degree to which its economic systems can respond to and adapt to the consequences of hazard activity. Drawing upon ecological, engineering and organizational
theory definitions of resilience, Rose (chapter 14) fills a gap in the
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 8/5/2016 1:56 PM via PHILADELPHIA UNIVERSITY
AN: 452697 ; Johnston, David Moore, Paton, Douglas.; Disaster Resilience : An Integrated Approach
Account: s4084935
Copyright © 2006. Charles C Thomas. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable
copyright law.
Identifying the Characteristics
17
existing literature by offering an operational definition of economic
resilience that demonstrates its utility as a device for managing catastrophic risk through actively incorporating economic issues into
holistic natural hazard planning models. In pursuing this objective,
Rose discusses how to quantify and measure economic resilience. He
emphasizes the need to consider this issue in the context of the specific hazard characteristics (e.g., their duration and severity, see Chapter
3) that a society may have to contend with. By emphasizing the contribution of microeconomic levels to economic resilience, Rose also
introduces the need to consider how commercial and business continuity contributes to economic resilience and the continuity of employment.
Paton and Hill (Chapter 15) discuss the procedures and competencies that contribute to business resilience through disaster continuity
planning. The processes they discuss also have implications for ensuring functional continuity in agencies with response, recovery and
rebuilding roles and responsibilities. One group for whom a capacity
for sustained operations is essential are those agencies with responsibility for managing the consequences of disaster.
Paton and Auld (Chapter 16) discuss the relationship between
resilience in emergency managers and effective response management. They discuss adaptive capacity in this population as a process
that involves matching the consequences and demands to be managed
with the individual, team and organizational resources that can be
mobilized to confront hazard consequences. While emergency management agencies play pivotal roles in all phase of disaster planning,
reduction (mitigation), readiness, response, recovery and rebuilding,
the effectiveness of the societal response, as a whole, is a function of
the degree to which emergency planning and management roles are
complemented by the activities of many other groups and agencies.
King (Chapter 17) emphasizes that planning for resilient communities is the responsibility of all community members, agencies and
organizations. He does so by arguing that closer integration of planning
with the concepts of sense of place and sense of community (see also
Chapters 7, 10, 12) will help embed planning processes within the culture of a community (see also Chapter 11). That is, to develop
resilience as a capacity that grows out of people and their communities
rather than as something that is imposed upon them. He discusses how
this can be done within mitigation a …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

error: Content is protected !!