Federalism
Federalism is among the challenges encountered in coordinating all emergency management activities. It entails the management of our national laws and culture, encompassing the affiliation among the individuals of a particular country and their governments. Federalism is engrained in our Constitutional federalism—one people with two sovereigns (the state and the federal governments respectively).
How does federalism affect emergency management?
Federalism has conflicting goals that may cause tensions between the various government agencies at multiple levels instead of acting in unity with a response. There are numerous varying degrees and forms of collaboration associated with federalism. Federal intervention and support have shown instances of weakness in emergency management and response capabilities during devastating periods. Consequently, various states delay their requests for federal intervention, subsequently undermining the quality of response, thus resulting in loss of lives. These situations have impelled FEMA to consider circumstances that are appropriate to get involved during catastrophic events preemptively. Federal administration singly can not guarantee that an individual, household, state, or local needs are attained. Thus, the lack of proper responses and numerous bureaucracies result in poor management of emergencies, an extraordinary number of mass casualties, disruption, or damage which critically affects the population. Proactive intervention ad support from the federal government is highly controversial, and it seemingly violates the usually held precepts of America’s federalist system. Federalism ha frequently created an environment of confusion, leading to pushing of their responsibilities and blame in unsuccessful and inadequate measures when a disaster occurs. The deliberation of the government agency with the prime responsibility to lead in emergency management creates a weak, incompetent, and slow response to the severely affected populations. The debate on the body with obligations of relief and response initiatives create cohesion between the state and federal governments’ actions. When central government agencies are brought in, they are required to work closely with other levels in the implementation of disaster-relief policies, instead of attempting to replace or supersede local activities.
Identify four examples (from any week thus far), and explain how federalism impacts how governments respond to a disaster.
The Department of Homeland Security was established to transform the country’s emergency management operations and described that the function of central governments would shift in the event of critical and intricate circumstances termed as ‘‘Incidents of National Significance’’. The measure authorized the federal government to develop a push system and apply its relief measures even before the occurrence of a disaster and without any request and advice from the state agencies. Several incidences occurred and called for the involvement of the federal government. These occurrences include; Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Sandy, Centerville flooding, and even the Space Shuttle Columbia disasters. The emergency management of these disasters showed significant flaws and failures. For instance, Hurricane Katrina’s response failure started with the debate on the category of the hurricane and if it would strike in New Orleans and proceed with improper ad inadequate evacuation plans. Later, the process culminated in a relief attempt through the lack of supplies, planning, and workforce, communication breakdown that was of the most basic sort, failure to learn, supply failures, fraud, indecision, and abuse. Confusion is usually a failure in officials of DHS and FEMA as they are not proactive and deliver erroneous information to the general public. Some of these officials have inadequate training to perform their roles, thus affecting the smooth evacuation and proper planning of disaster management. Communication breakdown is due to the lack of system interoperability between agencies and equipment failure. Indecision plagues the leadership in areas such as the deployment of medical personnel, supplies, and other necessary items. Abuse and fraud are other failures after the discovery that some individuals’ payment was fraudulent and invalid after the occurrence of disasters. Federalism thus affects the government’s response to disasters in very adverse ways.
In what ways is the relationship between state and federal government for emergency management collaborative, based on the readings?
Collaboration is an essential foundation when dealing with technological and national disasters and hazards and the consequences of these events. Although there is typical collision in the attempt to work together after the arising of disasters, a collaborative culture recommended for the achievement proper care of citizens. Proper leadership is essential to derive power of effective strategies and transformation to yield compelling vision instead of rank, hierarchy, or standard operating procedures. Some of the ways in which state and federal government form relationship for collaboration is through efforts to provide healthcare to individuals and the attempt of local governments to seek grants and funding. Also, when local governments try to seek additional resources in an event of a disaster is a critical motivation to seek collaboration and when providing training exercises for emergency personnel for response to disasters.
Why do states get to determine their own emergency management structures? And what advantages or disadvantages does each state deciding how to conduct emergency management present?
During disasters, numerous vital activities must be procured rapidly and efficiently. Among the activities are, rescue, keeping individuals far from dangerous places, caring for the harmed people, opening up of shelters for families and individuals displaced from their homes, and evaluation of the situation to determine the help required. With all these things occurring, people are always inquiring for more information and without a proper plan, hope of getting these measures done effectively gets lost. Fortunately, states have developed emergency management structures that enable them to respond with efficacy and recover effectively. Their measures and voluntary agencies provide important services to the community. States have an advantage in planning their Emergency management plans as they have response readiness for effective response to present calamities. They are also able to carry out rapid recovery through mitigation of risk restoration of their built environments, and returning to their usual community lives.
Crisis Communications
Efficacy in communication is considerably vital to the responses of any disaster or emergency. Government executives must clearly communicate the risks facing the community, and establish strategic messages to guide the public in times of crisis.
How does the public see risk? How do the EM institutions see risk? How do decision-makers work to reconcile differences of public/institutional perception of risks?
Risk perception is a significant aspect of disaster risk management. Through an increment of public understanding of risks, disaster managers and planners attempt to stimulate individuals and communities to perform proper protective actions prior and during disasters. The public makes judgments concerning risks by considering the nature of disasters, probable occurrence and effect of the disaster, the variety of substitute actions, and the outcomes any potential alternative. The public is rarely aware of all the available alternatives and greatly differs in how they judge the outcomes of certain actions. The EM institutions prefer the command-and-control perception of risks. They usually differ in perspectives and priorities when dealing with disasters. Various emergency personnel are especially nor comfortable with ‘emergent group’-informal, voluntary, spontaneous, and self-organized attempt by communities, other individuals, ad neighborhoods to help. The independence of action and thought and the emergence of groups in an event of disasters is common and significant. Today, decisionmakers have to reconcile that their decisions will not be readily taken on trust. Thus, they need to work harder to acquire an adequate level of public/institutional confidence. Public attitudes towards decision-makers is majorly influenced by caring and competence aspects.
What is the mission of an effective disaster communications strategy? Who are the stakeholders?
Communication strategies are very essential and critical in engaging the public and achieving the best possible response since a well-developed strategy has positive impact on response rates. An effective disaster communications strategy is founded on basic principles to ensure emergency personnel successfully communicate with the public in all the steps of emergency management; mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. The objectives offer guidance to emergency agencies and the various officials involved in the programs and operations on effective ways to talk to the public. Also to ensure that they can talk to people, what to say and what not to say, the precision of accuracy and timeliness, and the manner of connecting with people when they talk. Mitigation communication involves promoting of implementation tactics, actions, and technologies that will help in the reduction of loss of property and lives in potential disasters. Preparedness communication strategies entails communication preparedness information that educates and encourages the public in expectancy of disaster occurrences. Response strategies encompasses providing the public with warnings, notification, evacuation, and situation information on present disasters. Recovery information entails informing individuals, families, and communities affected by a disaster with comprehensive information concerning ways to register for and receipt of disaster relief. Thus, the mission of an effective disaster communications strategy is the provision of accurate and timely information to the public regarding all steps of emergency management. The stakeholders include families, the government, suppliers, regulators, investors, and the community at large.
Describe the guidelines that should be followed when working with the media in disaster response.
The media is among the pillars of democracy. It plays the role of custodian in protecting the citizens of any country by informing and awakening them about their constitutional and human rights. In the event of any form of disaster, natural and humanmade, the media works hard in disaster response and helping in sensitization of the public in the most effective way through live coverages of risks and prompt reporting. The capacity of emergency management is communication of strategies and informing the public properly and adequately during disasters and crises. Equivocally significant is the value of the media as partners in the provision of guidance on preparedness, safeguarding the reputation of an EM organization, and creation of risk-reduction tactics.
What three (3) factors do the Department of Homeland Security/Federal Emergency Management Agency (DHS/FEMA) and its state and local partners need to address to improve its communications with the American people?
Communication to the public is an area that needs improvement if America aspires to have an effective DHS/FEMA system for the benefit of Americans. For instance, DHS has always depicted little concern in communicating with the public and when they do, outcomes are always adverse-‘duct tape and plastic’ disaster. FEMA’s poor communications in Hurricane Katrina is also a good example. DHS, the state, and local partners need to address three factors to improve its communications with the American people. To start with, there must be proper and committed leadership at the concerned parties (DHS, state, and local partners) and all government levels such as the executive level to provide information accurately and timely to the American people. The communication is particularly essential in the response and recovery phases of a terrorism attack. During disasters, the conventional perception that state’s information is supreme and hoarding data aids in retaining of the power is nearly categorically reversed. The withholding of information during disaster event bears an overall adverse impact on the welfare of the public and the impression the public created regarding involved agencies.
Secondly, all DHS at all levels must attempt to resolve wars between the sharing of information with Americans in advance and in the outcome of a terrorism attack that has value for intelligence or prosecution aims. This is directly connected to the commitment issue of leadership and has been numerously sighted by DHS as reasons for failure to share information with the American people. It is a challenging issue that DHS ignores. The continuous frustration among the state and public and local official is a sign that the issue cannot solve itself or just disappear. Another issue is the time to release information to the public without compromising sources of intelligence (in terrorism attack).
Thirdly, most work must be exerted by federal agencies and departments to better comprehend the principal threats encountered by our country and develop effective communication tactics that inform and educate the public about the risks with more valuable or suitable information. For instance, the 2001 anthrax occurrence showing misinformation and uninformed public officials sharing conflicting and wrong information to the public. The country’s officials must get better informed on the principle risks and prepare to explain complex information to the American people. The communication strategies must take into account how to inform the public in cases when the information available is incomplete since in numerous occasions the partiality of information is a probability.