Over time emergency management has shifted from a command-and-control approach to a collaborative-styled due to the growth of information systems. According to Morakabati (2017), the command-and-control model deals mainly with a hierarchical system to control activities using military forces, while the collaborative approach offers interaction on a top-down to a bottom-up approach, incorporating a more flexible network. In dealing with disaster, most countries have an emergency management system that falls among the two extremes, or otherwise, a pure command system or a pure collaborative system. While there are several benefits and limitations for each side (Alexander, 2002; Buck et al., 2006), the author believes that modern emergency management needs to emphasize more on collaboration instead of command system, yet still incorporate the latter one in an adaptive way.
Many scholars have argued that command-and-control style should not be applied for civil protection (Rodriguez, Quarantelli and Dynes 2006). However, the system indeed has benefits for emergency management. For instance, command-and-control system has detailed guidelines, advanced field communication as well as high-skilled personnel. Nevertheless, in the rapid-changing environment where disasters are getting complex, collaboration outweighs the strict command for emergency management. Rigid command systems relatively failed to deal with wide-scale disasters (Buck et al., 2006), since the massive crises require multi-level and intra-sectoral organization involvement. Therefore, collaboration vertically and horizontally is paramount instead of command-and-control in times of large and complex events.
source: https://www.conocophillips.com/operations/safety-health-security/commitment-to-safety/emergency-preparedness/
Furthermore, right after the disaster happens, collaboration is needed more because there is a lack of actual information on the site, and it is nearly impossible to strictly control and command each move. Collaboration from volunteers, on the other hand, play important role in the crises spot. They are often present earlier in the field and know more information than the authority. They contribute in various ways, such as debris clearing, collecting funds, medicals and supplies, as well as providing shelter and psychological aids (Wenger 1991). Also, the involvement of voluntarism within people at risk builds the community’s capacity to deal with upcoming disasters and make them more resilient. (Waugh & Streib, 2006)
Source: https://www.northeastern.edu/graduate/blog/future-of-emergency-management/
However, concerning more on the collaborative system does not mean rejecting the command system at all. Rintakoski and Alho (2008) state that there is still a place for a command approach in a suitable format to achieve successful emergency management. The collaboration approach may face challenges where there are various stakeholders with different interests (Morakabati et al., 2017). Hence, we need to make sure that working organizations are harmonized and have the typical set of objectives. Command system still needs to be adapted for emergency management but not necessarily be authoritarian and limit the freedom of non-governmental organizations. It is essential that the commander has good leadership and give clear direction to the public and private sectors. Thus, all can work together as expected to meet the effectiveness and efficiency of emergency management.
In conclusion, to face a highly complex disaster, modern emergency management demands the involvement of a wide range of organizations. This certainly cannot be done through only a command-and-control system that relies upon a top-down approach and rigid move. However, while the collaborative approach should be put on the greater proportion in emergency management, the command system needs to be retained to ensure the collaboration runs in the appropriate manner.
Author:
Khonsa Indana Zulfa
Mahasiswi UCL, MSc Risk, Disaster and Resilience
References:
- Alexander, D. (2002). From civil defence to civil protection – and back again. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 11(3), 209–213. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653560210435803
- Buck, D. A., Trainor, J. E., & Aguirre, B. E. (2006). A Critical Evaluation of the Incident Command System and NIMS. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1252
- Morakabati, Y., Page, S. J., & Fletcher, J. (2017). Emergency Management and Tourism Stakeholder Responses to Crises: A Global Survey. J Travel Res, 56(3), 299-316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287516641516
- Havidan Rodriguez, E. L. Quarantelli and Russell R. Dynes, editors(2006) Handbook of Disaster Research. Springer
- Rintakoski, K., and S. Alho. 2008. “Improving the Coherence of Crisis Management: New Technologies for Command and Control Systems.” Study for the European Parliament Policy Department External Policies, European Parliament Think Tank
- Waugh, W. L., & Streib, G. (2006). Collaboration and Leadership for Effective Emergency Management. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00673.x Wenger, Dennis E. (1991.) “Emergent and Volunteer Behavior During Disasters: Research Findings and Planning Implications.” Texas A&M University, Hazard Reduction Recovery Center