The crisis management of disasters does not follow automatically from disaster planning. Research has shown that successful disaster management results primarily from the activities of emergency organizations. In particular, there are management problems with respect to the communication process, the exercise of authority, and the development of co-ordination.There are at least five different areas of difficulties in the communication process, namely, intra-and inter-organizational behaviours between organizations, from organizations to the public, from the public to organizations, and within systems of organizations. Exercise of authority difficulties stem from losses of higher echelon personnel because of over-work, conflict regarding authority over new disaster tasks, and clashes over organizational jurisdictional differences. Co-ordination difficulties come from lack of consensus among organizations, working on common but new disaster-related tasks, and difficulties in achieving overall co-ordination in any community disaster that is of any magnitude. Prior planning can limit these management difficulties but cannot completely eliminate all of them.

No abstract

No abstract

Using several data sources including an extensive database of media reports and a series of government documents, but relying primarily on the University of Delaware’s Disaster Research Center’s field research in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the authors describe the nontraditional behavior that emerged in that catastrophe. They also discuss the prosocial behavior (much of it emergent) that was by far the primary response to this event, despite widespread media reports of massive antisocial behavior. Their study focuses on individual and group reactions in Louisiana during the first three weeks following the hurricane. The authors limit their systematic analyses of emergent behavior to five groupings: hotels, hospitals, neighborhood groups, rescue teams, and the Joint Field Office. Their analysis shows that most of the improvisations undertaken helped in dealing with the various problems that continued to emerge following Katrina. The various social systems and the people in them rose to the demanding challenges of a catastrophe.

The discussion herein concerns important factors in the local management of disasters. We contrast this with the related but distinct process of disaster planning. Our assumption is that what is crucial is not management per se, but good management. Thus, to assess intelligently the management of community disasters requires an answer to the question: What is good management? The results of empirical research carried out by social scientists over the past 40 years are drawn upon in considering this question. The criteria identified entail: (1) correctly recognising differences between response and agent-generated demands; (2) adequately carrying out generic functions; (3) effectively mobilising personnel and resources; (4) generating an appropriate delegation of tasks and division of labour; (5) adequately processing information; (6) properly exercising decision-making; (7) developing overall coordination; (8) blending emergent and established organisational behaviours; (9) providing appropriate reports for the news media; and (10) having a well-functioning emergency operations centre. An issue also raised in the paper is how applicable these research findings-derived mostly from developed countries-are to the developing world.