EDMA/S-Electronic Disaster Management Architecture/System

The EDMA project aims to build a reference platform for disaster management in the domains of natural as well as man-made disasters with a specific focus on needs of Organizations. In this context organizations might be public bodies as well as private sector which share obligations and duties for risk prevention and response. EDMA strives to employ the accruing information of an incident in combination with existing technology in order to provide disaster assessment and communication services in particular with the citizens before, during and after it occurs. With EDMA, organizations will be assisted in the creation and efficient management of issues inherent to their respective responsibilities. Background Over the last two decades, the rise of information technologies has affected virtually all segments of society, and successfully met with that of disaster management, warning systems and decision support for emergency situations. This could be witnessed in the development of risk-related projects developed world wide. In particular, Automation in risk management has been an opportunity for IT specialists and risk management (RM) experts to explore IT-based solutions for risk management services. Among these solution, Software Oriented Architectures (SOA) has demonstrated a capability to host several risk-related applications, based on function-specific modules..The EDMA project lead to the successful development of a SOA platform addressing organizations User Group requirements for disaster and emergency management. While developing this system, EDMA members could benefit from a wealth of resources data, information, hard/software solutions, good practices already existing in the field of IT-based applications for RM purposes. EDMA partners could also witness similarities in frequently asked questions (FAQs) and difficulties users were confronted with when relying on IT applications for RM purposes. This includes: 1. Availability of and access to data 2. Privacy issues 3. Reliability of telecom networks and other utilities 4. Liability issues change management issues in client organizations 5. Similarities in problem-solving approaches, and solutions, could also be identified. These are the considerations that have lead EDMA members to recognize the need for support to be provided to IT users engaged in risk and emergency decisions, tasks or activities. The EDMA User Group aims at addressing this need.

EDMA User group: a definition Activity description: Rationale: Promote IT applications as tools for improved disaster management at local level. Strategy: Dissemination of the EDMA approach, technology and solutions. Audience: The EDMA User Group is open o To every designer, user or administrator of IT-based applications, tools or services for risk and emergency management o To every stakeholder in disaster management, emergency planning and disaster mitigation. EDMA User group: format and contents The EDMA User Group is supported by a web-based platform for exchange of information and good practice. Participants of the User Group will access: Information All public material from EDMA project and other participating projects Selection of existing IT applications for risk management Literature resources, including relevant websites Contact details of members Call for partners page (e.g.: for project development or business opportunity) Services Description of EDMA technological solutions Description of EDMA approach to management of IT/RM interfaces On-line form to submit needs assessment request Additional services likely to be provided by the EDMA User Group include: expert review of technical documents or papers, labelling of IT/RM projects etc. Such services may however require payment of fees. Governance of the EDMA user group Governance of the EDMA User Group shall cover the following issues: Executive duties Overall strategy of the User Group: scientific, technical and business issues Daily administration of the EDMA User Group Website (webmaster) o Monitoring of posted contents o Moderation of online forum or chats Admission of new members or partners, including business partners

Objectives EDMA strives to support the needs of organizations in order to assist them in the creation and efficient management of the individual crisis management tasks they are in charge of. In detail, EDMA will assist organizations to:

Access monitored sensor data related to various natural and industrial risks to enable proper risk assessment. Define and employ process guidelines for risk management procedures. Deploy and manage enhanced emergency telecommunications systems to support appropriate dissemination and warning procedures. To provide a collaboration platform for the exchange of information among different stakeholders. To prepare the elements for the implementation of a risk management network at a local scale.

EDMA will build an innovative prototype that targets the requirements of small and mediumsized communities. EDMA will link with existing risk management initiatives and pursue information exchange, discussion, and reuse of research results and components with a particular focus in mind: migrate these results to small and medium-sized communities. Of specific importance is the fact that the consortium includes several small to medium-sized companies with innovative product portfolios. The EDMA project will develop a comprehensive risk management platform which is based on the orchestration of relevant systems thanks to the application of service-oriented architectures, and interfaces to other systems will augment the EDMA service portfolio where needed. Scientific and Technical Authorities EDMA will assist local authorities to:

Access monitored data related to various industrial risks existing within their district, Deploy and manage their adapted emergency telecommunications systems, Implement a public communication system devoted to the information of their fellowcitizens.

EDMA will focus on the management of minor accidents and hazard as well as daily monitoring of limited risks, with relative limited potential impacts and consequences on the integrity of citizens, their health and goods. In case of major crisis, the responsibility of informing, warning and/or evacuation of citizens mostly remains within the police or other blue-light organizations. In such situation, the EDMA objective can assist on ensuring that all information about the identified crisis is being continuously transferred and updated to the appropriate authority in charge. The EDMA system could in case of major disasters still act as the main information channel towards the Citizens.

In the purpose to answer to organization needs, priority is given in EDMA to the building of a package of cost-effective, agile, interoperable, easy of use, standardized and secure IT solutions, allowing a wide and easy integration in many various municipalities, regions and districts. Thanks to the use of the innovative EDMA SOA prototype, European small and medium-sized local authorities, local safety and security organization, companies as well as residing individuals will have the possibility to efficiently exchange information. Such an approach can lead to the merging of all local but separated risk management systems - including communication and alert ones - in a unique system, as a way to improve the security of small and medium-sized communities. Project Goal Project EDMA(Electronic Disaster Management Architecture) aims to build a reference platform for risk management in the domains of natural as well as man-made disasters with a specific focus on the needs of organizations. These organizations might be public as well as private, sharing obligations and duties for risk prevention and response. Hence, specific attention will be devoted to a customizable platform, which can be tailored to the needs of individual risk at hand as well as local equipment and requirement. The current state of risk management can be characterized by the availability of many heterogeneous information sources. The question arises how to draw conclusions from existing sources for the purpose of task planning i.e. How to assess the current and future risk level for a specific type of event. How to govern the work flow processes in a collaborative way. How to reach and advise effected people, be they professional rescue forces for citizens. EDMA seeks to employ this information in combination with existing technology in order to provide risk assessment and communication services in particular with the citizens before , during and after incidents. EDMA will build an innovative prototype that targets the requirements of organizations. EDMA will link with existing risk management initiatives and pursue information exchange, discussion and reuse of research results and components with a particular focus in mind: migrate these results to organizations. The EDMA project will develop a comprehensive risk management platform which is based on the orchestration of relevant systems thanks to the application of service oriented architectures: interfaces to other systems will augment EDMA service portfolio where needed.

Scientific and Technological Challenges

Research on a generic SOA for risk management systems with a holistic approach to flexibly integrate standards and components. Research on risk management for organizations: decision making patterns, information needs, assets, and vulnerabilities. Application of workflow and decision systems to risk management tasks for organizations requirements; decision system based on key indicators with map based visualization tools. Design and implementation of a risk monitoring system configurable to a multitude of contexts, and centralization of risk measure data in local authorities system. Mapping of basic best practices of risk management to process and workflow engines with online support in risks at present. Citizen Relationship Management(CiRM): applying commercial oriented CiRM systems to the task of communication with citizens in the risk management context plus instantaneous warning of citizens in affected regions via multi channel means.

METHODOLOGY-The Diagnosis
The methodology of risk diagnosis is intended to make overall assessment of risks inherent to common space for people living there. Such spatial risks are considered to change over time. Therefore diagnosis starts with assessing the current status of common spatial risks, and then continuously monitors their changes over time. By definition this methodology includes what is called the method of seismic diagnosis of houses, buildings and facilities. However it is important to note that the methodology is used to make an overall assessment of the collection of houses, buildings and facilities located on common space, instead of independently assessing each of them. 1. It should produce information with policy-linkage label: Where policy means a bundle of diagnosis and prescriptions (countermeasures) to collectively achieve the goal of a safer and secured life under disaster risks. 2. Diagnosis underlines identification of the status, instead of immediately starting planning. 3. PDCA cycle should be reinterpreted to emphasize the phase of to check as a starting point of the cycle, rather than to highlight the phase of to plan as commonly interpreted to be appropriate.

4. Cities and regions as common space entailing diverse types of inherent spatial risks tend to change over time. Diagnosis requires continuous monitoring and continuous updating. 5. To put it otherwise, this methodology can also support risk communication among different stakeholders whose views, perceptions and information are limited and not so much mutually compatible. 6. Diagnostic methodology can be utilized for vertically integrating multiple strata of region viewed as vital common spatial/temporal system.

Tool and system development Action Planning Research team and Human network Dvelopment Methods Used

Regional Level -Damage Simulator -Social/Economic impact evaluation model -Predictions and Policies for local Governments -Researchers, Government Officials, Engineers etc.

Community Level -Diagnosis on wooden houses. - Community disaster impact assessment model -Reinforcement of Guidelines -Technicians, Residents, Volunteers etc.

The purpose of research is to discover or change laws and theory while the purpose or evaluations is to affix a value to the process or outcome. Research is used to define a cause : effect relationship between independent and dependent variable(s). Currently, such experimental studies either are impossible to conduct in the setting of a disaster or are considered unethical. Until recently, reports of disaster responses primarily have been anecdotal and descriptive with little or no structure. They have had little value in the elimination of hazards, reduction of risks, improvement in the absorbing and/or buffering capacities, reduction in vulnerability, and or enhancement of disaster preparedness. They have served to shape our perceptions of the medical and public-health needs associated with certain events. During the last two decades, methodologies used in the social sciences gradually have been adapted to the study of disasters. Such studies have contributed greatly to our understanding of the patho-physiology of disasters and the effects of specific interventions on the affected populations or populations at risk for an event. Not all aspects of such interventions can be measured, but most can be assessed using qualitative methodologies. The importance of using both qualitative and quantitative assessments of effects is discussed. RESEARCH IS defined as: studious inquiry or examination; to investigate thoroughly; investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and interpretation of facts, revisions of accepted theories or laws in the light of new facts, or the practical application of such new or revised theories or laws. 1 To evaluate is a verb and is defined as: to determine or fix a value to; to determine the significance or worth of, usually by careful appraisal or study. 2 These two terms vary in their purpose: research is to discover or change laws and theory; evaluation is to affix value to the process or outcome. Evaluation research, therefore, is investigation for the purpose of affixing a value to what is being studied. The use of experimental research methodologies forms the basis for much of our medical knowledge. Randomized, controlled, experimental studies long have been used as the gold standard. The purpose of such studies has been to prove that a cause:effect relationship can be established between independent and dependent variables. To many, studies that have not used these methodologies do not constitute true scientific studies.

Experimental studies of the effects of an intervention relative to disasters have not been
reported. It either has been considered impossible or ethically inappropriate, or both, to identify experimental and control groups essential for the hypothesis testing that is required for the conduct of such studies. Applications for the use of experimental studies in the setting of disasters or events that result in mass casualties may be quite limited, and the design, acceptance, and implementation of such studies in these settings remain as tasks for the future. Even though the occurrence of some events that result in disasters often may be predictable, they nevertheless strike more or less unexpectedly. Furthermore, disasters may be precipitated by a wide variety of events, never are exactly the same, and involve different geographic areas, populations, and cultures. Until the last decade, disaster research had been limited to narrative descriptions of the event(s) that precipitated the disaster, reports of the numbers of persons killed, injured, and/or displaced and the procedure applied thereafter. The adequacy of the procedures has been judged in terms of the response and related to the needs as assessed by the providers or any other external group and not necessarily related to the real needs of the affected population. Generally, published papers consist of anecdotal descriptions with little or no structure. Such reports also may be found in after-action reports generated by governmental, intergovernmental (IGOs), and nongovernmental (NGOs) organizations that have participated in the disaster responses and relief activities. Unfortunately, many of these reports have been biased and self-serving, as they have been performed by the responding agencies themselves. They have had little value in the elimination or modification of hazards, reduction of risks, improvement of the absorbing and/or buffering capacities, reduction of vulnerability, and/or enhancement of preparedness for events for future responses or for the design and implementation of future relief activities. Little in the way of hypotheses that may affect the future have been generated, or much less, tested. Research into the aspects of disasters has two principal objectives: (1) Developing an understanding of the pathophysiology of disasters; and (2) Evaluating the effects of specific interventions on the affected population or populations at risk. Gaining an understanding of the pathophysiology of disasters should facilitate identification of strategies to enhance the absorbing capacity of a society to specific event types and of those factors that seem common to all disasters regardless of their type. Evaluation research should facilitate identification of interventions that provide the highest level of efficiency at the lowest possible cost, and have optimal effectiveness, efficacy, and benefit to the affected population or these populations at risk for a disaster.

Descriptive studies have been valuable in enhancing our overall knowledge about the
consequences of disasters caused by a variety of events and about some of the procedures that seem to have made a difference in the outcome. However, these studies usually have assumed a link between the responses or interventions and some or all of the outcomes. Other studies have described the adverse effects of a disaster on the population and the kinds of remedies that were available or provided to the population affected. They have served to shape our perceptions of the recovery measures associated with particular sudden-, gradual-, or slow-onset events.

Another approach for research into the aspects of disasters has been the use of Epidemiological methodologies. Such studies have been used primarily for the purposes of investigating risk factors. This particular methodology, while scientific, is limited in terms of its scope and cannot be used readily as a tool for judging or evaluating the effectiveness and adequacy of procedures provided during disaster response. Nevertheless, disaster epidemiological techniques are very useful to answer specific research questions as part of the overall design of an evaluative study.

Quasi-experimental designs such as longitudinal (before-and-after) studies, also have

some application in the study of disasters. Although fraught with the danger of inclusion of confounding variables that may occur concurrently with what is being studied, before-after studies may form the basis for assessing the damage caused by an event. Assessment of damage is not possible without knowledge of the pre-event status of the affected society. Furthermore, the goal of disaster responses and relief is the return of the affected society to its pre-event status. Thus, damage assessments are a form of longitudinal studies. It is important to recognize that not all of the effects of an event on the population or of the effects of specific interventions can be measured.. Measurements require the use of quantitative data techniques to collect such data. Some aspects of the study of disasters can be quantified, while others cannot be measured directly. However, many aspects of the study of disasters and the responses to them can be assessed using qualitative data collection techniques. Others can be scaled and analyzed using inferential statistical methods. Combining the different methods may provide a whole spectrum of data collection techniques that can be applied to the study of disasters. The selection of the best technique(s) depends upon the question(s) being posed. Often, combinations of techniques may provide the best answers. Detailed descriptions of all of the available techniques that can be used for the study of disasters are provided within these Guidelines using Templates to assist investigators in the identification of the problems to be studied, framing the question, selecting the techniques to answer the questions, implementing studies, and analyzing and applying the results.

Conceptual Model
The ultimate objective of disaster management is to bring the probability that damage will occur from an event as close to zero as is possible. A conceptual model is proposed that uses a generic, non-quantitative, mathematical expression (formula) for relating the probability that damage will occur with specific hazards and with the risk posed by the hazard and vulnerabilities. Actions are subdivided into those that are implemented before a hazard becomes an event and those provided as a response to an event that is occurring or has occurred. In the former category are those actions that either augment or mitigate vulnerability by increasing or decreasing the absorbing capacity and/or buffering capacity of the population/environment at risk for an event. Responses to an event either may be productive or counterproductive. Use of this formula in disaster planning and analysis should assist in identification of the essential elements that contribute to a disaster.

Elements that contributing to a disaster are:1. Hazards and risks dictated by nature 2. Hazards and risks introduced by humans in order to achieve another objective 3. Actions of humans that result in augmentation of the negative effects of an event 4. Acceptance of a calculated risk. A model may help to further the understanding of the mechanisms and pathophysiology of a disaster. The model is not intended to be quantitative, but highlights the conceptual framework upon which this work is based. An absolute prerequisite for the development of a disaster is the presence of a hazard. A hazard may be caused by nature, by human actions, or by a combination of both. Manmade hazards may be deliberate (war, terrorism), a calculated risk, an unexpected side effect, and in some situations, even may not be recognized as human-caused. For example, building a hydroelectric dam is a part of a process to provide clean, reproducible power; but the price paid is the creation of a hazard with potential for the dam to burst or to have a negative ecological influence upstream and/or downstream from the dam. In other cases, the risk posed by the hazard may exceed the calculated gain, not necessarily because it is likely to happen, but because the damage that could result would be immense. The tragedy of Chernobyl is an example of the latter situation. In both examples provided above, both the gain and the probability of sustaining damage may affect the same group of people. In the case of Chernobyl, it also affected populations who never gained from its operations. Sometimes, the increased risk that the hazard will become an event is not recognisedi or is underestimated. In other cases, the hazard is recognized, but the real gain occurs elsewhere than in the area in which the hazard is constructed. The Bhopal tragedy was an extreme example of this situation: weak regulations governing such production allowed the implementation of simpler protective measures and enabled the production of a pesticide at a much cheaper cost than would have been possible in a country with stricter legislation.15 Thus, the manufacturer secured greater savings in the costs of production than if the manufacturing plant had been constructed in a country with stricter regulations, and the country in which the plant was constructed benefited from the additional jobs for its citizens and from the taxes collected. The provision of more jobs is a strong incentive in developing countries, and, if the security needs are not known by the population at risk, the export of such a hazard may be called development, even though it carries with it not only exposure to a new hazard, but a substantial risk that an event may occur. Thus, it is necessary to separate Hazards (H) into two main classes: (1) Hazards dictated by nature; and (2) Hazards produced by human activities. Therefore:

H = Hnat + Hman
Where H = total hazards Hnat = hazards dictated by nature; and Hman = hazards that result from human actions.

Hazards are everywhere. However, there is a considerable difference in the likelihood that the same type of hazard will evolve into an event in different parts of the world. Furthermore, the actualization of a hazard of the same magnitude may create a disaster in some areas, whereas its occurrence may be absorbed with little damage in another part of the world. Some of the factors causing damage may be the same regardless of the types of hazards involved. Therefore, analyses that predict a potential for damage reduction or prevention, or that a hazard will become an event, should use more generic methods than one just associated with one specific hazard. Strictly speaking, there are two risks or probabilities associated with the presence of a hazard: (1) the risk that a hazard will become an event; and (2) the risk that damage will occur. The term Damage Probability (PD) will be used to describe the latter, and Risk (RH) will be used to describe the probability that a hazard will turn into an event. A disaster, then, is a possible result of a hazard that becomes an event and produces damage beyond the coping mechanisms of the population impacted. Therefore, identification of the elements that may define the probability that an actuated hazard will create damage will be helpful for decisionmaking as how to obtain maximum benefit from investment of limited resources (prospective), and in identifying the reasons that damage did result from the impact of an event (retrospective). The event, in itself, may or may not produce enough damage to create a disaster. This is dependent heavily upon the extent to which a society is vulnerable to the occurrence of a specific event. Both the features of nature and the influence of actions by man determine this vulnerability. These vulnerability factors are designated as Vnat and Vman respectively for the probability (PD) of being damaged by a specific event. Thus, combining all of the above, the damage probability (PD) can be expressed as: PD =

(RH)(Hnat + Hman)(Vnat + Vman)

Where: PD is the probability that damage will result from a specific event; f denotes the function of: RH is the probability that the hazard will become an event; H is the hazard; Vnat is the vulnerability provided by natural phenomena; and Vman is the vulnerability created by human actions. Thus, human activities may alter the vulnerability of a given society in either direction (increase or decrease). Such alterations that occur before an event happens (a) and result in increasing the vulnerability for damage, are defined as vulnerability augmentation, and are indicated by the term, a1. Alterations that are achieved before an event occurs that decrease vulnerability for damage are called vulnerability mitigation and are indicated by the term, a2.After an event has occurred, emergency aid/actions constituting the response, are annotated by the letter b. Such response actions are meant to be productive (b2), but also could be counter-productive (b1). An example of the latter was the medically inappropriate provision of glucose-laden infusion fluids to treat a cholera epidemic in Somalia more than a decade ago.6 Unsolicited aid frequently turns out to be counter-productive (b1), even if it, in itself, is not harmful: it consumes resources even if its contribution seems insignificant. The provision of aid that no longer is needed also may be

counter-productive. The latter includes the continuation of supplying commodities or assistance after the real needs have been satisfied. An important objective for these Guidelines is to avoid this kind of mismanagement in the future. Thus, the human influence on vulnerability comprises all four elements

Vman = a1 + a2 + b1 + b2
Given this concept, the bracketed elements in the equation (Vnat + a1+a2 + b1 + b2) represent the total vulnerability of the society for a specific type of event. Thus,Vnat is the natural vulnerability of the environment and (a1 + a2 + b1 + b2) define all human actions influencing vulnerability (in either direction) including level and type of preparedness. And, the formula for damage probability becomes:

PD = f (Hnat + Hman) (RH)(Vnat + a1 + a2 + b1 + b2)

Where: PD is the probability that an event will inflict damage on the society and/or the environment at risk; f is a function of the relationship between all of the variables contained within and between the brackets; H is a hazard; RH is the probability (risk) that this hazard will be converted into an event; Hman is the human component responsible for the hazard; Hnat is the hazard dictated by nature; Vnat represents the resultant vulnerability to the event as determined by nature. a is the sum of the actions taken before an event occurs a1 is the vulnerability augmentation, a2 is the vulnerability mitigation; b is the sum of the actions taken during or after an event occurs b1 is the counter-productive disaster response; and b2 is the productive disaster response. Currently, it is not known how the factors in the formula influence the outcome: Are they additive, multiplicative, logarithmic, exponential, etc.? Thus, the term f for function, must be considered a generic mathematical entity, and it is not meant as a quantitative statement. Use of the Formula This formula represents an attempt to identify each of the essential elements contributing to a disaster, and how each influences the probability that damage will occur from an event. Today, emphasis tends to be placed on productive response (b2), since it is this aspect of disasters upon which the media tend to focus. Properly implemented, the approach using this formula may encourage the conduct of more balanced evaluations of all of the elements affected in a disaster. In a generic way, its use also should facilitate the analysis of any incidents or accidents. In this form, it may become a long-term instrument to guide people as to how to best address their efforts to minimize the problems inherent in a disaster. The results of such research efforts should be analyzed in the context of the formula.