Managing systemic risk in emergency management, organizational resilience and climate change adaptation

PurposeThis paper applies the theory of cascading, interconnected and compound risk to the practice of preparing for, managing, and responding to threats and hazards. Our goal is to propose a consistent approach for managing major risk in urban systems by bringing together emergency management, organisational resilience, and climate change adaptation.Design/methodology/approachWe develop a theory-building process using an example from the work of the Greater London Authority in the United Kingdom. First, we explore how emergency management approaches systemic risk, including examples from of exercises, contingency plans and responses to complex incidents. Secondly, we analyse how systemic risk is integrated into strategies and practices of climate change adaptation. Thirdly, we consider organisational resilience as a cross cutting element between the approaches.FindingsLondon has long been a champion of resilience strategies for dealing with systemic risk. However, this paper highlights a potential for integrating better the understanding of common points of failure in society and organisations, especially where they relate to interconnected domains and where they are driven by climate change.Originality/valueThe paper suggests shifting toward the concept of operational continuity to address systemic risk and gaps between Emergency Management, Organizational Resilience and Climate Change Adaptation.

Linking healthcare and societal resilience during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has highlighted the link between public healthcare and the broader context of operational response to complex crises. Data are needed to support the work of the emergency services and enhance governance. This study develops a Europe-wide analysis of perceptions, needs and priorities of the public affected by the Covid-19 emergency. An online multilingual survey was conducted from mid-May until mid-July 2020. The questionnaire investigates perceptions of public healthcare, emergency management and societal resilience. In total, N = 3029 valid answers were collected. They were analysed both as a whole and focusing on the most represented countries (Italy, Romania, Spain and the United Kingdom). Our findings highlight some perceived weaknesses in emergency management that are associated with the underlying vulnerability of the global interconnected society and public healthcare systems. The spreading of the epidemic in Italy represented a 'tipping point' for perceiving Covid-19 as an 'emergency' in the surveyed countries. The respondents uniformly suggested a preference for gradually restarting activities. We observed a tendency to ignore the cascading effects of Covid-19 and possible concurrence of threats. Our study highlights the need for practices designed to address the next phases of the Covid-19 crisis and prepare for future systemic shocks. Cascading effects that could compromise operational capacity need to be considered more carefully. We make the case for the reinforcement of cross-border coordination of public health initiatives, for standardization in business continuity management, and for dealing with the recovery at the European level.

Resilience stress testing for critical infrastructure

Critical infrastructure is vulnerable to systemic long-term stressors such as climate change, as well as shocks from extreme weather events, economic disruptions, and cyber failures. The complexity and interdependencies across critical infrastructure domains makes it susceptible to cascading failures, with the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is the most recent example of disruptions in supply chains, healthcare and emergency facilities. Stress testing offers a conceptual framework and methodology for identifying risks associated with cascading failures and selecting mitigation and recovery strategies. This paper reviews the fundamentals of stress-testing science and practice in different fields (medicine, engineering, economics) and identifies challenges associated with the application of existing methodologies to infrastructure systems. The currently practiced risk-based stress testing approaches may only be of limited use because they merely aim to identify the components of failing systems by varying stress loads. Adding a systems-thinking perspective and consideration of interconnectedness across system domains facilitates resilience stress testing (i.e., the impact of disruptions on the system's ability to recover and adapt). We propose combining risk and resilience stress testing into a tiered approach applicable to complex, interconnected infrastructure.

Perceptions of the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan with respect to cultural, information, disaster and social issues.

A questionnaire survey was distributed via the Internet to 600 respondents. Preliminary results revealed that most Japanese people regularly washed their hands and had low resistance to wearing masks even before the COVID-19 pandemic. Internet news was the most common source of information. Half of the respondents said they would "stay at home evacuation" if a disaster occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, reflecting the strategy promoted to reduce crowding in evacuation shelters. If a state of emergency must be reinstated, one-third of respondents said they could bear it for a few months and another one-third for a few weeks.