Emma Carter, & Simon French. (2005). Nuclear emergency management in Europe: A review of approaches to decision making. In B. C. B. Van de Walle (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2005 – 2nd International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 247–259). Brussels: Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium.
Abstract: The need for transparent and consistent decision making in nuclear emergency management across local, regional, national and international levels is well recognised. Several decision support systems have been developed to help achieve this; but, by and large, with little consultation with potential DMs and with limited understanding of the emergency management procedures across Europe and how they differ. This work, part of a European Fifth Framework project EVATECH, considers the application of process modelling to document and compare the emergency management process in four countries. We have observed that the four process models are substantially different in their organizational structure and identified differences in where decisions are made, the management of advice and the communication network style. This papers focus is on the results of the comparison and the implications for the design and use of decision support systems.
|
Nan Zhang, Clare Bayley, & Simon French. (2008). Use of web-based group decision support for crisis management. In B. V. de W. F. Fiedrich (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2008 – 5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 55–58). Washington, DC: Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Abstract: Web-based group decision support systems (wGDSS) are becoming more common in organizations. In this paper, we provide a review and critique of the literature on wGDSS, raising a number of issues that need addressing. Then we report on a small scale experiment using Groupsystems ThinkTank to manage an issue to do with food safety. We also describe how we propose to use ThinkTank in a crisis situation.
|
Simon French, & Carmen Niculae. (2004). Believe in the model: Mishandle the emergency. In B. C. B. Van de Walle (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2004 – 1st International Workshop on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 9–14). Brussels: Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium.
Abstract: During the past quarter century there have been many developments in scientific models and computer codes to help predict the ongoing consequences in the aftermath of many types of emergency: e.g. storms and flooding, chemical and nuclear accident, epidemics such as SARS and terrorist attack. Some of these models relate to the immediate events and can help in managing the emergency; others predict longer term impacts and thus can help shape the strategy for the return to normality. But there are many pitfalls in the way of using these models effectively. Firstly, non-scientists and, sadly, many scientists believe in the models' predictions too much. The inherent uncertainties in the models are underestimated; sometimes almost unacknowledged. This means that initial strategies may need to be revised in ways that unsettle the public, losing their trust in the emergency management process. Secondly, the output from these models form an extremely valuable input to the decision making process; but only one such input. Most emergencies are events that have huge social and economic impacts alongside the health and environmental consequences. While we can model the latter passably well, we are not so good at modelling economic impacts and very poor at modelling social impacts. Too often our political masters promise the best 'science-based' decision making and too late realise that the social and economic impacts need addressing. In this paper, we explore how model predictions should be drawn into emergency management processes in more balanced ways than often has occurred in the past. © Proceedings ISCRAM 2004.
|
Simon French, Emma Carter, & Carmen Niculae. (2006). When experts or models disagree. In M. T. B. Van de Walle (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2006 – 3rd International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 547–553). Newark, NJ: Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium.
Abstract: In managing crises, decision makers are confronted with a plethora of uncertainties. Many arise because the world is uncertain, particularly in the context of a crisis. But some arise because analyses based upon different, but seemingly equivalent models lead to different forecasts. Other times expert advisors differ in their explanations and predictions of the evolving situation. We argue that when handled correctly such conflict can alert the decision makers to the inherent complexity and uncertainty of the situation and improve their management of the crisis.
|
Simon French, Naomi Chambers, Duncan Shaw, Alan Boyd, Russell King, & Alison Whitehead. (2012). A scoping study of R&D needs in emergency planning in UK healthcare systems. In Z.Franco J. R. L. Rothkrantz (Ed.), ISCRAM 2012 Conference Proceedings – 9th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management. Vancouver, BC: Simon Fraser University.
Abstract: Driven by events such as terrorist outrages and pandemics, the 21 st century has seen substantial changes in how countries plan for and manage emergencies across health care systems. Aside from changes in the pattern, type and scale of emergency, emergency preparedness must respond to developments in medical knowledge and treatment, and in information and communication technologies, particularly social networking. This report describes a scoping study of research and development (R&D) needs with regard to emergency planning in health care undertaken by the authors in the UK. We discuss the design of the study, difficulties in its conduct and, via a reference to the published final report, indicate its conclusions. © 2012 ISCRAM.
|
Simon French, & Nikolaos Agryris. (2014). Nuclear emergency management: Driven by precedent or international guidance? In and P.C. Shih. L. Plotnick M. S. P. S.R. Hiltz (Ed.), ISCRAM 2014 Conference Proceedings – 11th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 483–487). University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University.
Abstract: The NREFS project is re-evaluating the management of radiation accidents, paying attention to environmental, financial and safety issues and to the threat and response phase. In designing our project some two years ago, we were concerned to avoid any assumption that a future accident will be similar to a past accident, in particular the Chernobyl and Fukushima Accidents. After a year of research on the issues to be considered and the criteria that could or should drive the decision making, our concern has increased. We have found that international guidance provided by organisations such as ICRP and IAEA lack the specificity to help decision makers. Precedent set in the handling of earlier accidents provides much clearer and tighter guidance – and, moreover, one may feel that that the public will expect them to follow such precedent. Unfortunately the circumstances of a future accident may make precedent inapplicable. Consequently we believe that there is an urgent need to think more widely about nuclear emergency management.
|
Simon French, Nikolaos Argyris, William J. Nuttall, John Moriarty, & Phillips J. Thomas. (2013). The early phase of a radiation accident: Revisiting thinking on evacuation and exclusion zones. In J. Geldermann and T. Müller S. Fortier F. F. T. Comes (Ed.), ISCRAM 2013 Conference Proceedings – 10th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 296–300). KIT; Baden-Baden: Karlsruher Institut fur Technologie.
Abstract: We are just beginning a two year research project on the management of nuclear risk issues, paying particular attention to environmental, financial and safety issues. One aspect that concerns us is to avoid the assumption that any future accident will be similar to a past accident. In the cases of Chernobyl and Fukushima, it was possible both to evacuate the local population to impose a substantial exclusion zone, and we recognize that for many potential accidents this would be the case. But for some nuclear plant, it may not be so because of the large number of local inhabitants or because of some key industrial or societal infrastructure. We would like to take the opportunity of the ISCRAM conference to discuss this issue with a wide audience.
|
Simon French, Nikos Argyris, Jim Q. Smith, Stephanie Haywood, & Matthew C. Hort. (2017). Uncertainty Handling during Nuclear Accidents. In eds Aurélie Montarnal Matthieu Lauras Chihab Hanachi F. B. Tina Comes (Ed.), Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response And Management (pp. 15–24). Albi, France: Iscram.
Abstract: In the years following Chernobyl, many reports and projects reflected on how to improve emergency management processes in dealing with an accidental offsite release of radiation at a nuclear facility. A common observation was the need to address the inevitable uncertainties. Various suggestions were made and some of these were researched in some depth. The Fukushima Daiichi Disaster has led to further reflections. However, many of the uncertainties inherent in responding to a threatened or actual release remain unaddressed in the analyses and model runs that are conducted to support the emergency managers in their decision making. They are often left to factor in allowances for the uncertainty through informal discussion and unsupported judgement, and the full range of sources of uncertainty may not be addressed. In this paper, we summarise the issues and report on a project which has investigated the handling of uncertainty in the UK's national crisis cell. We suggest the R&D programmes needed to provide emergency managers with better guidance on uncertainty and how it may affect the consequences of taking different countermeasures.
|
Tina Comes, Valentin Bertsch, & Simon French. (2013). Designing dynamic stress tests for improved critical infrastructure resilience. In J. Geldermann and T. Müller S. Fortier F. F. T. Comes (Ed.), ISCRAM 2013 Conference Proceedings – 10th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 307–311). KIT; Baden-Baden: Karlsruher Institut fur Technologie.
Abstract: This paper outlines an approach to support decision-makers in designing resilient critical infrastructure (CI) networks. As CIs have become increasingly interdependent disruptions can have far-reaching impacts. We focus on the vulnerability of CIs and the socio-economic systems, in which they are embedded, independent from any initial risk event. To determine which disruptions are the most severe and must be avoided, quantitative and qualitative assessments of a disruption's consequences and the perspectives of multiple stakeholders need to be integrated. To this end, we combine the results of consequence models and expert assessments into stress test scenarios, which are evaluated using multi-criteria decision analysis techniques. This approach enables dynamic adaption of the stress tests in the face of a fast changing environment and to take account of better information about interdependencies or changing preferences. This approach helps make trade-offs between costs for resilient CIs and potential losses of disruptions clearly apparent.
|