0


我们如何改进应对灾难的方法?

How Can We Improve Disaster Response?
课程网址: http://videolectures.net/mitworld_oye_larson_sheffi_idr/  
主讲教师: Yossi Sheffi, Kenneth Oye, Richard C. Larson
开课单位: 麻省理工学院
开课时间: 2013-03-08
课程语种: 英语
中文简介:
专家小组成员表示,即使美国从卡特里娜飓风中汲取了正确的教训,在下一场灾难中,美国仍可能陷入困境。在政府的某些领域,肯尼斯·奥伊指出,“由于你不喜欢,弱点可能持续很长一段时间不要面对现实测试。卡特里娜是一个现实测试,对(FEMA)有着不可忽视的影响。“他继续说,这个机构在以前的政府中运作良好,他从十多年前飓风安德鲁的失误中吸取了教训。但随后9/11事件发生,并将FEMA纳入国土安全部。 Oye说:“由于其(新)重点关注恐怖主义,有自然灾害经验的中层管理人员离开了,并被替换为赞助人......它变成了一个空心机构。”Oye担心灾难“不在游戏书中,我们在哪里项目和猜测“如核或生物恐怖主义。理查德拉尔森评估了对俄克拉荷马城爆炸,东京地铁沙林袭击,博帕尔瓦斯爆炸等灾难的反应的有效性,并总结了这些经验的一些教训:介词用品和设备;期待许多志愿者和下班人员,并为他们的部署制定规则;实施911通话的“数据拖网”,以防“独立报告真是一件大事;”减少手机和收音机的交通堵塞;并期望围绕疏散决定进行权衡。但是,Larsen指出,“与改善飓风反应一样重要的是,考虑下一次流感大流行可能更为重要。”Yossi Sheffi看到组织在灾难袭击后肆虐并失败。他回忆说,英国政府对2001年口蹄疫爆发的初步反应使事情变得更糟。当它“关闭整个乡村以灌输信心时,对旅游业的破坏是对农业部门造成的损害的2.5倍。”这种过度反应是典型的高影响,低概率事件,Sheffi说,所以“发展弹性抵抗大冲击是一个组织问题。“正如许多全球公司在库存中建立冗余,加强通信和安全一样,国家预防必须涉及”过程收紧“和投资基础设施,从实现能源独立到支持漏水供应。 “准备下一个,而不是最后一个,”Sheffi建议道。 “下次不会有三天的警告。”
课程简介: Even if the U.S. draws the right lessons from Hurricane Katrina, panelists suggest, the nation may still be caught short in the next disaster. In some areas of government, Kenneth Oye points out, “weaknesses can go on for a long time because you don’t confront a reality test. Katrina was a reality test with implications for (FEMA) that could not be ignored.” This agency had functioned quite well in prior administrations, he continues, having learned from mistakes following Hurricane Andrew more than a decade ago. But then came 9/11 and the incorporation of FEMA into the Department of Homeland Security. Says Oye, “With its (new) focus on terrorism, middle management people with experience in natural disasters left, and were replaced with patronage appointments…It became a hollow agency.” Oye worries about disasters “not in the play book, where we project and guess” such as nuclear or biological terrorism. Richard Larson grades the effectiveness of responses to such disasters as the Oklahoma City bombing, the Tokyo subway sarin attack, the Bhopal gas explosion, and summarizes some lessons from these experiences: preposition supplies and equipment; anticipate lots of volunteers and off-duty personnel, and set up rules for their deployment; implement “data trawling” of 911 calls in case “independent reports turn out to be really one massive thing;” reduce traffic congestion on phones and radios; and expect tradeoffs around evacuation decisions. But, notes Larsen, “as important as an improved hurricane response is, it’s probably more important to think about the next flu pandemic.” Yossi Sheffi has seen organizations splutter and fail after catastrophe strikes. The British government’s initial response to a 2001 outbreak of foot and mouth disease made things worse, he recalls. When it “closed its entire countryside to instill confidence, the damage to tourism was 2.5 times the damage to the agricultural sector.” This kind of overreaction is typical of high impact, low probability events, says Sheffi, so “developing resilience to withstand big shocks is an organizational issue.” Just as many global corporations build redundancy in inventory, and beef up communications and security, national prevention must involve “process tightening” and investing in infrastructure, from achieving energy independence to shoring up leaky water supplies. “Prepare for the next one, not the last one,” Sheffi counsels. “It won’t be coming with three days warning next time.”
关 键 词: 卡特里娜飓风; 恐怖主义; 自然灾害
课程来源: 视频讲座网
最后编审: 2019-05-25:cwx
阅读次数: 50