[Critical Curriculum for Emergency Management Leaders: Three Essential
Themes]{.underline}

Glen Woodbury

Director, Washington State Emergency Management Division

May 28, 2004

Emergency Management Higher Education Conference

Emergency Management Institute

Emmitsburg, MD

June 8-9, 2004

The function and discipline of emergency management has evolved
significantly since its evolution from civil defense in the late 70's
and early 80's. The evolution has accelerated significantly since the
dawn of the millennium and the demands and expectations of a capable
emergency management leader requires new tools and educational
enhancements that were previously unnecessary, or at least not as
critical as in today's environment. While additional educational
curriculum enhancements could conceivably cover the spectrum from
anthropological studies to political science, there are three critical
themes that must be addressed to ensure that the nation has effective
emergency leaders: hazard and threat science, sociological and
psychological considerations, and prevention/mitigation principles.

[Hazard and Threat Science]{.underline}

Any experienced emergency manager could specify the principle hazards
that threaten their community or jurisdiction. Most could even provide
an above-layman's background to the specifics of the threats and the
science or history of the hazards. Unfortunately, much of this knowledge
comes from either a post-emergency analysis of an event that just
impacted their jurisdiction or a gradual series of presentations and
programmatic updates on specific hazards that are prepared for over a
period of time. Neither of these learning environments provides the deep
and pre-event understanding of threats necessary for an emergency leader
to effectively develop and implement *strategic* efforts to mitigate
these threats and/or to prepare for the response and recovery from their
consequences. Additionally, the depth of understanding across the
spectrum of hazards facing a community, business, or jurisdiction is
unbalanced. For example, a Pacific Northwest emergency manager may
understand, in geological detail, the three major earthquake threats to
the region, but may have little if any understanding of the finer points
of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE or "mad cow disease'.) Yet the
consequence response complexity and consequences of the latter may cause
as much, if not more, economic and government confidence damage to the
jurisdiction as would a minor seismic event. A Midwestern emergency
manager may be able to go into excruciating detail about the genesis and
meteorology of tornado formation, but if asked about the strategic
objectives of Al Qaeda and how this knowledge might guide critical
infrastructure protection priorities, the response might be silence.

Emergency management leaders need an academic, not just experiential,
knowledge base of the natural and manmade hazards that face their
regions or facilities. They need to know the science behind the threats,
not just the potential, operational consequences should these hazards
manifest themselves. The most effective curriculum would involve both
the inclusion of all the hazards an emergency manager would have to
address and a deep analysis of the science and/or history behind each
one. Senior leaders need to be enabled with the tools to develop and set
in motion strategic and holistic measures to address their threats, not
just simple, one dimensional, preparedness and response operational
activities. But the education in this theme should not end with just the
delivery of deeper threat awareness. The emergency manager should also
be taught high-quality research and analysis processes as well as
strategic application tools in order to most effectively apply this type
of knowledge.

[Sociological and Psychological Considerations]{.underline}

One of the flawed and yet widely believed assertions in the disaster
field is that citizens will panic during a disaster. The entertainment
industry has propagated this myth for decades as fictional disaster
after catastrophe depiction are rarely without a scene of people running
through the streets, looting and rioting and generally behaving as
individual beings bent on their own personal survival at the expense of
all others. Reality has borne out that, except in extreme and sporadic
circumstances, citizens will rush to the aid of their fellow man even at
the risk of their own safety. Unfortunately, this misunderstanding of
the psychology of disaster victims and the actual societal response to
emergency situations is not just an unfortunate misinterpretation.
Senior leaders in charge of preparing for disasters often presume that
"panic avoidance" be a critical planning consideration for catastrophic
scenarios, while the more probable challenge of managing masses of
volunteers and self-responders is often ignored or minimized in
preparation efforts. This is only one example of how a lack of
understanding of the psychological and sociological realities of those
emergency leaders are charged to protect can lead to ineffective
response and recovery activities.

Senior emergency management leaders should possess a deeper
understanding of how individuals "process" disaster scenarios as well as
how to best connect with citizens on the front end of preparedness as
well as in the recovery phase. What technique will encourage the most
citizens to prepare for disasters they might face? Why are most public
education campaigns only effective in a small percentage of those
targeted? How will an "average" person react to an Emergency Alert
System broadcast? Are Critical Incident Stress Debriefings helpful to
responders and communities or do they also do more harm than good in an
unacceptable number of those participating in them? The average
emergency manager does not consider the psychological realities of the
human mind when they promote and execute programs that are designed to
encourage, prepare and direct individuals to not only do the right
things before and during a disaster, but to assist them following the
emergencies aftermath. Mental counseling efforts are an established
component of a Disaster Field Office's operations, but the importance,
and therefore emphasis, to strongly support these activities may be
absent due to a lack of education in this area. Efforts are stressed to
rebuild a victim's financial and structural circumstances after a
disaster but the infinitely more important recovery of the emotional and
mental health of a victim is not focused upon.

How groups of individuals and communities react to emergency messaging
and disaster scenarios is also critically important to understand. Some
neighborhoods vigorously seek out Community Emergency Response Team
training while others decline the offer even though individual member's
perceptions of their risk to disaster events may be high. Employee
groups of some companies and workers in high rise buildings collectively
demand safety training while those elsewhere are apathetic, though not
ignorant, to preparedness efforts. Understanding group dynamic and
social interaction principles is vital in not only effective
preparedness campaigns but just as important in the proper direction of
communities during an event. This essential thematic area for higher
education should include curriculum covering the psychological,
sociological and physiological responses of individuals and groups to
stressful and traumatic events. Effective emergency managers need to
know how emergency directions, disaster scene environments and
post-disaster assistance are mentally processed by those targeted and
affected.

[Prevention and Mitigation Principles]{.underline}

The ultimate purpose of any emergency management leader should be to
make themselves and their organizations obsolete through the definitive
application of prevention and mitigation measures. The balance of
resources, attention and focus on responding and recovering from
disasters significantly outweighs those spent on investments in either
eliminating the threat in the first place or at least minimizing the
consequences of the event. In the Homeland Security arena, initial funds
and policies clearly directed the application of state and local efforts
towards planning, training, and equipping to deal with the aftermath of
an attack, not towards preventing one in the first place. Only recently
has a policy and emphasis shift been made to invest more heavily in
systems, doctrine and equipment that will stop an attack or harden the
targets that are most likely at risk. In the natural hazard world,
governments have been slightly more aggressive in mitigation emphasis.
Flood hazard reductions, non-structural mitigation for earthquakes, and
more comprehensive programs, such as Project Impact, have reduced and
even eliminated the catastrophic consequences of potential hazards. The
challenge, however, has always been that proof of successful preventive
policies and investments are not always clear; for instance, if they are
done well, nothing happens. Additionally, shifting the allocation of
funds from response programs towards prevention are ill advised since
the cost benefit of preventive efforts are rarely realized in the one
fiscal cycle.

But this perceived inability to prove the benefits of mitigation actions
should not be a barrier to advocating for the resources and policies to
preventing the bad things from happening in the first place. Emergency
management leaders require a higher level of understanding of risk
management, cost-benefit analysis, land use planning, terrorist
strategies and counter-terrorism programs, critical infrastructure
protection, vulnerability assessment processes and other areas that
would enable a leader to advocate effectively for the application of
preventive measures. An effective emergency manager should be able to
successfully convince elected officials and executives that investment
in prevention measures are an effective application of a jurisdiction's
or organization's funds, even though the benefits may not be realized
for several years. These investments may not "pay-off' in a given term
of office or may be so long term that the benefits are not perceived at
all, because they occur after the knowledge of their initial application
have passed from organizational memory. The point is that emergency
management leaders must have the tools and education to argue for
preventive policies regardless of the near-term political, economic and
physical barriers that challenge their implementation.

[Summary]{.underline}

Familiarity of emergency response operations, disaster rule
applications, effective communications techniques, and executive
administration are all examples of the basic knowledge that emergency
managers must possess. But to be effective in the implementation of
policies and actions that truly reduce the impacts of disasters;
emergency leaders must be educated more intensely in the background of
the hazards they face, the human reactions to these threats, and the
tools to effect prevention measures that may eliminate the hazards or
consequences from ever occurring in the first place. These three themes
should not be delivered solely in one-time, individual courses; once
taught, their essence and application should be weaved throughout the
overall curriculum since their value is holistic in nature, not just
single parts of the whole of effective public safety leadership.