Search results

The complexity of surprise industrial disasters, the high probability of their occurrence, their protracted effects, and the risks they impose on humanity make empirical research and international exchanges of information essential. Industrial disasters also give rise to significant ethical uncertainty which requires emergency managers, industrial leaders, and political decision makers to reformulate the manner in which expert knowledge is developed and applied to the tasks of risk reduction and public safety. In assessing the challenges posed by surprise or unexpected industrial disasters, it is the purpose of this essay to heighten awareness of the ethical dimensions of all knowledge in this field. Additionally, the concept of prohibited risk is suggested as a crucial normative variable to be analyzed in the application of this knowledge to the essential tasks of emergency management in relation to industrial disasters.

Examines the disastrous industrial accidents globally since the Second World War. Change and innovation development have accelerated dramatically through this century. The war itself influenced various developments. Argues that environmental problems are problems of development. Bhopal, Chernobyl, Exxon Valdez, Kuwait’s oil wells and Siberian pipelines are all used as examples. Industrial activity and social change have increased vulnerability to man‐made hazards. Hazardous industries tend to be sited nearer the poorest and most vulnerable people, making the effects of any disaster even greater. Discusses the changing attitudes to man‐made disasters ‐ from fatalistic resignation to a desire to gain greater control. Assessment, legislation and mitigation have meant improvements and are indicators of willingness and ability to handle the threats.

A disaster and a crisis are two different, and related events. The two terms are sometimes used interchangeably. Man‐made disaster that occurs at an industrial organization, may develop into an industrial crisis. Crisis can happen to any organization. It has been noted that there were no universally accepted definitions yet developed for disaster and crisis. There is also no universally available criteria, to define the disaster in terms of the consequences, such as the casualties and the cost of damage. This paper reviews the definitions, types, characteristics, criteria and models of disaster and crisis. Also the types of crisis were rearranged and the differences between the disasters and crises have been summarized.

This paper aims to provide graduate students, researchers, and government and independent agencies with an overview of disaster types.

Disaster types have been the subject of research by and concern to academicians and to government and independent agencies. The paper summarizes the views of researchers and agencies. Disaster types are collected from several sources such as technical, general articles, internet web sites, and internal reports. Disaster definitions, criteria and types are reviewed. Disasters are classified into natural disasters, man‐made disasters, and hybrid disasters. Man‐made disasters are classified into technological disasters, transportation accidents, public places failure, and production failure. The paper presents a comparison between the main types of disasters.

Disasters are classified into three types: naturals, man‐mades, and hybrid disasters. It is believed that the three disaster types cover all disastrous events. No definition of disaster is universally accepted. Several criteria are proposed to define disasters. Understanding of disaster definitions, criteria, and types aids researchers and agencies in the proper classification, good recording, and better analysis of disasters. Disasters have different characteristics and impact; however, disasters have a common element, which is their severity.

This paper presents a definition of and criteria for disasters. The paper also presents an overview of disaster types. The paper presents a comparison between the main types of disasters, and combines various disaster terms into one record.

This paper aims to examine and compare extant literature on the application of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques in humanitarian operations (HOs) and humanitarian supply chains (HSCs). It identifies the status of existing research in the field and suggests a roadmap for academicians to undertake further research in HOs and HSCs using MCDM techniques.

The paper systematically reviews the research on MCDM applications in HO and HSC domains from 2011 to 2022, as the field gained traction post-2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami phenomena. In the first step, an exhaustive search for journal articles is conducted using 48 keyword searches. To ensure quality, only those articles published in journals featuring in the first quartile of the Scimago Journal Ranking were selected. A total of 103 peer-reviewed articles were selected for the review and then segregated into different categories for analysis.

The paper highlights insufficient high-quality research in HOs that utilizes MCDM methods. It proposes a roadmap for scholars to enhance the research outcomes by advocating adopting mixed methods. The analysis of various studies revealed a notable absence of contextual reference. A contextual mind map specific to HOs has been developed to assist future research endeavors. This resource can guide researchers in determining the appropriate contextual framework for their studies.

This paper will help practitioners understand the research carried out in the field. The aspiring researchers will identify the gap in the extant research and work on future research directions.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first literature review on applying MCDM in HOs and HSCs. It summarises the current status and proposes future research directions.

The purpose of this article is to apply what social scientists have learned from decades of research on natural and technological disasters to better understand the short-term and potential long-term human impacts of the 9/11 attacks. The short-term response to the 9/11 attacks was similar to how people and communities typically respond to natural disasters. One year after the attacks, news reports suggest that factors identified in technological disaster research as causing collective trauma, rather than recovery, are beginning to surface. We identify three patterns typically present in (but not restricted to) the aftermath of technological disasters that contribute to slow recovery and ongoing collective trauma and evaluate the likelihood that these factors will impact the recovery process for those impacted by the 9/11 attacks. We conclude that due to perceptions of governmental failure, the likelihood of protracted litigation, and uncertainty regarding the mental and physical health of victims, the social and psychological impacts of the 9/11 attacks will likely be severe and long-term. As such, the concluding section recommends the implementation of a long-term clinical intervention program for mitigating these potential chronic impacts and facilitating the timely recovery of survivors.

This paper aims to describe the phenomenon of multiple simultaneous un/natural disasters (MSDs). This study also aims to describe the importance and contribution of philosophy in describing MSDs warning and alarming systems.

The paper summarizes topics in the philosophy of MSDs that were covered in detail in previous research in order to continue with the topic of the philosophy of MSDs alarming and warning. A practical solution to conceptual paradoxes is researched by means of conceptual-morphological analysis.

The paper proposes a conceptual idea for MSDs alarming system which is its main topic; namely, it offers a conceptual solution to a series of practical-conceptual paradoxes that occur before, during and after MSDs.

This is only a conceptual research, and it does not deal with particular technological solutions.

The proposed solution of this research could be implemented in various warning and alarm systems.

The proposed concept of a universal alarm system for MSDs was not previously proposed.

The purpose of this paper is to review current theoretical approaches in disaster studies and put forward a model of vulnerability that incorporates physical science, engineering, and social science research.

A comprehensive model of vulnerability is proposed, which includes both liabilities and capabilities from the physical and social environments. The model is related to risk, susceptibility, resistance, and resilience to vulnerability and disasters.

This review assesses current concepts as guides for disaster management and suggests that a more complete view of vulnerability is more apt to generate inclusive and integrated disaster policies.

Since this model is relatively new, its applicability needs to be examined further in terms of the phases of disasters and the many stakeholders involved in emergency management.

The holistic model of vulnerability in this paper may help emergency managers better understand disasters and devise relevant policies to counter them. The paper underscores the importance of broad and integrated methods for dealing with socially constructed disasters. It is related to environmental, infrastructure, economic, political, cultural, and other variables.

This paper is unique in that it presents four viewpoints of vulnerability and because it applies the proposed model to many different types of disasters.

Corporate management must face not only the legal consequences of failing to manage risk adequately and to protect the public and the environment, but also the potential risks to profits and corporate reputations. There is thus an urgent need to understand organisational and industrial disasters better, and to suggest how strategic decisions makers can plan to prevent them. A formal systems methodology is applied to risk management problems. This approach is used to examine a number of case studies which cover a broad spectrum. All the case studies resulted in disastrous consequences either in terms of human suffering or for the environment. In addition, the financial and legal consequences for top management were severe. The failures of each system are examined, with particular reference to the role played by top management. It is suggested that all the failures can be analysed under three broad categories: organisational issues, human response issues and external factors. Specific strategies are suggested for each of these areas to assist corporate decision makers in disaster prevention.

The focus of this study was to analyze crisis management in a context of high-reliability organizations (HRO) evidenced in two cases of Brazilian air disasters. Aspects of human and technological natures were examined, addressing the complex sociotechnical system.

This in-depth case study addressed the two most serious air disasters on Brazilian territory. The first case involved a midair collision between Gol Flight 1907 and the Legacy jet. In the second case, TAM flight 3054 had difficulty braking when landing at the airport and crashed into a building. Data were collected from official disaster documents.

The results revealed that the management and operational activities aimed to maintain the necessary conditions that prioritize a high level of reliability. High reliability mainly involves concern over failure, reluctance to accept simplified interpretations, sensitivity to operations, commitment to resilience and detailed structure specifications.

The implications are based on alerting highly reliable organizations, emphasizing the focus on managing more reliably, resiliently and conscientiously. Changes will be required in the operations of organizations seeking to learn to manage unexpected events and respond quickly to continually improve the responsiveness of their services.

In the perspective of an intrinsic case study for crisis management in a context of HRO and disaster risk management, the originality of this study lies in its examination of the paradoxical nature of control within the systems of dangerous operations in complex organizations, as well as their contradictions in a high-reliability system.