| 008 |
|
130627n^^^^^^^^xx^^^^^^o^^^^^|||^0^eng^d |
| 245 |
00 |
|a Early warning systems |h [electronic resource] |b reframing the discussion |y English. |
| 260 |
|
|a [S.l.] : |b Red de Estudios Sociales en Prevencion de Desastres en América Latina (LA RED) ; |a [S.l.] : |b Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (FLACSO), |c 2006. |
| 506 |
|
|a Refer to main document/publisher for use rights. |
| 510 |
|
|a Hall, P. H. (2006). Early warning systems: reframing the discussion. Red de Estudios Sociales en Prevencion de Desastres en América Latina (LA RED), Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (FLACSO). |
| 520 |
3 |
|a In this paper, Philip Hall argues that developing effective early warning systems cannot be primarily about science and technology, but about the leadership component of emergency response. It is people and not technologies that ultimately respond to disaster risks, and thus traditional “people-centered” methods should be the core element of any effective early warning system. While a broad literature exists on the issue of “early warning,” there is no coordinated or collaborative action at the international level to establish a standard for developing effective early warning systems. The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA), while calling for the implementation of early warning systems and for more palpable actions than debates, suffers from a deficiency in terms of delineating specific objectives to which national governments and related entities would be committed. Hall argues, in other words, that the HFA call for effective early warning systems has not yet become a reality and that, as a result, there is a need to provide a clear and compelling prescription for the implementation of an adequate early warning system and to make it an international accomplishment. Hall’s prescription, in terms of early warning systems, essentially consists of integrating and extending the capacities of existing emergency management. Hall assumes that initiatives toward the establishment of local, national, regional and international early warning systems should be under the leadership of emergency managers, not scientists and technologists. In Hall’s view, this should be the case because emergency managers, as contrasted with scientists and technologists, are people-centric in that they are acquainted with the fact that the community, as the risk owner, should be assisted in assessing and addressing risk. This paper addresses one of the weaker aspects of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA). It shows that this framework fails to outline of clear mechanism for establishing “early warning systems,” one of its main prescriptions. It, in turn, delineates the roles and responsibilities of the five primary early warning stakeholders: emergency managers, scientists, the media, public officials, and at-risk communities. |
| 520 |
0 |
|a General Risk Management |
| 533 |
|
|a Electronic reproduction. |c Florida International University, |d 2013. |f (dpSobek) |n Mode of access: World Wide Web. |n System requirements: Internet connectivity; Web browser software. |
| 650 |
1 |
|a Natural disaster warning systems. |
| 710 |
2 |
|a Disaster Risk Reduction Program, Florida International University (DRR/FIU), |e summary contributor. |
| 856 |
40 |
|u http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI13042577/00001 |y Click here for full text |
| 992 |
04 |
|a http://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/content/FI/13/04/25/77/00001/FI13042577_thm.jpg |
