Emergency Management policy

at
Categories
Tags

 

Provide your group with an overview of the stakeholders involved in your identified policy. List all of the stakeholders and describe how they are included in or impacted by the decision-making process. Make use of this module’s required resources to ensure that you have included all possible stakeholders.

Stakeholder Profile

Amy Hill posted Jun 25, 2022 7:33 PM

I am covering Emergency Management policy. It should be noted that Emergency Management includes four phases: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. Internal and external stakeholders play various roles in each phase of Emergency Management. I will discuss each phase in further detail and identify the stakeholders in each phase.

The fema.gov (n.d.). website defines the mitigation phase as actions taken to prevent or reduce the cause, impact, and consequences of disasters. The website goes on to provide examples of mitigation: constructing levees or permanent barriers to control flooding or buying insurance policies. Stakeholders in this phase include the local emergency management, citizens and the media. The local media shares information of things being done in the community to keep citizens informed of mitigation activities. Citizens that live in areas prone to natural disasters purchase the required insurance to protect themselves and their property.

The fema.gov (n.d.). website defines the preparedness stage as planning, training, and educational activities for events that cannot be mitigated. Examples include developing disaster preparedness plans for what to do, where to go, or who to call for help in a disaster or exercising plans through drills, tabletop exercises, and full-scale exercises. The stakeholders involved in this phase is the local emergency manager, state emergency manager, citizens, and the media.

The fema.gov (n.d.) website defines the response phase as occurring in immediate aftermath of a disaster. During the response phase, businesses and other operations do not function normally. Personal safety and well-being in an emergency and the duration of the response phase depend on the level of preparedness. Examples include implementing disaster response plans, conducting search and rescue missions, taking actions to protect yourself, your family, your animals, and others. Stakeholders in this phase are first responders, local emergency manager, state emergency management, federal emergency management (depending on the severity of the disaster), citizens (disaster victims), local business owners, local and national media, and the red cross.

The last phase is the recovery phase. The fema.gov (n.d.) website defines this stage as restoration efforts occurring concurrently with regular operations and activities. The recovery period from a disaster can be prolonged. Examples include preventing or reducing stress-related illnesses and excessive financial burdens or rebuilding damaged structures. Stakeholders involved in this phase are citizens (disaster victims), local business owners, local emergency manager, state emergency management, federal emergency management, media, and the red cross.

https://training.fema.gov/emiweb/downloads/is111_unit%204.pdf

https://training.fema.gov/emiweb/downloads/hdr/session%204%20powerpoint.pdf

In your responses to your group members, provide feedback on their stakeholder profiles.

• Have they included the full range of stakeholders for this policy?

• Are there any additional stakeholders that should be considered?

• Is there anything you would add about how stakeholders are included in or impacted by the decision-making process for this particular policy?

For your response posts, you must do the following:

Refer to the discussion prompt for response requirements.

Write a post of one to three paragraphs.

Demonstrate more depth and thought than simply stating “I agree” or “You are wrong.”

Consider content from other parts of the course where appropriate. Use proper citation methods for your discipline when referencing scholarly or popular sources.

Sample Solution

The colonization and seemingly nonsensical division of Africa by European powers in the late nineteenth century did nothing to prevent or stave ethnic conflict in the coming decades—although the politically motivated creation of new borders on the continent at least moderately contributed to later ethnic conflict. But did the festering wounds left by the European colonizers directly cause later ethnic violence? Rather than asking such a specific question, it is better to examine these conflicts as having both ultimate and more immediate causes. And this is how we must examine the case of Rwanda, and even its closely related sister, Burundi: indeed, their Belgian colonizers bred problems that ultimately led to the countries’ ethnic issues, culminating in a number of genocides in the latter half of the twentieth century; but it was their own people and political strife that was at the root of the problem (BBC). Moreover the ultimate and more immediate causes often co mingle, as one may give rise to the other. Because of the shifts in political power brought on by the Belgians in their countries the various ethnic groups there became increasingly more violent. Soon violent incidents became the norm, directly ushering in the ethnic conflicts between the Hutu and Tutsi years later.

Theoretical Answer

In order to better understand the leap from ethnic conflict to genocide, it is important to take into account how different approaches would address this issue. As such, in this section, I’ll be addressing the link between ethnic conflict and genocide through the lens of rationalism, culturalism, and structuralism.

A rationalist approach would assume that ethnic conflict, like all human interaction, is the result of individual’s rational pursuit of universal interests such as wealth, power, and security. Conflict among ethnic lines creates uncertainty of each groups intentions, and may overestimate hostilitle actions, thus escalating the conflict further. They are also uncertain about outcomes in case of conflict, and thus don’t know when to concede and avoid catastrophe. The main insight is that strategies of mass violence are developed in response to real and perceived threats to the maintenance of political power.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.
Hi, how can I help?