Comparative Analysis of Crisis, Emergency, Response, and Recovery Management

سال انتشار: 1405
نوع سند: مقاله کنفرانسی
زبان: انگلیسی
مشاهده: 51

فایل این مقاله در 12 صفحه با فرمت PDF قابل دریافت می باشد

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این مقاله:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

ICST05_0054

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 10 مهر 1405

چکیده مقاله:

Crisis Management, Emergency Management, Response Management, and Recovery Management are four interrelated yet conceptually distinct pillars of the disaster management cycle. While operational overlaps are inevitable, each domain differs in its objectives, temporal scope, decision-making level, and operational tools. These distinctions are particularly critical in the context of urban infrastructure and industrial accidents, where cascading effects can disrupt multiple sectors simultaneously. This paper synthesizes insights from recent scholarly and institutional sources to provide a detailed comparative analysis of these four domains. It examines their respective roles across the three primary phases of the disaster cycle-pre-event, during-event, and post-event-supported by international standards such as ISO ۲۲۳۶۱ and ISO ۲۲۳۲۰, the Sendai Framework, and the FEMA National Response and Recovery Frameworks. The analysis reveals that Crisis Management focuses on strategic governance, inter-agency coordination, and risk reduction; Emergency Management emphasizes preparedness, rapid mobilization, and hazard-specific contingency planning; Response Management is concerned with tactical, on-the-ground operations to contain and mitigate immediate impacts; and Recovery Management addresses medium- to long-term restoration, reconstruction, and resilience-building. Two real-world case studies-the ۲۰۲۰ Beirut Port explosion and the ۲۰۱۸ Genoa Morandi Bridge collapse-illustrate how failures or strengths in each domain can influence overall disaster outcomes. The paper concludes with a proposed integrated matrix model linking domains, phases, and enabling technologies such as AI-driven Decision Support Systems (DSS), IoT-based monitoring, GIS, and Multi-Hazard Early Warning Systems (MHEWS). This model offers a practical framework for policymakers, urban planners, and emergency managers to enhance coordination, reduce losses, and accelerate recovery.

کلیدواژه ها:

نویسندگان

Panisa Hassanzadeh

PhD candidate in Disaster Engineering, Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Esmail Salehi

Department of Disaster Engineering, Education and Environmental Systems, Graduate Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Ahmad Nohegar

Department of Disaster Engineering, Education and Environmental Systems, Graduate Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran