5. Systems Failure Revisited

According to the international commitment through the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) Panel on Tropical Cyclones, the World Meteorological Organization’s Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre (RSMC-New Delhi) now issues information four to eight times a day to panel member countries when tropical cyclones form in the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea (Pattie 2009). The panel member countries include: Thailand, Myanmar, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Oman (Pattie 2009). It is claimed that this core information made available by the World Meteorological Organization was vital to reducing human deaths during the cyclones Nargis in 2008 in Myanmar (Pattie 2009) and Mahasen in Bangladesh in 2013. The UN systems including the World Health Organization, United Nations Environment Programme, United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, World Meteorological Organization, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, World Food Programme and The Famine Early Warning Systems Network – are now given a special charge by the aforementioned governments to foster awareness and develop the effective use of early warning systems in their institutional jurisdictions (Glantz 2009). In Sendai, the World Meteorological Organization announced more support to governments and others in developing multi-hazard early warning systems (UNISDR 2015b).

Government of India modernised the Indian Meteorology Department by: ‘(i) commissioning 10 global positioning system stations; (ii) installing nine Doppler Weather Radars besides the existing five Doppler Weather Radars which have improved real time monitoring services; (iii) installing integrated Airport Meteorological Instruments at Mumbai, Hyderabad, Bangalore, Jaipur and Delhi airports; (iv) installing 550 Automatic Weather Stations apart from the existing 125, in addition to installation of 689 Automatic Rain Gauges; (v) commissioning of a set of four High Power Computers with a total installed capacity of 124 Teraflops for global data processing and Numerical Weather Prediction for weather forecasting services. A district-level agro-meteorological advisory service along with a five days in advance district-level weather forecast system, covering all the 555 districts, was launched for farmers in partnership with a number of Central Government ministries and organisations, state-level institutions, private agencies, non-governmental organizations, progressive farmers and the media. Over 3 million farmers have subscribed to receive this information through mobile phones’ (Planning Commission 2013a: 254).

The Planning Commission of India has been renamed as Nitiyog by the current Prime Minister, Mr. Narendro Modi.

Reflection-in-action is based on a rapid interpretation of the situation (Ghaye and Ghaye 1998). It indicates that it commences in the middle of action, whereas ‘reflection-on-action’ occurs after the event to improve future action (Ghaye and Ghaye 1998; Schön 1983).

This mission systems approach was developed by Adolph Hitler’s military in Germany. The essence of this approach is that: “a subordinate commander, a subaltern […] should be trained to a level where he (or very rarely, she) could achieve the tactical goals of superior officers, with or without orders. […] Such a localised system of behavioural guidance makes heavy demands on the personal qualities of the superiors. A prerequisite is an extensive experience of the jobs carried out in the workplace of the conditions under which they are likely to be performed. […] Effective teams capable of operating autonomously when the circumstances demand it, need high quality leaders. This is in turn requires with the organisation invest heavily in the quality, motivation and experience – its first line supervisory” (Reason 1997: 218).

The IAS exam is considered to be one of the toughest exams in India and the success rate is just 0.1% (GoI 2008; UPSC 2015).

Author’s other respondents including the three District Emergency Officers, Deputy General Manager of Odisha State Disaster Management Authority and the Deputy Relief Commissioner were recruited through the Odisha State Civil Service exam. Besides this, the District Emergency Officers of Jagatsinghpur and Ganjam had M.Phil. from two prestigious Universities of India (Jawaharlal Nehru University and the Institute of Population Studies in Mumbai) and the Deputy General Manager of Odisha State Disaster Management Authority had a Ph.D. All the respondents were also highly educated.

Until 2005 only Odisha, Gujarat and Maharashtra had state disaster management policies in India.

Europe’s Meteosat Generation Satellite (MSG) and the American National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are both responsible for weather forecasting (DLR 2013). As part of the International Charter, ‘Space and Major Disasters’ DLR’s Centre for Satellite-Assisted Crisis Information (ZKI) in Germany played a crucial role in supplying up-to-date satellite images (with the help of TerraSAR-Z and RapidEye) to the Japanese government in the aftermath of the Japan Tsunami in 2011. The satellite images led to the development of maps in order to supply relief forces with useful information immediately (DLR 2013).

“Within the first 48 hours after Super Typhoon Haiyan’s landfall, nearly 230,000 tweets were published internationally containing a situationally relevant hashtag. From those tweets, over 600 written messages and 180 images were identified containing actionable information for emergency response planning” (Moore and Verity 2014: 3).

Three hashtags for emergencies are: Early standardisation of the disaster name (e.g., #Fay), how to report non-emergency needs (e.g., #PublicRep) and requesting emergency assistance (e.g., #911US)” (Moore and Verity 2014: 2).

Command and control (C2) is different from the ‘chain of command’ approach (Alberts and Hayes 2003). The chain of command (C) is a traditional approach where the commander (traditional leader—see Senge 1990) is in charge of decision making. Command usually subsumed control in this approach. In C2, on the other hand, the command and control responsibilities are shared. There is no longer one commander in charge rather a collection of individuals (primary and secondary responders) who are assigned to accomplish a mission. Actions, inactions, active errors, cultures and mental models are of equal importance in the operation of C2 (Alberts and Hayes 2003: 14–15).

In a visit to the Royal Society in London in February 2014, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for disaster risk reduction, Ms. Margareta Wahlström announced ‘that the second phase of the Hyogo Framework’ (now the Sendai Framework) will be geared towards making Disaster Risk Reduction ‘trans-boundary’ by taking ‘systems view’. The focus will also be on building organisational resilience, in addition to building the resilience of at-risk communities (Kemp 2014). The author was extremely excited by this announcement. On 24 June 2015, Margareta Wahlström revisited the Royal Society of London again as part of the Policy Lab Meeting on ‘From Agreement to Action: What Next for the New Global Framework on Disasters?’ The author attended this meeting. Margareta Wahlström provided an excellent synopsis of the Sendai Framework, one in which she recurrently emphasised the role of science in order to improve the disaster risk reduction practice.

After the meeting, the author spoke to Margareta Wahlström and reminded her of her earlier allusion to a systems view in February 2014. This is the summary of her response: ‘There were not enough systems thinkers to negotiate the consultation phase of the Sendai Framework in Geneva. Rather the emphasis of DRR moved to science. They were strong. Every word of the Sendai Framework is owned by someone or somebody in this world. I think, systems thinking is now implicit in the Sendai Framework rather than explicit. However, this should not stop anyone pursuing research on this topic’.

The bureaucratic model, “rely more heavily on rules, precedent, and standard operating procedures. Less time and resources will be spent on decision making, and fewer alternatives will be considered before actions are taken” (Pfeffer 1981: 24). The political decision making model, presumes “that parochial interests and preferences control choice” (for details see Pfeffer 1981: 22).

‘Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk’ (Priority for Action 2).

Scenario planning (Masys 2012) is essentially a story, describing potential future conditions and their emergence to facilitate sense making and to inform decision making. The thought process involved in scenario planning supports ‘thinking the unthinkable’ exploring uncertainty and challenging mental models and assumptions in order to recognise alternate futures in a space of possibilities (VCLL 2013). There are numerous approaches to scenario planning in the literature such as Schwartz’s 8-Step Scenario Building Model (see Schwartz 1996); Schoemaker’s 10-Step Scenario Building Model (see Schoemaker 1993); Avin’s 12-Step Scenario Building Model (see Avin 2007), and JISC’s (2007) 6-Step process for the development of scenarios. By revealing the uncertainty one opens up the notion that more than one future is potentially open (VCLL 2013).

Casual Loop Diagrams are important tool that can provide a language for articulating our understanding of dynamic, interconnected situations. Through the ‘visual grammar’ of Casual Loop Diagram, it prepares the participants to challenge the linear cause and effect relationships and decipher various interconnected feedback loops (VCLL 2013). Sterman (2000) and Senge (1990) and Senge et al. (1994) provide an excellent resource for learning about Casual Loop Diagrams (VCLL 2013).

Outcome Mapping was developed by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) in Canada in support of development efforts around the world (IDRC 2001). The application of this methodology to the disaster management domain is particularly relevant to the notion of building/enabling resilience. Two of the key features or principles of Outcome Mapping that resonate with systems thinking are its recognition of the importance of embracing different world views and perspectives as well as the acceptance of non-linear (complex) causality. The 12 steps associated with the Outcome Mapping methodology are available at IDRC (see 2001).

Assumption Based Planning (ABP) is an essential element in disaster management domain according to Dewar et al. (1993). It is a powerful tool to show how plans often fail because inadequate attention was paid to the underlying assumptions. This tool aims to capture the assumptions underlying plans that if invalid, could derail the plans and operations stemming from it. It is a systemic tool because it explores the interrelationships, perspectives and boundaries of an established plan to ensure the viability of that plan. Through this process, it recognises how ‘load bearing vulnerable assumptions’ require explicit analysis (see Dewar et al. 1993).

“Indian states comprise a three-tier administrative structure. Several gram sansad (villages) or wards (hamlets) constitute a gram panchayat (GP), several GPs constitute a panchayat samiti (PS) or block, and several panchayat samiti constitute a zilla parishad or a district” (Ray-Bennett 2009a: 12).

Indian Rupees 100,000.00 (approximately Great British Pound 1,025.00) for a death due to cyclone, Indian Rupees 150,000.00 (approximately GBP 1,500.00) due to lightening, Indian Rupees 10,000 (approximately Great British Pound 100.00) due to heat wave and Indian Rupees 100,000 due to a snakebite during floods (GoO 2014a).