Abstract
The integration of Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) into emergency responses is crucial due to frequent human errors and inadequate human-system interactions which impede effective emergency and disaster management. Therefore, this research aims to develop and validate the Smart All-hazards Response Framework (SARF) that systematically incorporates HFE principles across all aspects of disaster management, from planning through post-response analysis. The framework focuses on reducing human errors, enhancing human-system interactions, and boosting system resilience. The research methodology includes a detailed literature review, the development of the HFE-integrated framework, and rigorous testing through experimental studies and simulations across various scenarios. Key questions address the integration of HFE to optimize system performance and the impact of ergonomic interventions on responder safety in high-risk environments. By advancing a holistic, human-centered approach to emergency and disaster management, this study aims to significantly enhance the effectiveness, safety, and adaptability of responses to all kinds of hazards.
Introduction
In the evolving landscape of today’s emergencies and disasters, the integration of Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) into management of all kinds of incidents, or “all-hazards approach” is of paramount importance. The necessity of the all-hazards arises from frequent observations that human errors, underutilization of ergonomic principles, and inadequate consideration of human-system interactions significantly hamper the effectiveness of emergency and disaster management. Thus, these observations underscore the need for a comprehensive approach that embeds HFE into the design and implementation of emergency and disaster management systems to improve safety, efficiency, and resilience.
The relevant background for this research derives from the acknowledgment that various hazards—ranging from natural to anthropogenic and technological—pose complex challenges that require sophisticated, adaptable, and human-centered strategies. Studies such as Sasangohar et al. (2020) highlighted the significance of incorporating ergonomic considerations in COVID-19 pandemic response efforts. Similarly, Nicoletti and Padovano (2019) underscored the critical role of ergonomic principles in managing emergency responses in industry, thereby emphasizing the broad applicability of HFE across different types of hazards. Recently, a recent study provided the “Disaster Ergonomics” framework that explains the roles of HFE along the lifecycle of disaster management (Son, 2023).
Although there have been several frameworks for the emergency and disaster management domain, several limitations still exist. These frameworks lack specificity for individual and team level implementation. Especially, the design and use of smart technologies (e.g., artificial intelligence [AI], unmanned aerial vehicle [UAV]) was not adequately considered in the human-system integration. To address this knowledge gap, the objective of the current study is to develop a detailed framework that systematically integrates HFE principles into all-hazards incident management, from planning and training to execution and post-event analysis. Our framework aims to address the current gaps in emergency and disaster management strategies by focusing on optimizing human-system interactions, minimizing human errors, and enhancing overall system resilience.
To achieve these desired outcomes, this research follows a clear roadmap that includes a literature review to establish a theoretical foundation, followed by the development of the HFE-integrated framework. Subsequent phases involve the design of experimental studies and simulations to test the framework under various incident scenarios, and the analysis of these studies to refine and validate the framework. Key research questions (research aims) guiding this investigation include:
How can HFE principles be effectively integrated into all-hazards strategies to minimize human errors and optimize system performance?
What are the impacts of HFE interventions on the effectiveness and safety of emergency and disaster management systems in high-stress and high-risk environments?
How do human-system interactions in disaster management influence the resilience and adaptability of emergency and disaster management strategies in the face of various kinds of hazards?
Current Frameworks and Issues
Our literature review revealed a nuanced approach toward integrating HFE principles in managing hazards. The analysis identifies several key characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses associated with the emergency and disaster management frameworks.
It was found that recent studies tried to have integrated technology, adaptability, flexibility, and automatic risk assessment feature (Sasangohar et al., 2020; Son, 2023; Son et al., 2020). In these works, the incorporation of technologies to simulate, analyze, and improve human-system interactions was emphasized for proactive and preventive management of hazards. There is a growing focus on creating adaptable and flexible systems that can be reconfigured according to human ergonomic needs in recent disasters (Moon et al., 2024; Son et al., 2023). These frameworks are becoming more tailored to specific environments, such as offshore installations, highlighting the need for industry-specific hazard management strategies.
In detail, there were four types of frameworks. The first type focused on the overall flow to have safety and improved effectiveness of the emergency and disaster management. The framework proposed by Gucci et al. (2019) focused on macro-ergonomic factors to identify potential hazards in industries, emphasizing a holistic view of human-work system interactions. Petrosoniak et al. (2017) offered a framework based on human factors for improving patient safety in trauma resuscitation, showcasing the application of HFE in healthcare emergency responses. Son (2023) also emphasized the overall flow of the framework with preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. The second type of the frameworks emphasized more on the importance of human components in the emergency and disaster management. Demirel (2020) introduced a framework in which digital human models are incorporated in the system design and assessment, aiming to enhance the interaction between humans and complex systems in virtual environments. This approach allows for the early identification of potential ergonomic and safety issues. As a participatory framework, Morag and Luria (2013) proposed another ergonomics approach for workplace hazard and risk analysis, stressing employee involvement in identifying and mitigating risks. The third type of emergency and disaster management frameworks were focused on hazards of specific industries such as healthcare and manufacturing. Bortolini et al. (2020) discussed the inclusion of safety, ergonomics, and human factors in designing reconfigurable manufacturing systems. This framework highlights the adaptability of manufacturing environments to human needs, ensuring safety and efficiency. Norazahar and Ahmad (2018) developed a framework assessing risks associated with human responses during emergency escapes on offshore installations, addressing the unique challenges of evacuation in high-risk environments. Nickel et al. (2020) emphasized designing machinery and systems for improved safety, focusing on human-system interaction requirements to prevent accidents. Lastly, there was a framework focused on regulatory exercises. Wilkinson (2016)’s research outlines the current regulatory and governmental focus on integrating HFE into safety standards and practices, highlighting the importance of legal and procedural adherence.
There are several limitations on current frameworks. First, they have implementation complexity and lack the specificity. The complexity of integrating HFE principles into existing systems can be a significant barrier, requiring substantial time and resource investment. Some frameworks (Petrosoniak et al., 2017; Son, 2023) lack the specificity needed to address unique hazards in certain industries, leading to generic solutions that may not be optimally effective. Secondly, they did not involve a plan of having advanced technologies, especially for AI, with training and adaptiveness issues (Carayon et al., 2014; Duffy, 2016; Endsley, 2017; Morag & Luria, 2013). Effective implementation often requires extensive training and awareness programs, which can be challenging to execute across large organizations. While adaptable systems offer significant benefits, their complexity poses challenges in implementation and requires extensive training.
Proposed Framework
Smart All-Hazard Response Framework (SARF)
Based on the limitations in the current frameworks and insights gathered from the literature review, a new framework is proposed: Smart All-hazards Response Framework (SARF) (Figure 1). The SARF aims to leverage the strengths of previous approaches while addressing their limitations through the integration of advanced and smart technologies.
Smart all-hazard responses framework (SARF).
AI-Driven Risk Assessment
The SARF utilizes AI to continuously analyze data from various sources (sensors, user inputs, environmental conditions) to identify potential hazards in real-time (Carayon et al., 2014). It also incorporates predictive analytics to forecast potential ergonomic and safety issues before they manifest, allowing for proactive measures. There are two types of the risk assessments. The first one is “narrow,” which has augmented reality (AR)-goggle based specific point-risk assessment (e.g., a room), to be able to provide experience of having real world and virtual world (Park et al., 2023). The second one is “broad,” which entails digital-twin (e.g., a building) concept to have team training.
Digital Human Modeling (DHM)
DHM employs simulations to evaluate human-system interactions in virtual environments, assessing ergonomic impacts of proposed solutions, which quantify and predict metrics such as physical and cognitive workload (Park et al., 2020), situation awareness (Endsley, 2017), and task performance (Park & Zahabi, 2022). Furthermore, the SARF utilizes the established models and formulations in human performance modeling (HPM) domain, to enable top-down or theory-based approach (Park, 2023; Park et al., 2020; Park & Zahabi, 2024). That is, a hybrid modeling approach is generated with the data-driven approach with AI and theory-driven approach with HPM. This is the core component of the SARF, as it incorporates HFE principles with bottom-up and top-down approaches. Integrating DHM with AI provides potential capability to optimize design and layout of workplaces and emergency and disaster management plans (Duffy, 2016).
Adaptive Response Mechanisms
To be able to have life-long performance, it is required to develop AI-based systems that are capable of adapting to the changing nature of hazards and human ergonomic needs (Endsley, 2017; Son et al., 2020). This includes mechanisms for reconfiguring manufacturing systems or emergency evacuation plans dynamically in response to AI-driven risk assessments.
Team Dynamics Modeling
Team dynamics modeling has its origin from the individual DHM, which means the metrics in individual level and team level need to be shared. Here, the SARF uses natural language processing (NLP) to analyze feedback and suggestions for continuous improvement of the emergency and disaster management system, with participatory ergonomics approach (Burgess-Limerick, 2018). Furthermore, it is essential to implement quantifiable logics for measuring team knowledge and situation awareness level (Cooke et al., 2000; Gorman et al., 2017; Dos Santos & Son, 2024).
Integrated Training Programs
Lastly, it is necessary to incorporate VR and AR training modules powered by AI to simulate emergency scenarios and best ergonomic practices. In detail, it is required to customize training contents based on AI analysis of individual learning needs and ergonomic risk factors (Iván Aguilar Reyes et al., 2022; Zahabi & Abdul Razak, 2020).
Discussion
The SARF was meticulously designed to address the three pivotal research aims (RAs) previously mentioned in the introduction, each focusing on integrating HFE with smart technologies in all-hazard emergency and disaster management efforts.
In sum, not only does the SARF optimize human-system interactions for improved safety and efficiency, but also it ensures that. the system remains adaptable and resilient in the face of evolving hazards and challenges, with advanced and smart technologies. The successful and realistic implementation and execution of the SARF depends on the cohesiveness and timeliness of the data flow and quality of the AI algorithms. As the current study provides a roadmap for the next studies, more efforts are needed to implement individual goals for each component in SARF.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
