Scientific modeling systems contain extraordinary amounts of data and produce mountains of output. These systems, often utilize Geographic Information Systems (GIS), offer almost limitless options for providing the user with informed knowledge. This article explores a new approach for emergency managers to harness the capability of scientific modeling systems when responding to disasters. In disaster response, emergency managers need sound situational awareness to support critical decision-making. Obtaining situation awareness is difficult because of the gap that exists between the information that emergency managers have and the information that emergency mangers need. However, comprehensive situational awareness is necessary to form accurate estimates of physical impacts and response requirements. GIS applications can be used to narrow the gap between known information and required information. This study developed a methodology for obtaining a common operating picture based on Hazus (Hazards U.S.), a GIS-based application that performs loss and risk assessments on multiple types of hazards. Hazus combines both scientific and engineering knowledge to model a disaster event. The keyf to this new method is using subject matter experts to penetrate the complex and chaotic decision environment and establish a hierarchy of relevant information based on relative importance. This study focused on the response required to save lives and property in catastrophic earthquakes.
CurtisJ.M., BlackburnJ. and PineJ., Louisiana State University Geographic Information System Support of Hurricane Katrina Recovery Operations, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters24(2) (2006), 203-221.
2.
ElnashaiA.S., ClevelandL.J., JeffersonT. and HarraldJ., Impact of earthquakes on the Central USA, MAE Center Report 09-03, 2009, 44-115.
3.
TaniguchiE., FerreiraF. and NicholsonA., A conceptual road network emergency model to aid emergency preparedness and response decision-making in the context of humanitarian logistics, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences (39) (2012), 307-320.
4.
Esri, GIS Integration with Public Safety Applications, Redlands, 2012, 1-4.
5.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), News Release: New Madrid Seismic Zone Catastrophic Earthquake Planning, HQ-08-250, 2008.
6.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Fact Sheet: Catastrophic Earthquake Planning: New Madrid Seismic Zone, 2010.
GalindoG. and BattaR., Review of recent developments in OR/MS research in disaster operations management, European Journal of Operational Research230(2) (2013), 201-211.
9.
DavidH.A., The Method of Paired Comparisons, Charles Griffin, London, 1963, 21-27.
10.
MiskelJ., Disaster Response and Homeland Security; What Works and What Doesn't, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006, 35.
11.
HarraldJ.R., Agility and discipline: critical success factors for disaster response, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science604(1) (2006), 256-272.
12.
HarraldJ.R. and JeffersonT., Supporting Critical Multi-Organization Collaboration during Response to Catastrophic Events, Organization: Journal of Management, Informatics, and Human Resources40(2) (2007), 109-114.
13.
HarraldJ.R. and MazzuchiT., Planning for success: A scenario-based approach to contingency planning using expert judgment, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management1(4) (1993), 193-195.
14.
BanipalK., Strategic approach to disaster management: lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal15(3) (2006), 484-494.
15.
ZographosK.G., DougligerisC. and TsoumpasP., An integrated framework for managing emergency-response logistics: The case of the electric utility companies, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management45(2) (1998), 125.
WaughL., Living with Hazards, dealing with Disasters: An Introduction to Emergency Management, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, 2000, 24-51.
18.
MacutkiewicsM., CookeR.M., Unibalance User's Manual, Risk and Environmental Modeling, TU Delft University, The Netherlands, 2006, 11-14.
19.
KendallM.M., Rank Correlation Methods, Charles Griffin, London, 1962, 191.
20.
KapucuN., Collaborative emergency management: better community organising, better public preparedness and response, Disasters32(2) (2008), 239-262.
21.
KunzN., ReinerG. and GoldS., Investing in disaster management capabilities versus pre-positioning inventory: a new approach to disaster preparedness, International Journal of Production Economics (157) (2014), 261-272.
22.
WagnerN. and AgrawalV., An agent-based simulation system for concert venue crowd evacuation modeling in the presence of a fire disaster, Expert Systems with Applications41(6) (2014), 2807-2815.
23.
National Academy of Sciences, Successful Response Starts with a Map: Improving Geospatial Support for Disaster Management, National Academies, Press, Washington, 2007, 49-50.
24.
HesterN.C., HortonS.P., WilkinsonJ. and JeffersonT.I., Integration of Information Systems for Post Earthquake Research Response, in Proceedings of the 5th international ISCRAM Conference, Washington, 2008, 362-367.
25.
WrightP., DanielP., LiberatoreM.J. and NydickR.L., A survey of operations research models and applications in homeland security, Interfaces36(6) (2006), 514-529.
26.
BiddingerP.D., BaggishA., HarringtonL., d'HemecourtP., HooleyJ., JonesJ., KueR., TroyanosC. and DyerK.S., Be prepared - the Boston Marathon and mass-casualty events, New England Journal of Medicine368(21) (2013), 1958-1960.
27.
WhiteR., Towards a unified homeland security strategy: An asset vulnerability model, Homeland Security Affairs (10) (2014), 1-16.
28.
WrightR., Testimony to Hearings before U.S. House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Research and Technology, 113th Congress on A review of the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP), 2014, 2-14.
29.
SnayR.A., NiJ.F. and NeugebauerH.C., Geodetically derived strain across the northern New Madrid Seismic Zone, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper, 1538-F, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, 1994, 1.
30.
CookeR.M., Experts in Uncertainty: Opinion and Subjective Probability in Science, Oxford University Press, New York, 1991, 211-215.
31.
CookeR.M., Stakeholder preference elicitation, Environmental Security in Harbors and Coastal Areas, Springer, Netherlands, 2007, 149-160.
32.
CookeR.M. and ProbstK.N., Highlights of the Expert Judgment Policy Symposium and Technical Workshop, Resources for the Future, Washington, 2006, 15-17.
33.
RanfR.T., EberhardM.O. and MaloneS., Post earthquake prioritization of bridge inspections, Earthquake Spectra23(1) (2007), 131-146.
34.
GauthierS., Lessons in GIS and emergency management, GeoSpatial Solutions14(2) (2004), 38-41.
35.
JainS., HutchingsC.W. and LeeY.T.T., Building Analytical Support for Homeland Security, in: Modeling and Simulation Support for System of Systems Engineering Applications, L.B. Rainey and A. Tolk, eds, John Wiley, 2015, pp. 219-249.
36.
PricovicS., Multi-criteria model for post-earthquake land-use planning, Environmental Management and Health13(1) (2002), 9-21.
37.
WellsS., Developing actionable information from modeling in a New Madrid earthquake, FEMA White Paper (unpublished), 2008, 1-3.
38.
PanS.L., ShanL., PanG. and LeidnerD., Crisis response information networks, Journal of the Association for Information Systems13(1) (2012), 31-56.
39.
JeffersonT., HarraldJ.R. and FiedrichF., Linking infrastructure resilience to response requirements: the New Madrid Seismic Zone case, International Journal of Critical Infrastructures8(1) (2012), 22-46.
40.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, National Incident Management System, FEMA Publication, Washington, 2008, 11-135.
41.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. ESF and Support Annexes Coordinating Federal Assistance in Support of the National Response Framework, FEMA Publication, Washington, 2008, 23-24.
42.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, National Response Framework, Washington, 2013, 32.
43.
YiW. and OzdamarL., A dynamic logistics coordination model for evacuation and support in disaster response activities, Journal of Operational Research179(3) (2007), 1177-1193.
44.
JenkinsW.O., Homeland security: Observations on DHS and FEMA efforts to prepare for and respond to major and catastrophic disasters and address related recommendations and legislation, U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-07-1142T, 2007, 17-18.
45.
NormanW.R. and StreinerD.L., PDQ PrettyDarnedQuick Statistics, 3rd Ed. BC Decker, London, 2003, 27-31.
