This section presents the three work streams that ERGO will tackle.
Aims and Objectives
This project will focus on "producing well tested plans which can be used to evacuate people from danger zones should an incident occur" (Pidd et al, 1996). It will include looking at what models governments, civil protection agencies and emergence response services use to plan, prepare, execute and control mass evacuations in the light of natural or man-made incidents. The project will focus on the different stages of mass evacuation:
- Communication of the need to evacuate
- Preparation for evacuation
- Mass decontamination
Stream 1: Operational Research/ Management Science (OR/MS) methods used for preparedness for mass evacuation.
This work stream will be focused on understanding what OR/MS models are governments using to prepare for mass evacuations and to benchmark and create a knowledge repository for these models. The questions this work stream will answer are:
- What policy-level questions need to be answered to ensure preparedness
- What models and modelling techniques help to address these questions?
- What data and assumptions are needed to build these models?
- How are these models being used at the moment
Stream 2: Preparedness of the public
This work stream will focus on the preparedness of the public, evaluating the effectiveness of campaigns and the psychological effects of these campaigns on the public at large. The questions this stream will answer are:
- How can we measure public preparedness?
- How prepared are the public across Europe?
- What approaches are used to ensure good awareness and preparedness of the public?
- What is the likely effectiveness of the approaches for preparing the public?
- How should the public be best prepared
Stream 3: Combining OR/MS and the public
This stream will bring together Streams 1 and 2 and will look at how the Emergency Management Agencies (EMAs) and their models interact with the public and its preparedness. The questions this stream will investigate are:
- How can models predict the optimal public response?
- How can EMAs work towards achieving this response through public preparedness
- What level of interaction and integration exist between different emergency services and EMAs?
These questions will be explored for variations by country and, as appropriate, by type of EMA to identify good practice.
Approach and Phases
Phase 1: Exploration
- Systematic literature review (Tranfield et al 2005) of e.g. academic papers, EMA materials.
- Review models e.g. MASSVAC, OREMS, ETIS
- Interviews on what policy questions EMA analysts inform, what models & data support analyses, how they prepare the public to react in desired ways.
Phase 2: Analysis
- Map current capabilities & desires. Identify gaps
- Identify good practice
- Generate measures of EMA & public preparedness for evacuation
Phase 3: Impact
- Facilitate two EMA workshops in each participating country to feedback how to meet desires & strengthen capability & overall preparedness. Involve good practice practitioners
- Interactive web portal for sharing & transferring knowledge in/across EMAs
Phase 4: Dissemination
- Organise conference, with papers on national capabilities from EMAs & contributed papers to involve others
- Publish our papers at international academic/practitioner conference & journals
- Press releases on de-sensitised findings