Successfully reported this slideshow.
Modelling crisis management for improved action and preparedness 
Indicators to compare simulated 
crisis management strat...
26.08.14 | 2 
CRISMA crisis management simulation approach 
 A framework to build integrated modelling and simulation 
sy...
26.08.14 | 3 
Indicators in simulation scenario reflection 
 Indicators replace intuitive opinions with verifiable data 
...
26.08.14 | 4 
CRISMA Test cases 
 Pilot A : Northern winter storm with cross-border effects (Finland) 
 Pilot B : Coasta...
26.08.14 | 5 
Indicator types 
1. Situation indicators 
2. Capacity and resource planning indicators 
3. Economic impact i...
26.08.14 | 6 
1. Situation indicators 
 Related to hazard, vulnerability and impact 
 Status of the world, e.g. meteorol...
26.08.14 | 7 
2. Capacity and resource planning indicators 
 Address real world objects and personnel deployed, e.g. 
 p...
26.08.14 | 8 
3. Economic impact indicators 
 Often valid for several hazards 
 Strategic-level indicators: economic imp...
26.08.14 | 9 
4. Key performance indicators (KPI) 
 KPI evaluate the efficiency of the crisis management. 
(1) KPIs measu...
26.08.14 | 10 
Sample application: “resource planning” for “bus accident”
26.08.14 | 11 
Scenario modifications 
 Decision alternatives “resource planning” for “bus accident” 
 Treatment strateg...
26.08.14 | 12 
Post-Hyogo contribution 
 CRISMA enables national authorities to provide assistance to local 
authorities ...
26.08.14 | 13 
Conclusions 
 Indicators provide a condensed view that enables decision makers 
to quickly understand a si...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

ENGELBACH-Indicators to compare simulated crisis management strategies-ID1065-IDRC2014_b

1,051 views

Published on

5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice 24-28 August 2014 in Davos, Switzerland

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

ENGELBACH-Indicators to compare simulated crisis management strategies-ID1065-IDRC2014_b

  1. 1. Modelling crisis management for improved action and preparedness Indicators to compare simulated crisis management strategies W. Engelbach, S. Frings, R. Molarius, C. Aubrecht, M. Meriste, A. Perrels Email: wolf.engelbach@iao.fraunhofer.de This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 284552 "CRISMA“
  2. 2. 26.08.14 | 2 CRISMA crisis management simulation approach  A framework to build integrated modelling and simulation systems  CRISMA facilitates simulation and modelling of  realistic crisis management scenarios;  possible response actions; and  the impacts of crisis, depending on crisis evolvement and various crisis management actions.  CRISMA will support  multi-organisational short and long term strategic planning,  impact evaluation of e.g. investment options,  improving multi-organisational cooperation, and  more flexible training.
  3. 3. 26.08.14 | 3 Indicators in simulation scenario reflection  Indicators replace intuitive opinions with verifiable data  Indicators can be absolute values or ratios.  Indicators allow for complete crisis management scenarios  Comparison of complete scenarios (benchmarking)  Checking against target values (criteria)  Indicators allow for one scenario  Understanding over time (evolution)  Differentiation for regions (spatialisation)
  4. 4. 26.08.14 | 4 CRISMA Test cases  Pilot A : Northern winter storm with cross-border effects (Finland)  Pilot B : Coastal submersion – Charente-Maritime (France)  Pilot C : Accidental pollution – Ashod (Israel)  Pilot D : Geophysical hazards – L’Aquila (Italy)  Pilot E : Mass casualty incidents – Bavaria and Berlin (Germany)
  5. 5. 26.08.14 | 5 Indicator types 1. Situation indicators 2. Capacity and resource planning indicators 3. Economic impact indicators 4. Key performance indicators (KPI)
  6. 6. 26.08.14 | 6 1. Situation indicators  Related to hazard, vulnerability and impact  Status of the world, e.g. meteorological parameters, or demographical, structural and network characteristics  “intensity of hazard”, “number and features of elements at risk”, and “damage per element type”  Supported decisions by these indicators  Mitigation options and resource investments in preparation  Resource allocation and evacuation during crisis  At a national level and in the context of electricity blackout: “number of households without telecommunication for more than two hours per district”.
  7. 7. 26.08.14 | 7 2. Capacity and resource planning indicators  Address real world objects and personnel deployed, e.g.  patient situation (numbers and status)  resource situation (vehicle, equipment, responder)  time until arrival of resources  treatment performance of resources  Key in simulated response phase of crisis management  E.g. in the context of forest fires, fire brigade resources  E.g. for evacuation, event-time-specific population distribution
  8. 8. 26.08.14 | 8 3. Economic impact indicators  Often valid for several hazards  Strategic-level indicators: economic implications of the state of preparedness and resilience of an area  macro-economic impact multiplier  fiscal gap indicator  insurance coverage  Operational-level indicators: expected economic impacts of hazards  facilitate early stage decision making in an unfolding crisis  e.g. power outage
  9. 9. 26.08.14 | 9 4. Key performance indicators (KPI)  KPI evaluate the efficiency of the crisis management. (1) KPIs measure absolute results or relations of the crisis management or mitigation activities (2) KPI are valid in the scope of the whole scenario (3) KPI really matter to the stakeholders  Examples hours needed for evacuation number of depleted resources duration of road interruptions
  10. 10. 26.08.14 | 10 Sample application: “resource planning” for “bus accident”
  11. 11. 26.08.14 | 11 Scenario modifications  Decision alternatives “resource planning” for “bus accident”  Treatment strategies  Transportation strategies  Situation variables  time and date of incident, location  number and injury status of patients (red, yellow, green)  number and type of first responders, and available vehicles  Agent-based simulation for behaviour and decision representation  health or injury patterns for the patients  skill level and recreation demands of first responders  transport capacity and fuelling needs of vehicles
  12. 12. 26.08.14 | 12 Post-Hyogo contribution  CRISMA enables national authorities to provide assistance to local authorities by offering relevant reference scenarios and indicators  Rigid and consistent management of disaster risk reduction  Systematic and regular crisis management simulations helps to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels  CRISMA indicators support the implementation of a strong institutional basis for awareness in crisis management  Identification, assessment and monitoring of disaster risks within and between regions  Check the quantity and quality of resources available to answer assumed crisis scenarios  Better decision base for awareness programs, pre-event planning, communication to the public and investment priorities.
  13. 13. 26.08.14 | 13 Conclusions  Indicators provide a condensed view that enables decision makers to quickly understand a situation as well as alternative scenarios  Common understanding of available and applicable indicators in the scope of the CRISMA modelling and simulation approach  Currently these indicators are tested in CRISMA pilot studies with many crisis managers that address specific decision situations

×