A meditation on the current role of technology in disaster risk reduction and response to major emergencies. An investigation of the consequences of the primacy of the hazards paradigm over vulnerability studies during the last three decades.

1. The Human Factor
Disaster risk reduction
is about people
David Alexander
University College London

2. HUMAN
CONSEQUENCES
OF DISASTER
“ORTHODOX” MODEL
PHYSICAL
EVENT
HUMAN
VULNERABILITY
“RADICAL CRITIQUE” (K. HEWITT et al.)
HUMAN
CONSEQUENCES
OF DISASTER
HUMAN
VULNERABILITY
PHYSICAL
EVENT
1983-2017:
The relative failure of the radical critique.
The continuing primacy of hazards studies.

3. Is technology a source of vulnerability?
Have we created a 'technofix' culture?
Is it an outgrowth of the hazards paradigm?
Implicit axiom: the
solution to the failure
of technology is
more technology.

4. • algorithms and software
• robots
• unmanned aerial vehicles
• telecommunication
instead of face-to-face.
Are we filtering out the humanity out of
emergency planning and management?

5. With thanks to Gianluca Pescaroli
Basic
human
needs

6. • they can go into unsafe spaces
• they can carry diverse forms of
sensor and be of various sizes
• they can be connected to
networks and remote sensing
• they cannot really think, see and feel.
Can urban search and rescue (USAR)
really be accomplished by robots?

7. The procedure:-
1. Find a problem
2. Simplify it to bare bones
3. Invent an algorithm
4. Hey presto!
Example:-
1. How to optimise the distribution of
relief goods after a disaster.
2. Where to put distribution centres.
3. Apply a fuzzy analytical
hierarchy process.
4. Problem solved (?).

8. • Missing or inadequate scenarios
for the impact of the disaster.
• Magnitude and frequency issues
give different exigencies.
• Do field commanders want to use
the algorithm, are they able to
do so, and would it help them?
• We don't construct warehouses in
the emergency phase of a disaster.
• Route blockages are common
and somewhat unpredictable.

9. A chasm has opened between
field practice and new algorithms.
Humanitarian logistics: an increasingly
popular field in which many researchers
do not understand the essence of the
problems they are trying to tackle.

10. Redundancy
• physical: more equipment
• human: other ways of doing things
How much redundancy can we afford?
• human redundancy - as much
as we can think and devise
• technological redundancy –
only a few systems are in
the 'high reliability' class.

11. • telecommunication alternatives (cell
net ACCOLC, Bluetooth, pager, etc.)
• paper, pencil and a
person who can run fast
• procedures that favour autonomous
operations (i.e. do without
a common operating picture).
For example, radios stop working

12. Conclusions

13. The technofix culture is an
outgrowth of the hazards paradigm:
we should emphasise vulnerability!
• Are robots and drones
simply red herrings?
• Should we discourage
the algorithm makers?
• Do we need better humanitarian
logistics or none at all?.

14. A DRR that is about people
is labour intensive:
• machines and algorithms don't
answer back - but they do foul up
• machines are cheaper than salaries
(capital expenditure is easier to
authorise than revenue expenditure)
The curse of emergency preparedness:
capital expenditure overshadows revenue
expenditure (an unsustainable
'one-off' culture).

15. Alan H. Barton, sociologist, Columbia University
1969-70

16. Charles E. Fritz, 1921-2000,
sociologist, Chicago University

17. The 'therapeutic community',
if it exists, does so under
very difficult circumstances:
fear, uncertainty, frustration,
grief, sadness, disorientation...

19. Sergio Pirozzi, Mayor of Amatrice
Amatrice, 7th October 2016

20. Thank you
for listening!
www.slideshare.net/dealexander
emergency-planning.blogspot.com