Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The most fundamental level at which emergencies must be tackled is obviously the local level, for however large the disaster is, the local area is always the theater of operations. However, several thresholds of competence exist in relation to the possible magnitude of events. If the immediate needs generated by an emergency cannot be satisfied by local or even regional resources, then the national government must become involved. At the level of a country's sovereign state, planning for emergencies is a question of safeguarding the national interest—if the event is serious enough, it is a matter of safeguarding the integrity of the nation and guaranteeing its survival without descent into ungovernable anarchy. It is also a matter of ensuring equity and welfare for survivors and people threatened by the crisis. Fortunately, relatively few emergencies are serious enough to require full-scale national mobilization. Most commonly, the emergencies that fulfill this criterion are natural disasters such as major earthquakes, floods, or tropical cyclones, or human-triggered cases of major environmental damage, catastrophic pollution, disease pandemics, or very large terrorist atrocity.

Types of National Response Institutions

National disaster plans are a function of the way in which emergency response is organized at the national level. In synthesis, there are two end members of a broad spectrum of permutations: civil defense is a centralized, top-down system, in which command is vested in national government, which directs local operations; and civil protection is a decentralized, bottom-up system, in which the role of the national government is to provide support and harmonization for locally- and regionally-organized efforts. In practice, the distinction is not quite so simple. Even a fully decentralized system may be overridden by central government in the national interest, while a fully centralized system is unlikely to function without strong local and regional support. Nevertheless, over the past half century there has been a long-term trend toward collaboration.

The nature of the institutions that a country uses to manage its largest emergencies depends on several factors, including the form of the state (for example, federal republic, unitary state, island state, kingdom, devolved state); the nature of its legal system; and the role attributed to civil society organizations, particularly voluntary societies such as the national Red Cross or Red Crescent Society and other rescue and relief agencies. Under most circumstances, the U.S. government cannot override the interests of the states and local authorities; hence, it tends to concentrate on providing assistance. Such is the division of powers between states and the federal level that the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and its umbrella organization, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), have had only limited success in encouraging states to prepare for disaster and harmonize their emergency plans.

A National Park Service helicopter hovers over the destruction of the Pentagon, where a hijacked American Airlines flight crashed on September 11, 2001. National emergency planning soon shifted to emphasize counterterrorism and centralized emergency responses

However, since March 2008, the United States has had a National Response Framework (NRF), which provides guidelines for homogenizing the response to disasters that involve states, communities, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading