crisis response - schillings€¦ · a new peacebuilding model ..... 70 larissa sotieva and juliet...

News ...................................................4

CommentThe ‘wrong people’ around the table ..........8Rob McAlister says the more cognitive diverse a team’s composition, the better it can provide solutions

A metaphor for our times ...................... 12Emily Hough speaks to Michele Wucker, who introduced the Grey Rhino concept to the world

Mitigating disasters in a fractured world .. 16Today’s threat landscape is increasingly cross-border, undeterred by traditional lines of sovereignty. It is also largely asymmetric, says Amy Pope

Australian bushfi resFire Service response ........................... 20Fire Chief Mark Jones describes the challenges that the bushfi res presented in South Australia

Operation Bushfi re Assist ...................... 24Senator the Hon Linda Reynolds, Minister for Defence, tells Emily Hough how Australia’s armed forces are helping with response and recovery

When can we talk frankly? ..................... 26Christine Jessup contends that we all need to play our part in adapting to climate change for our survival

A total rethink: Our moral responsibility ... 30Greg Mullins, former Commissioner of Fire and Rescue for New South Wales, shares his thoughts on the recent bushfi res with Christine Jessup

Frontline responseAlbania earthquake .............................. 34John Doone reports on Kosovo’s response when Albania reached out for help from its neighbours

A peek into the future with the SCDF ....... 36Emily Hough learns more about the Singapore Civil Defence Force’s trailblazing technology from Commissioner Eric Yap

Insarag anniversary .............................. 40Lucien Jaggi describes the 30-year achievements of the International Search and Rescue Advisory Group

Business continuityMuch more than cyber .......................... 42Concentrating solely on cyber threats at the expense of more traditional problems is not a good way forward, contends Lyndon Bird

The role of ERM ................................... 46Hans Læssøe debates the approach to – and value of – enterprise risk management in today’s ambiguous, volatile and complex world

Creating resilience from turmoil ............. 48Brexit highlights several factors that we can learn from and make the necessary changes to take society to the next level, according to Adrian Clements

Preparing a frontline service for Brexit .... 50Alex Darling describes how a UK ambulance service has prepared to mitigate the potentially adverse effects of Brexit

Leadership and Covid-19 ...................... 52The actions of leaders can make the difference between panic and calm concern, says Eric McNulty

Performing under pressure .................... 54Anna-Maria Rochester describes lessons from hostage negotiators that apply to anyone who has to perform in high stress situations

A special focus on DRIVER+ .................. 58We present a special feature on the DRIVER+ project, which aims to boost crisis management, innovation, operational effectiveness and networking. Here, we look at its achievements and legacy

CommunitiesA centre of hope in Cambodia ................ 66Nigel Ellway describes a new victim support partnership being developed in Cambodia

Editor in ChiefEmily [email protected]

Editorial AssistantClaire [email protected]

Projects Development ManagerDerya [email protected]

Design & ProductionChris [email protected]

News and Blog researchLina [email protected]

Web Support Neil Moultrie

SubscriptionsCrisis Response Journal is published quarterly; it is available by subscription in hard copy, digital and online [email protected]

Published by Crisis Management Limited, Sondes Place Farm, Westcott Road, Dorking RH4 3EB, UKCOPYRIGHT Crisis Management Limited 2020. Articles published may not be reproduced in any form without prior written permission.Printed in England by The Manson Group, UKISSN 1745-8633

www.crisis-response.com join the CRJ LinkedIn group follow us on twitter @editorialcrj

March 2020 | vol:15 | issue:1

contents

DRIVER+ project p58Australia’s bushfi res p20

2 Resources, links, pictures, videos and much more are available for subscribers in our digital and online editions www.crisis-response.com

Commonwealth of Australia 2020 DRIVER+

A new peacebuilding model ................... 70Larissa Sotieva and Juliet Schofi eld argue for a transformative model of peacebuilding

Cultural understanding ......................... 74Awareness of other cultures is a vital component in managing crises, explains Matt Minshall

Citizens: Vital co-actors ........................ 78Governor Gilles Mahieu announces collaborative agreements as part of the Belgian Province of Walloon Brabant’s efforts to encourage citizens associations in crisis preparedness

Unprompted acts of kindness ................. 80When it comes to spontaneous volunteers, Ali Malvern says that professionals must shift their mindset

Preparedness for children ..................... 82Rob Fagan argues the case for instilling fi rst aid and emergency preparedness in our children

Testing in the Caribbean ....................... 84Alois Hirschmugl, Anna Lena Huhn and Albrecht Beck describe an exercise with thousands of participants

How VR enhances humanitarian learning . 86Atish Gonsalves and Anne Garçon outline exciting developments, especially in terms of safeguarding and building empathy

SecurityThe dangers in our digital shadows ......... 88Ghonche Alavi offers advice on how to minimise online threats

Leaders on the cyber battlefi eld ............. 90Jeffrey Crump explores practical ways to conduct cyber crisis management training

Cyber threats and emergency services..... 92Beatriz Peon provides several examples of how emergency public services have fallen victim to cyberattacks

Counterterrorism in cities ..................... 94Terrorism is a global, networked and persistent threat, so counterterrorism must also be global, networked and persistent. Alex Townsend-Drake elaborates

Cities & societyThe tall buildings challenge ................... 96It is expected that the one-kilometre-high barrier for buildings will be broken soon. This raises the stakes in emergency preparedness, according to Russ Timpson

Tall buildings and high reliability ............ 98Everyone involved in high-rise buildings should look to high reliability organisations for inspiration, says Shane McMahon

Health systems – a critical element ...... 100A look at how the WHO is working with the Kyrgyz Government to strengthen emergency preparedness and response

Delivering a different approach ............ 104Ruth Wozencroft explores whether it is necessary to redesign or redevelop out-of-date hospitals

Tech for goodThe global impact of drones ................ 106Charles Werner lists the numerous ways that drones are being used to save lives and protect communities

Crisis mapping ................................. 108It is important that we understand the relationship between the formal humanitarian sector and digital volunteers, explains Doug Specht

RegularsEvents.............................................. 110HNPW review .................................... 112Indonesia conference ......................... 113Frontline .......................................... 114Preparing and helping children to deal with major incidents is the foundation of ensuring resilient communities. Claire Sanders speaks to Heather Beal, President and CEO of Blocks

“Today’s biggest problems defy simple, short-sighted solutions,” commented

Ambassador (Ret) David Carden in the South China Post on February 19. Although Carden was referring to the global response in the face of Covid-19, his thoughts on complex adaptive systems are applicable to the whole gamut of crisis risks.

On p4 of this edition of CRJ, we discuss the Global Risks Report 2020, which forecasts a year of increased domestic and international divisions. It says: “Systems-level thinking is required to confront looming geopolitical and environmental risks and threats that may otherwise fall under the radar.” On p12 Michele Wucker points to the need for greater systems-level thinking when considering far reaching global challenges such as climate.

Wucker also highlights the benefi ts in terms of resilience in societies where people do not just consider themselves as individuals, but as part of a larger group.

“Thinking holistically is part of what transformation research is all about. We can’t all be running around doing our own thing individually,” notes Professor Wilson of Ohio State’s School of Environmental and Natural Resources, in a call for less focus on individuals and more work to inspire collective action in preparedness for climate threats (p4).

As Amy Pope says on p16: “No single government, or even a multilateral institution, is equipped to respond to any major disaster alone. In a world where major governments are choosing their own countries fi rst, we are fi ghting disasters with one arm tied behind our backs.”

Pope continues: “Ultimately, we need to rethink the way that societies engage collectively. In the absence of leadership from governments, there is an opportunity for corporations, non-governmental actors and individuals to influence the debate, push for reform, build coalitions and fi ll the gaps...”

So in this fractured landscape, who is stepping in to fi ll the yawning gap in trust and governance? Interestingly, the 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer (p6) notes that: “Business has leapt into the void left by populist and partisan government.” Other factors in achieving a holistic, co-operative approach include cognitive diversity (p8), cultural understanding (p74), citizens themselves (p78) and spontaneous volunteers (p80).

Fractures can be healed. Admittedly, this can be a painful process, but it does appear that a fundamental change in thinking is now imperative. We all have a role to play in this.

contents comment

SCDF trailblazing p36 Digital volunteers p108

CRISISRESPONSE

join the CRJ LinkedIn group follow us on twitter @editorialcrj 3Crisis Response Journal 15:1 | March 2020

Cover story: Fractures – Societal, political, trust, systems & cultures

Cover image: gracie_hb | exoticshirts.co.uk

SCDF HOT | Chris Morgan

Mitigating disasters in a fractured worldAmy Pope shares lessons from her time on the National Security Council under President Obama’s administration, combined with her private sector experience of advising individuals and corporations on mitigating risk and responding to crisis

Real life lessons have taught me that no single government, or even a multilateral institution, is equipped to respond to any major disaster alone. In a world where major governments are choosing their own

countries � rst, we are � ghting disasters with one arm tied behind our backs. � is realisation is underlined by having

served four-and-a-half years on the National Security Council sta� – most recently as President Obama’s

Deputy Homeland Security Advisor, where my lens was particularly homeland speci� c. For

example, while the National Security Council was tasked with responding to the

con� ict in Syria, my particular responsibility was to plan for and

mitigate the impact of the con� ict in the US, in terms of migration, terrorism, disruption to supply chains and so on. I learned very quickly that there are very few threats that are con� ned solely to the US and very few solutions can be e� ectively managed in isolation.

Today’s threat landscape is increasingly cross-border in its nature, undeterred by traditional lines of sovereignty. It is also largely asymmetric. Forty years ago, we may have de� ned the most serious threats as those posed by particular nation states. Even threats posed by nations tend to

In a world where major governments are choosing

their own countries fi rst, we are fi ghting disasters with one

arm tied behind our backs


operate outside of traditional channels of aggression, and thus outside of the traditional response playbook.

Let’s take some examples, starting with migration. � ere are probably fewer politically intractable challenges faced by states than migration. Perversely, today’s situation appears to have spurred increasing isolationism and nationalism, playing a signi� cant role in the Brexit decision and the election of President Trump, not to mention the rise of populism across Europe.

Currently, more than 65 million people are displaced from their homes, the highest number recorded since the Second World War. Some of the push factors that have led to these numbers, both in the US and Europe, include: � Con� ict – civil war, religious or political

persecution or gang violence;� Competition for resources, such

as water or employment; � Natural hazards, such as drought or hurricanes

and the inability of states to manage them; and� Relative stability and wealth in

(primarily northern) countries.Yet, the response to migration can also be deemed

a failure. For example, the weakness of countries immediately adjacent to those experiencing mass emigration – or their systems being overwhelmed by the numbers of people – has led to an inability or unwillingness to contain the spill-over.

� is has been compounded by a lack of common response and the inability of existing multilateral institutions to manage the crisis, further complicated by the injection of politics, making it increasingly di� cult to formulate an e� ective and humane response.

If we step back and look at the impact of climate change and natural hazards on migration now and in the future – the picture is even more bleak.

Take this example from Central America; a co� ee leaf rust (CLR) outbreak � rst documented in 2012 soon became a regional epidemic. In a space of three years, ten to 55 per cent of arabica co� ee crops were destroyed throughout the region, growing into epidemic proportions thanks to increasingly erratic weather, mostly warmer and wetter.

Although this was not the � rst co� ee rust outbreak, a new record was set for spread, impact and duration. As much as 70 per cent of Central America’s co� ee � elds were a� ected, reducing yields signi� cantly and causing massive economic damage, including the loss of 500,000 co� ee-related jobs and approximately $1 billion in revenue.

Smallholders whose livelihoods depend on shade-grown, organic co� ee have yet to recover from the CLR epidemic, which continues to hamper production. A downward trend in co� ee prices has further deepened this social-ecological crisis.

All of this fuels immigration, especially in countries like Guatemala and Honduras, where the median age is 20 and 21, respectively.

In El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala, co� ee is a key source of income, particularly for poor rural households. When nearly 100,000 co� ee workers are losing jobs in Guatemala, and thousands more across the region are losing their crops and the livelihoods that once sustained them, local employment options – severely limited to begin with – become even

more unlikely. Without steady income, many people will su� er from food insecurity. Others may resort to joining the drug trade as the only viable economic option. And many will head north to the United States.

� e relationship between migration and the environment is not new. From the mid-19th century Great Irish Famine to the early 20th century Dust Bowl, history shows many examples of people choosing – or being forced – to migrate because of changes in their physical environments. What is new is that the world is grappling with the devastating impacts of climate change.

Whether it’s Central America or the Lake Chad Basin, which is currently experiencing grave environmental degradation, in a context where populations face the violence linked to the presence of groups such as Boko Haram – environmental disasters, spurred by climate change – can quickly lead to further destabilisation and migration pressures.

� e reality is that no single government is able to manage this problem alone.

Unless we take up multi-jurisdictional, multi-sectoral solutions, such as co-ordinating development and economic support in highly vulnerable/high risk counties that are likely sources of future migration, or revisiting and enhancing the ability of multilateral institutions to operate before the crisis, we could be overwhelmed by the consequences.

Major disruptionLet’s turn to infectious disease. Over the last two decades, we have faced countless threats – from multiple strains of in� uenza to the emergence of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and, currently, Covid-19. We have faced anthrax attacks, Ebola emerged for the � rst time in West Africa, and is ongoing in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Between 1980 and 2013 there were 12,012 recorded outbreaks of infectious disease, comprising 44 million individual cases and a� ecting every country in the world.

Each month the World Health Organisation (WHO)tracks 7,000 new signals of potential outbreaks. In June 2018 there were – for the � rst time ever – outbreaks of six of the eight disease categories in the WHO’s ‘priority diseases’ list. � ese are not listed as priority because they are the most widespread – they are a priority because there are no e� ective countermeasures. If any had spread widely, it would have had the potential to kill thousands and create major global disruption.

� e 2003 SARS outbreak, which infected about 8,000 people and killed 774, cost the global economy an estimated US$50 billion. � e 2015 MERS outbreak in South Korea infected only 200 people and killed 38, but led to estimated costs of US$8.5 billion. At the time of writing, the consequences of the current outbreak are still playing out, but there is no question it will a� ect trade, travel, commerce and, ultimately, political stability.

One estimate of potential pandemics through the 21st century puts the annualised economic costs at US$60 billion; another estimate puts the cost of pandemic in� uenza alone at US$570 billion per year– the same order of magnitude as climate change.

More troubling is that our most e� ective weapon to counter many of the most common diseases – antibiotics

join the CRJ LinkedIn group follow us on twitter @editorialcrj 17Crisis Response Journal 15:1 | March 2020

comment

Anton Deviatnikov | 123rf

– continue to be misused and overused, seriously undermining their e� cacy, leading to increased rates of antimicrobial resistance. Furthermore, an erosion of vaccine norms is leading to a resurgence of older biological threats previously thought to have been defeated. � is includes measles, which poses a serious threat to babies, toddlers and young people. Measles outbreaks are increasing across many countries; in some cases this is because vaccination coverage rates have fallen as a result of unfounded safety concerns.

Again, the solutions require co-operation and an increase in global infection control standards. It needs co-operation both across states and within states, between the security and public health sectors. Most importantly it must be recognised that diseases do not respect borders and microbes will not be detained by a wall.

My third example is one that could take up an entire volume of the CRJ in itself – misinformation and digital security. I certainly cannot give it the treatment it deserves here, but I want to spend a little time as it is the best example of where the political becomes personal.

� ere are two issues. One is the protection of personal information and data; the second is the manipulation of that data to in� uence unsuspecting consumers of information. On both fronts, this threat is growing at a rapid pace, as the desire to connect people, things, and information digitally has far outpaced protections for security or privacy.

� e cost of disruption has become relatively low – an individual, a hacktivist, a terrorist or a nation state all face far lower barriers to entry to create an impact that could have a disastrous e� ect on a society, a company or an individual.

Nefarious actorsWe are seeing this play out on a daily basis when it comes to misinformation – whether the injection of inaccurate information into political campaigns, or the actions of a political or commercial adversary to create a cloud of suspicion over a rival.

Researchers have studied the trajectories of 126,000 tweets and found that those propagating fake news consistently outperformed those containing true information, on average reaching 1,500 people six times more quickly. We saw this play out in 2018 when an incoming missile alert plunged residents of Hawaii into panic before it was declared to be a false alarm. Mobile phone users received a message saying: “Ballistic missile threat inbound to Hawaii. Seek immediate shelter. � is is not a drill.” Human error, not a malicious actor, triggered this particular alert, but it does highlight vulnerability to the spread of misinformation and how unprepared we are to counter a disaster that is propagated by the spread of misinformation.

Based on my experience, the spread of misinformation – and the ability of nefarious actors to manipulate information – create a real hazard that is still not fully understood. Solving this problem transcends our typical mechanisms and that dynamic allows for nefarious actors to do a successful end run around any response.

I have also witnessed � rst-hand incidents where, despite many attempts to respond to such malicious misinformation, especially with regard to in� uencing elections, there was no clear way forward in terms of

organising an internal response that crosses traditional lines of bureaucratic responsibility. Without such mechanisms in place, it is even more di� cult to formulate a response that appears to be objective and not designed to in� uence the outcome of an election.

We need to take a page from our response to terrorism, when we recognised that traditional bureaucratic mechanisms for responding to state actors did not � t well into our response to non-state, asymmetric threats. I would also suggest creating taskforces or other entities that have clear leadership, management, political support and resources. And this is one area where an entity such as NATO could develop further the capability to counter the threat on a global level.

I’m more pessimistic about our ability to mitigate these threats for two reasons that have exacerbated the challenge since I left government. � e � rst is that there has been an increasing breakdown in the ability of – and trust in – multilateral institutions to manage the threats. Secondly, the rise in nationalism has lent support to a world view in which states intentionally reject a global or multilateral response. Such a position, while perhaps politically appealing, actually weakens the ability of leaders to manage the threats e� ectively.

To compound this, we are ill prepared for the impact that issues such as climate change will have on fuelling and aggravating disasters. And we are completely unprepared to manage the manipulation of information around disasters, making us vulnerable in ways that we have not foreseen.

Having now painted a very grim picture, what are the solutions? In the � rst instance, we need to think multilaterally; we must visit and reform existing institutions where they are no longer � t for purpose. � is is not to say we should close down these institutions, but they need to be adapted to make them capable of addressing the problems at hand.

For example, the Ebola outbreak of 2014 underscored that the WHO was not able to manage the response. Dozens of after-action analyses detailed many of the problems. As a result, in 2019, the WHO announced the most wide-ranging reforms its history to modernise and strengthen the institution. � e jury is still out as to whether there is more work to do – and it is certainly under greater scrutiny at the moment given the current outbreak of Covid-19 – but scepticism of the moment allows for a disruption of the status quo and a rebuilding and reimagining of critical institutions.

Acting under the umbrella of these multinational organisations, countries can – and should – look at development objectives through the prism of climate change, for example. Can we do more to co-ordinate our development aid to anticipate where disasters will strike as a result of a heating planet?

Turning to governmental aspects, there is an opportunity for new leaders to � ll the vacuum. � is could go in many di� erent directions, not all of them positive, but there is room for smaller countries to step in and assume leadership.

Likewise, at the non-political level, it’s vitally important that o� cials shore up or strengthen existing channels of communication – through intelligence, law enforcement and defence, for example. And it is equally important to act across sectors, to reach out


to the non-governmental and corporate sectors, in order to build channels of response.

� is brings me to the non-governmental sector, both the non-pro� t and for pro� t world, which

may have to step in and bridge the gap left by government actors. While not their

traditional role, the corporate sector can identify opportunities for public-private

partnerships and push governments into action. Rather than waiting for governments, it may have to create and advocate policy and build coalitions to advocate for

those outcomes. And it behoves this sector to conduct political risk analysis and due diligence before acting.

And what can we do at an individual level? We can contest inaccuracies, we can diversify, we can push corporations to act and push governments into action.

Ultimately, we need to rethink that the way that societies engage collectively. In the absence of leadership from governments, there is an opportunity for corporations, non-governmental actors, and individuals to in� uence the debate – push for reform, build coalitions to � ll the gaps, and create protections that will extend beyond the short-term. � ere is also an urgent imperative for them to do so.

Based on my experience, the spread of misinformation – and the ability of nefarious actors to manipulate information – create a real hazard that is still not fully understood

AuthorAMY POPE is a Partner at Schillings. A seasoned courtroom lawyer, she is

a skilled tactician and strategist. Pope was US Deputy Homeland Security Advisor to President Barack Obama, where she led personnel in high profi le challenges such as managing cyber attacks, terrorist threats, natural hazards, violent extremism, border security threats and disease outbreaks. She is a Member of CRJ’s Advisory Panel� www.schillingspartners.com

19Crisis Response Journal 15:1 | March 2020 join the CRJ LinkedIn group follow us on twitter @editorialcrj

comment

Sofi a Wrangsjo | Alamy

crisis response - schillings€¦ · a new peacebuilding model ..... 70 larissa sotieva and juliet...

Documents