@FORTRESS_EUhttp://fortress-project.eu
Case studies of cascading disasters
Kim HagenTrilateral Research & [email protected]
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Fukushima nuclear disaster
Disrupted electricity supply to the nuclear power plant
System for cooling the nuclear reactors could not function
Back-up transmission lineMismatched sockets
Firefighters became responsible for alternative water injections
Aftershocks
Earthquake Tsunami
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
FORTRESS
1. Identify and understand cascading effects in crisis situations
• Analyse relations and interdependencies between systems and actors
2. Build a modelling platform for cascading and cross-border effects
3. Develop an incident evolution tool/decision support tool
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
FORTRESS
1. Identify and understand cascading effects in crisis situations
• Analyse relations and interdependencies between systems and actors
2. Build a modelling platform for cascading and cross-border effects
3. Develop an incident evolution tool/decision support tool
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Case studies of cascading disasters
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Case studies of cascading disasters
• Frequency of crises
• Cross-border aspect of crises
• Presence and severity of cascading effects
9 case studies
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
List of case studies
• 2005 London attacks, UK
• 2000 Enschede fireworks factory explosion, the Netherlands
• 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, Japan
• 1999 Galtür avalanche disaster, Austria
• 2003 Heatwave, France
• 2014 MH17 plane crash, Ukraine
• 2010 Eyafjallajokull volcanic eruption, Iceland/UK
• 2012 Hurricane Sandy, USA
• 2002 Central European floods, Prague, Czech Republic
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Approach and methodology
• Approach
• Pages of text
• Visual analysis
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Approach and methodology
• Excel sheet
• Triggers of cascading effects
• Time- when did what happen
• Unfolding of events and actions in crisis management
• Unfolding of the crisis itself
• Negative effects
• Sectors directly affected
• Sectors indirectly affected
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Blue arrow- direct causal relationYellow arrow- of influence onGreen line- subsequent steps but not a causal relation
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Blue arrow- direct causal relationYellow arrow- of influence onGreen line- subsequent steps but not a causal relationRed line- connects trigger in green column to the cascade it caused
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Approach and methodology
Uniform approach for categorising the triggers of cascading effects
• Disruption of
• Information relation
• Supply relation
• Organisation relation
• Malfunctioning of legal and regulatory relation
• Disturbance relation
• Relational conditions
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
What are common triggers of cascading effects and what are the implications for emergency management?
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
1. Disruption of
• Information relation
• Supply relation
• Organisation relation
• Malfunctioning of legal and regulatory relation
2. Disturbance relation
3. Relational conditions
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
1. Disruption of relations
Disruption of information relations: 12 times
• Congestion of telecommunication networks
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
London attacks-First responders reliant on mobile phones-Increase in call traffic (up to 250%)-Difficulties in organizing response efforts with hospitals, and in allocating additional resources
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
1. Disruption of relations
Disruption of information relations: 12 times
• Congestion of telecommunication networks
►Importance of having separate reliable communication systems
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
1. Disruption of relations
Disruption of supply relations: 8 times
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Galtür avalanche-Roads were inaccessible- no transport via roads-Not enough helicopters to bring emergency personnel and evacuate people-Helicopters had to be requested from neighbouring countries and NATO member states
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
1. Disruption of relations
Disruption of supply relations: 8 times
• Supply of water
►Importance of access to resources
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
1. Disruption of relations
Disruption of organisational relations: 11 times
• Decisions based on incorrect information
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Enschede fireworks factory explosion-Fire brigade asked SE Fireworks if fire safety measures were up to date-SE Fireworks claimed they were-Firefighters subsequent actions were based on this.
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
1. Disruption of relations
Disruption of organisational relations: 11 times
• Decisions based on incorrect information
• Decisions proved to be wrong
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
London attacks-Meeting location for members of the Gold Coordination Group was changed-Congestion on roads and closure of underground-Senior officials experienced difficulties in getting to the new location-Impacted the strategic coordination to the attacks
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
1. Disruption of relations
Disruption of organisational relations: 11 times
• Decisions based on incorrect information
• Decisions proved to be wrong
• Organisational responsibilities were not agreed upon
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Heatwave- France-No heatwave response plan was in place-Classification as an ‘emergency situation’ was delayed- it did not fit in the existing format-Poorly coordinated and inadequate response to the event
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
1. Disruption of relations
Disruption of organisational relations: 11 times
• Decisions based on incorrect information
• Decisions proved to be wrong
• Organisational responsibilities were not agreed upon
►Triangulation of knowledge provided by those who have a stake in the situation
►Importance of systematic organisation of both resources and people, between and within organisations, pre- and during disaster
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
2. Disturbance relations: 12 times
(unintended relations between systems or actors that come into being during a crisis)
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Fukushima-No electricity-Failure of pumps - reactors could not be cooled-Firefighters became responsible for cooling nuclear reactors.
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
2. Disturbance relations: 12 times
(unintended relations between systems or actors that come into being during a crisis)
►Known risks are valuable resources of knowledge that can be used in emergency planning
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
3. Pre-disaster relational conditions: 12 times
• Wider trends influenced specific behavior
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Fukushima-Nuclear power less profitable in Japan prior to 2011-Investment in cost reduction at the expense of safety measures-Inadequate diagrams and instruments related to safety protocols -Delay in responding to the accident
AP
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
3. Pre-disaster relational conditions: 12 times
• Wider trends influenced specific behavior
• Specific behavior influenced wider trends
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Floods- Prague-Political decisions – use of dams for the production of electricity-Flood models and structural barriers -Urbanisation -Gradual loss of flood mitigation practices
AP
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Analysis
3. Pre-disaster relational conditions: 12 times
• Wider trends influenced specific behavior
• Specific behavior influenced wider trends
►Triggers of cascading effects that have their origin in a pre-disaster period are more difficult to address during actual crisis management. However, they allow greater opportunities for the mitigation of risk.
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
Take home lessons
►Triggers of cascading effects can originate prior or during crisis
►Effective regulations can limit cascading effects
►Pre-crisis mitigation and preparation measures can limit the occurrence of triggers of cascading effects during crises
►Systems and human resources cannot be considered in isolation from each other
@FORTRESS_EU
http://fortress-project.eu
THANK YOU
If you have any further questions or would like to be kept up-to-date with the
project’s findings and events please contact:
FORTRESS has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 607579.
Top Related