Journal
JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH
Volume 22, Issue 11, Pages 1425-1442Publisher
ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2018.1476901
Keywords
Comprehensive emergency management (CEM); all hazards approach; China; emergency management system; comparison; applicability
Categories
Funding
- National Natural Science Foundation of China [71774098, 71790611]
- Tsinghua University Initiative Scientific Research Program [20151080360]
- Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China [17YJC630101]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The institutional structures and processes of emergency management have been infused with ideas of Comprehensive Emergency Management (CEM) and the so-called all-hazard approach in various countries since the mid-1980s. China's new emergency management system has moved to the direction of a more CEM-like system, though some experts advocate an even more comprehensive system. This article examines the applicability of three popular CEM principles in the Chinese context: all-hazard, all-phase and all-stakeholder involvement. We argue that (1) an all-hazard coordinating ministry was established for a different reason; (2) integrating all-phase management (especially mitigation phase) should not only be applied in post-catastrophes reconstructions, but also in prior disaster mitigation phases; (3) too much stake has been imposed on individual leaders in vertical governmental relations which hinders opportunities on trial and error learning after an emergency. Finally, we try to contribute to the extensions of the CEM concept after comparing applications in different political and administrative contexts.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available