Disaster Management System as an Element of Risk Management for Natural Disaster Systems Using the PESTLE Framework

Abstract

Abstract. Recently, we have witnessed son many natural catastrophies such as earthquakes in Japan, severe floods in the UK, US and many other parts of the world. In addition businesses have been losing tens of billions of dollars because there have been various natural and man-made disasters. However, the Disaster Management System (DMS) and system that have been put in place have proven important means of reducing the risk of damages to businesses, in particular. The DMS can minimize and in some cases, eliminates the risks through technical, management or operational solutions (risk management effort). However, it is virtually impossible to eliminate all risks. Information technology systems, for example, are vulnerable to a variety of disruptions (e.g. short-term power outage, disk drive failure) from a variety of sources such as natural disasters to terrorist actions. In many cases, critical resources may reside outside the organizations control (such as telecommunications or electric power), and the organization may be unable to ensure their availability. This study proposes a model for Disaster Management System as an Element of Risk Management using the PESTLE framework. Thus, an effective Disaster Management System in the form of contingency planning, execution and testing are essential to mitigate the risk of system and service availability. We have developed a global model for Disaster recover planning and management based on the PESTLE framework which can be customized and applied to a variety of disasters prone systems such natural, emergency, IT/Network/Security, Data recovery, and incident-response systems. The main aspect of this model has been currently used and evaluated.

Landscape and domains of possible future threats from a societal point of view

“…As brought forth in the theoretical background of this paper, PESTLE framework is a widely used tool in strategic and organisational setting. It is not that commonly used in academic crisis studies, but e.g., Sarwar et al (2016) noted that PESTLE can be benefitted in disaster risk management. The PESTLE categorisation differs from the existing other frameworks (e.g., Coombs et al, 2020; Drennan et al, 2014; Williams et al, 2017), which are either very organisation‐focused, or do not clearly include societal domains.…”

“…In addition to the previous schemes, one central strategic and organisational framework to scan, assess and manage crises is to divide them with the PESTLE framework (see Pereira, 2017; Rastogi & Trivedi, 2016; Vasileva, 2018). This is challenging due to the interconnected nature of society and thus crises emerging within it, but when acknowledging this complexity, PESTLE is also a comprehensive, yet structured and comprehensible way of organising very diverse phenomena, deemed suitable also for crisis and disaster field (Sarwar et al, 2016). It is a simplification of reality as every model but takes the different sectors of administration and industry into account and can be modified further for different purposes.…”

An Overview of Disaster and Emergency Management Systems Models

“…The equilibrium amongst flexibility and preparedness is seen as a fundamental benefit of this model (Dong, Li, Ota, Yang, & Zhu, 2014). Moreover, the infrastructure is required for the Manitoba model to ensure that modifications and adaptations enable the updating of information (Sarwar, Ramachandran, & Hosseinian-Far, 2017). Again this infrastructure requires well trained and established individuals to operate the functionality of the model.…”

“…It can be seen that both models are really applied to specific applications regardless of the requirements: This applies to the level of budget, as there is significant high level technology that applies to this model for different areas of geographic places (Quillinan, 2009). The financial focus for the preparation of the emergency happening again is extremely high (Sarwar, Ramachandran, & Hosseinian-Far, 2017). The initial model is seen to be a time related crisis, in conclusion it can be stated that during this initial period of the time so there is no need for the feedback (Li, Li, Liu, Khan, & Ghani, 2014).…”

Practice of disaster risk management in global national parks and its enlightenment to China

“…

[2,3] 。灾害的 消极影响不仅取决于致灾因子的性质、概率和强度，也取决于实体、社会、经济和环境 因素的抗灾能力 [1] 。灾害风险管理是实施减少灾害风险的政策和战略，以防止出现新的灾 害风险，减少现有的灾害风险，管理残余风险，从而有助于加强复原力并减少灾害损失 [1] 。 当前，国内外对灾害风险的研究主要关注以下几个方面：第一是灾害风险管理理 念。自 20 世纪初至今，随着自然与社会环境的变迁与灾害风险多样性与复杂性的日益 加深 [4] ，出现准军事理念 [5] 、自然灾害应变理念 [4] 、灾害管理周期理念 [6] 、环境安全管理 理念 [7] 与公共安全管理理念等多种理念。第二是灾害风险管理策略。随着管理实践的不 断积累，目前已发展出多种面向灾害管理的决策工具，其中具有代表性的包括"危害-风险-脆弱性" (HRV) 决策工具 [8] 、博弈论决策工具 [9] 、地理空间技术决策工具 [10] 、灾害 大数据决策工具 [11,12] 、移动通信技术决策工具 [13] 、灾害管理元模型 (DMM) 决策工具 [14] 、 复杂网络决策工具 [15] 等。第三是灾害风险评估方法。目前在宏观层面已有一些较为成熟

…”