Mapping convergence points in the initial emergency response to 9/11¹

Abstract

In response to extreme events, researchers have recognised the convergence of volunteers, emergency responders, and other individuals and organisations. In 2000, geographer Paul Routledge presented the concept of convergence spaces as a theoretical means to explain social movements. In applying this concept, this paper explores the geographic space in which organisations and individuals converged immediately following the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center. The paper begins to answer the question of whether there were in fact any patterns of convergence among the locations utilised by organisations responding to the attacks. Using data collected from field documents, these geographic locations are mapped over 12 days to help identify possible patterns of clustering. Results of this analysis will begin to provide researchers, policy makers and practitioners with a better understanding of how emergency response evolves geographically following an event.

Public–nonprofit Partnership Performance in a Disaster Context: The Case of Haiti

“…Emergency management research also emphasizes that coordination is a valuable partnership input (Comfort 2007; Bevc et al 2009; Celik and Corbacioglu 2010; Thompson 2010). Several authors have noted the inadequate coordination of organizations in recent disasters, such as during Hurricane Katrina and the flooding of New Orleans (Kettl 2003; Comfort et al 2004; Cigler 2007).…”

Progress and prospects for data-driven coordinated management and emergency response: the case of Ireland

“…For example, within the United States there are many cities with limited data-driven CMER, especially smaller sized cities rather than large metropolitan areas. Further, similar coordination issues across jurisdictions and scales (local, regional, state, federal) are evident in the fractured approaches to large-scale events such as 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombings, and the Katrina and Sandy hurricanes (AAR, 2014;Bevc et al, 2009;Boyle, 2015;GAO, 2006;HHSCR, 2014;Powell et al, 2012). Likewise, across Europe, there is a variable level of coordinated, data-driven CMER, from large cities with a history of terrorism eventswhich have a denser network of real-time data generation across infrastructural systems and more developed plans and responses based on know-how and necessityto smaller more remote locales which have relatively less capacity, infrastructure and experience.…”

The Four Cs of disaster partnering: communication, cooperation, coordination and collaboration

“…According to Comfort et al (2004), failures of communication channels whether conventional phone lines, cell phone systems or radio channels can severely harm the emergency response. In recent years, means of communication during a disaster response have become more and more sophisticated, due to new developments in information and communication technologies (Bevc et al, 2009). However, we are still concerned with information exchange that takes place face-to-face, via telephone, cellular phones or walkie-talkies, as well as e-mails, text messages and other forms of information and communication technologies (Bevc et al, 2009).…”

“…In recent years, means of communication during a disaster response have become more and more sophisticated, due to new developments in information and communication technologies (Bevc et al, 2009). However, we are still concerned with information exchange that takes place face-to-face, via telephone, cellular phones or walkie-talkies, as well as e-mails, text messages and other forms of information and communication technologies (Bevc et al, 2009). Celik and Corbacioglu (2010) find that well-functioning information and communication technologies positively affect the disaster response and facilitate coordination among organisations.…”