Inter-regional emergency management capability assessment

Abstract: A cross-regional emergency basic content. By defining the inter-regional emergency management connotation, the use of multi-factor evaluation theory, a set of inter-regional emergency management capacity assessment index system, and qualitative combined with the quantitative analysis method to improve the level of the index weight, a multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of regional emergency management capability across a comprehensive assessment. An example operation, showed the feasibility of the evaluation method is better, the effect is better able to cross-regional levels of government decision-making basis for emergency management activities.


Keywords:: cross-regional; emergency management; AHP (AHP); fuzzy comprehensive evaluation; Government
Abstract: The connotations of cross-regional emergency management and cross-regional emergencymanagement capability are given. The theory of multi-factor assessment is used to establish an index system. Then, based on calculation of the weight by the qualitative and quantitative HAHP, and a fuzzy comprehensivesafety assessment model for cross-regional emergency management capacity is put forward. With this method, anassessment of a real case is made. The results show that the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method is feasible andeffective. It can provide the basis for the governments at different levels for their decision-making of cross-regionalemergency management.

Keywords:: cross-region; emergency management capability; analytic hierarchy process; fuzzycomprehensive evaluation; government


0 Introduction inter-regional occurrence of unexpected events is beyond the scope or extent of emergency administrative areas. As human beings become increasingly close, cross-regional incidents have occurred all over the world have attracted much international attention. For example, the United States 2001 years, "9.11"; Hurricane Katrina in 2007 [1]; of 1894, Guangzhou, Hong Kong outbreak of plague in the event, 20 years spread to the world; the spring and summer 2003 outbreak of SARS cases; November 2005 in the Songhua River water pollution incident; southern snow disaster in 2008; earthquake; ****** event the 2008 melamine; 2009 Influenza A H1N1 incident and other incidents [2]. The cross-regional contingencies impact on people's minds, anxiety and uneasiness to the society, but also make people acutely aware of a single administrative region capable of such incidents is difficult to fight. inter-regional objective of emergency management departments to rely on break, the barriers between regions to co-ordinate the deployment , integration of resources, coordination. the world highlight the work of emergency management in general importance of national emergency co-operation between local governments, for example, the United States established a federal, state, county, city, community-level 5, while emergency management organization system [ 3], within the state to encourage and support cooperation between local governments. Michigan Emergency Management Act 410 provides that: Municipalities and counties with other counties, municipalities, public agencies, the nation-state or private sector agency alliance , or other mutual aid to reach all entities or mutual aid agreement [4-5]. British governments were set up the appropriate level of joint emergency management response system (The Emergency ManagementCombined Response System, EMCRS), responsible for the same level between the emergency Government coordination of cooperation [6]. can be seen as a social subject of public administration and services, foreign governments at all levels across regions in response to emergencies has made unremitting efforts. However, the domestic inter-regional shortage of emergency management practice, theory lacks . the practice of cross-regional emergency response and emergency rescue by their common superior people's government leaders to accomplish, there are some with similar interests to form the government from its own agreement in the form of regional cooperation, such as 2009, nine Pan-PRD Province by the <<Pan-Pearl River Delta region of nine provinces in the Mainland (Region) Emergency Management Cooperation "Agreement> [7]. In either mode, cross-regional level of emergency management related to China's social stability and people's vital interests of the [ 8]. The inter-regional emergency management performance evaluation to the regional emergency management across government departments to provide a basis for decision-making behavior, the establishment of a scientific inter-regional emergency management capacity assessment system seems necessary.


1 AHP-based on improved fuzzy comprehensive evaluation

1.1 Safety Assessment Model and its cross-regional emergency management evaluation system that cross-regional emergency management capacity in cross-regional emergency incident management subjects in emergency preparedness, disposal and recovery process of a comprehensive response to the performance results, so cross-regional emergency management evaluation system is used to describe and judge the effect of cross-regional emergency management factors that collection. According to China's emergency laws and regulations and [9] the definition of emergency management capabilities, cross-regional emergency management capacity is means the emergency preparation, emergency response and recovery after three comprehensive disposal capacity. and decided that three of many factors, complex relationships, so need to follow the scientific level, integrity, dynamic comparability and practical , versatility and target-oriented principle of selecting the indicators [10-11].


Pursuant to these principles, through literature analysis, questionnaires and expert interviews on-site investigation combined approach to the literature [12] on the emergency management system of Research-based, familiar with cross-regional emergency management-related factors. The time context, from the early characterization of cross-regional emergency preparedness (A1), cross-regional emergency disposal capacity of (A2) and the resumption of cross-regional emergency response capacity (A3) three point of view, has been established including a 3 level indicators, 16 indicators and 61 secondary indicators across three regional emergency management capacity assessment system, shown in Table 1. One cross-regional capacity of emergency preparation is to identify possible risk areas and emergency type, and put forward measures for the prevention and disposal capacity. to the security system of laws and regulations, emergency plans, based on the regional implementation of the inherent cross-regional and regional emergency to prevent the degree of attention to a decision. regional emphasis can have cross-regional emergency communication organizations exist, and whether cross-regional emergency response resources can be protected so that it embodies. inter-regional emergency response capacity refers to the sudden unexpected events across regions, in order to reduce the loss of the main active cooperation of all involved, integrate and transporting Related Resources joint response capabilities. it depends on the decisions and actions of the rapid and consistent implementation of all aspects of personnel quality and transport capacity of four aspects of the wounded. disaster recovery capabilities that enable victims to resume normal life and social production capacity, need to both victims and the government to consider. victims, first of all to make proper arrangements for the victims, protect their basic living and psychological needs; Second, we should actively carry out reconstruction work in disaster areas, to restore all the production and living activities. the Government, the first disaster to the accident investigation, find out the reasons and lessons learned; Secondly, according to the results of accident investigation to determine the emergency needs of the region involved in emergency response resources and to pay the actual emergency allocation of resources, by adjusting in order to protect the interests of the region, this is also the later Development of disaster protection and the protection of cross-regional emergency response mechanisms necessary for Healthy long-term Development initiatives.


1.2 The weights of each factor to determine the index system of cross-regional emergency management in determining the importance of capacity is to be distinguished, and reasonably determine the index weight, can be more objective assessment of the results obtained. AHP is a more mature approach, Although it is by subjective factors, but by many experts to do independent thinking and the average rate treatment could eliminate the personal preferences. AHP 9-point assignment with the principle of discrimination in the actual Research in the too small, operable is not strong, the time when the number of indicators are more likely to cause confusion experts, before and after the judge deviate from the consistency, resulting in repeated consistency test Research and other complex calculations, and repeat the process. In this regard, this switch to one-third of the system, which plays an important, equally important and important distinction between the three can not only reduce the degree of confusion, but also enables sorting by importance indicators corresponding to the relative scores, reduce the workload of experts, a certain simplification of the process of investigation [13]. the principle of the improved assignment see Table 2 .


1.3 Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method is to use fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of fuzzy mathematics and fuzzy statistical method, through the influence of something considering all factors, the things that make a scientific evaluation of the pros and cons. This method is described in precise mathematical model uncertainty of the best things one of the tools. As inter-regional emergency management capacity of the indicators in the indicator system with varying degrees of ambiguity can not be given in accordance with uniform standards for an accurate assessment data. and the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation can be ill-defined, quantitative factors not easily quantifiable, and its evaluation process in favor of other hidden wealth of information to improve the decision-making behavior [14]. fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method of the general steps are as follows [15-16]: (1) the establishment of evaluation and determine the appropriate set of weights. which constitute the target set at the same level fuzzy factor set U, U = {u1, u2, ..., un}; letters n the number of factors that represent the same level.


(2) determine the evaluation set. Judge set a jury may be made the object of evaluation of various total set of evaluation results, the evaluators of the factors being evaluated to determine what or how the results of that evaluation, generally constitutes an odd number of levels, the middle class to facilitate the evaluation factors to determine the level of ownership by using V = {v1, v2, ..., v5},
Table 3 is to assess the choice of this evaluation set.

(3) determine the membership matrix. The bottom of each index for different experts give different levels, each level of evaluation of the evaluation of the number of percentage of the total level of evaluation results. Ui factors such as the evaluation of j-factor get a fuzzy vector with respect to V as Rj = {rj1, vj2, ..., vjn}, if m-ui factors of evaluation will be attached to the matrix as:

(4) in accordance with the index level, the underlying index from the fuzzy operation started, operation results are used in the fuzzy operation on an evaluation matrix, until the target level so far.


2 Application of cross-regional analysis of emergency management

In order to verify the operability of the assessment program with practical Application, select the Guangdong Province, two representative areas, based on improved analytic hierarchy process (IAHP) - Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of its ability to cross-regional assessment of emergency management . through the questionnaire survey method, statistical indicators of 10 experts to sort the results, the comparison matrix; IAHP computer program based on the input layers of Excel form computing derived factor weight of each index. At the same time invited 10 senior experts on each a three indicators under evaluation, statistics and indicators calculation of weight in Table 4.

Links to Research Papers Download http://www.hi138.com A17 = W17 �� R17 = [0.000,0.311,0.500,0.191,0.000], A21 = W21 �� R21 = [0.087,0.213,0.587,0.032,0.013 ], A22 = W22 �� R22 = [0.000,0.300,0.463,0.240,0.000], A23 = W23 �� R23 = [0.000,0.418,0.550,0.032,0.000], A24 = W24 �� R24 = [0.060,0.273,0.535 , 0.132,0.000], A25 = W25 �� R25 = [0.000,0.300,0.600,0.100,0.000], A31 = W31 �� R31 = [0.000,0.368,0.432,0.171,0.029], A32 = W32 �� R32 = [0.084 , 0.253,0.531,0.116,0.016], A33 = W33 �� R33 = [0.160,0.184,0.511,0.145,0.000], A34 = W34 �� R34 = [0.100,0.100,0.375,0.400,0.025].


Fuzzy synthetic evaluation results:

A1 = W1 �� R1 = [0.035,0.285,0.423,0.257,0.000], A2 = W2 �� R2 = [0.035,0.297,0.538,0.126,0.004], A3 = W3 �� R3 = [0.059,0.274,0.464,0.182 , 0.021].


Three-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation results are as follows:

A = W �� R = [0.038,0.288,0.473,0.197,0.004].


Multi-level fuzzy assessment conclusions:

(1) of the selected area of the cross-regional emergency response capacity of the assessment results show that 3.8% of the experts believe that the very ideal, 28.8% of the experts believe that the ideal, 47.3% of the experts consider to be ideal, 19.7% of the experts believe that less than ideal, 0.4% The experts believe that is not ideal. According to the principle of maximum membership degree, the two regional emergency inter-regional level is ideal for comprehensive assessment.


(2) and two from a fuzzy evaluation results can be obtained in the cross-regional emergency management system, weak or strong links, for example, the Interest on post-disaster assessment coordination results: A34 = W34 �� R34 = [ 0.100,0.100,0.375,0.400,0.025].


Can be seen from the corresponding maximum degree less than ideal, which indicates that the process of inter-regional cooperation in the interests of coordination need to be strengthened. This gives you advance the Development of common rules and regulations to ensure that their emergency safeguard the interests of regional cooperation, the incident on-site in situ formation of functional coordination of interests and coordinate the disaster the government came forward to the next higher level of individual unreasonable.


The wounded transport capacity assessment results:

A24 = W24 �� R24 = [0.060,0.273,0.535,0.132,0.000].


Ideal corresponding to the maximum degree of membership, indicating that fairly well, so when the two regions occurs in a region of a serious nature, more casualties requiring emergency assistance around an area, according to this assessment can be a reasonable choice to regional cooperation.


3 Conclusion

(1) In this paper, based on IAHP --- fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, cross-regional emergency management with the actual situation of cross-regional emergency management capacity building evaluation index system is established evaluation model. The model not only for pre-assessment as a regional initiative organizational basis for emergency response cooperation agencies, can also be used to improve inter-regional assessment of the status of emergency management activities and found that the process of cross-regional emergency management weaknesses, make improvements in a timely manner, so that management continues to increase.


(2) selected two regions by the method of this example shows, to some extent, the results show that the assessment method can be recognized experts, operability strong.


(3) The assessment results show that the actual situation of the selected instance of the ideal, which is in Guangdong in recent years emphasis on cross-regional emergency management is closely related to proved in 2009, influenza H1N1 in Guangdong Province on the control effect was significantly higher than control SARS event effects.


References:

[1] Link L E. The anatomy of a disaster, an overview of HurricaneKatrina and New Orleans [J]. Ocean Engineering, 2010,37 (1) :4-12. [2] Fu Xiaodong. On the cross-regional public crisis prevention [J]. Learning and practice, 2009 (4) :40-47. [3] Zou Yijiang. Overseas Development of Emergency Management systems and experience of enlightenment [J]. Disaster, 2008,23 (1) :96-101. [4] Jennifer Wilson, Oyola-Yemaiel. The evolution of emergency man-agement and the advancement towards a profession in the UnitedStates and Florida [J]. Safety Science, 2001,39 (12) :117-131. [5] Liu Hongqin. Joint coordination of public crisis management mechanism [D]. Lanzhou: Lanzhou University, 2008. [6] Becky Hill. Diagnosing co-ordination problems in the emergencymanagement response to disasters [J]. Interacting with Comput-ers, 2010,22 (1) :43-55. [7], the first Pan-PRD regional cooperation to open a precedent for the National Emergency Management [J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2009,27 (3): 119. [8] Hanchuan Feng, Ye Cen. Government Comprehensive Evaluation of Emergency [J]. Natural Disasters, 2007,16 (4) :149-153. [9] Mo Jing Long, TRANSACTIONS OF THE Li Jing Bao, et al. Hunan Xiangtan Urban Agglomeration disaster emergency management capacity assessment [J]. Disaster, 2009,24 (3) :137-140. [10] by Bo Zhang. Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of training effectiveness evaluation of enterprise [D]. Dalian: Dalian Maritime University, 2008. [11] He Tianping, Cheng Ling. Analytic Hierarchy Process in Chemical Industry Park safety evaluation [J]. Safety Science and Technology of China, 2008,4 (4) :81-84. [12] Zhaoyuan Fei, Chen Guohua, LI Yi-Huan. PDCA model-based dynamic multi-layer Integrated Emergency Management System [J]. Disaster, 2008,23 (1) :135-139. [13] Liu, Zheng Shuangzhong. G1-based assessment of emergency response capacity of law to determine weights [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2006,16 (1) :30-33. [14] Cheng Ling, Hua Jie, Zhou Xiao column. Based on AHP - Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation of Chemical Industry Park [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2008,18 (8) :125-130. [15] EXPLOSIVES Cuiguo Zhang. Safety Systems Engineering [M]. Beijing: Coal Industry Press ,2002:153-156. [16] Chen Guohua, Zhang Xinmei. Fuzzy-based methodology forperformance assessment of emergency planning and its Application [J]. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2009,22 (2) :125-132. Links to Research Papers Download http://www.hi138.com