CrisesResearchers Find Commonalities in All Crises

By Guro Kulset Merakerås

Published 8 June 2020

Generals are often accused of preparing to fight the last war. How about emergency managers and those entrusted with setting up contingency plans for the next crisis? In the aftermath of a crisis, it is always easy to see how the crisis could have been better handled, and then we put new measures into place. But do these measures set us up to solve the next crisis – the one we don’t yet know about?

The coronavirus crisis has made civil protection a highly relevant area of research.

Major crises often trigger this kind of response. The last such wave peaked following the July 22, 2011 terror attacks in Oslo and Utøya. Increased interest in emergency preparedness and civil protection is completely natural but not necessarily helpful for achieving the desired security.

The actual key to success is regular, ongoing groundwork that can help connect resources when a crisis arises. This approach requires establishing cross-sector collaboration, open communication and effective information flow.

Interdisciplinary Efforts Often a Critical Piece
Although no one can predict the next crisis, researchers at NTNU Social Research find that whatever the crisis turns out to be will most likely be best solved through interdisciplinary efforts. Research shows that this is a common feature of all major crises and often a critical piece in achieving a successful outcome.

Both the July 22 terror attacks and swine flu (H1N1) are examples of how the handling of these crises suffered from a lack of clear roles and responsibilities between agencies.

“Regular meeting points and formalized processes for interacting are always useful measures. Talking together can contribute to a common understanding and better insight into topics that extend across sectoral boundaries. We should make sure that agencies with different points of view build relationships, because over time that can contribute to better cooperation when crises occur,” says Marie Nilsen. She is supported by her colleague at NTNU Social Research, senior researcher Stian Antonsen.

“Collaboration and coordinated effort are important, and we need to invest in cultivating our collaborative ability ‘in peacetime’. This prevents crises from becoming larger than they need to be as a result of mismanagement,” he says.

Management Phase Dominates When We Evaluate
All preparedness and safety work can be broken down into five phases.

Phase one involves risk assessment, phase two is about preventing crises, and phase three involves management planning. All these steps have to occur before a crisis hits.

Once the crisis occurs, the fourth phase kicks in, where we have to manage the situation by mobilizing resources, informing citizens and mitigating injury.

Finally, phase five entails normalizing the situation. Remedying damage, communicating information and transitioning to normal operations become the important tasks. This phase is also the time to evaluate, learn and report out.