PPA 573 – Emergency Management and Homeland Security

1. PPA 573 – Emergency Management and Homeland Security Lecture 2c – Human Behavior and Governmental Activity in Disasters: Two Sets of Norms

2. Introduction • This lecture examines the various norms, expectations, and values that guide human behavior during disaster situations. • In everyday life, people rely heavily on norms to help determine their own activities and their interactions with others. • Norms also serve as fundamental building blocks for organizational and institutional life.

3. Introduction • Norms are key mechanisms for societal integration and cohesion. • But, during disasters, the regular, routine modes of human behavior are severely disrupted. • In such situations, people often question the legitimacy and viability of established principles, and may develop new norms and behavior patterns to guide their actions.

4. Introduction • These newly emergency norms may conflict with existing governmental policies and procedures. • The size of the gap between emergent norms and bureaucratic norms may have a direct impact on the success of the disaster response process.

5. Bureaucratic Norms: The Governmental Response Process • The characteristics of bureaucracy. • Clearly defined objectives; • A division of labor; • A formal structure underlying the process and tying together the component organizations; and • Set policies and procedures guiding organizational activity.

6. Bureaucratic Norms: The Governmental Response Process • Bureaucratic norms in the governmental disaster-response system. • Explicit objectives – mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery; • Formal structure – Intergovernmental system of emergency management, most with small corps of professionals and many layers of reservists (federal); state and local (shared with other functions). • Division of labor – Each layer has specific roles and responsibilities (functional competence). • Formal policies and procedures – Stafford Act, FEMA regulations,.

7. Bureaucratic Norms: The Governmental Response Process • The governmental response system possesses the basic characteristics of a bureaucracy.

8. Bureaucratic Norms: The Governmental Response Process • Bureaucratic pathologies. • Overemphasis on organizational survival. • Hierarchies are inefficient at quick and effective response. • Decentralized organizations have difficulty with coordination. • Inherent tension between structure and division of labor. Specialization induces myopia. • Formalization can lead to excessive focus on standard operating procedures.

9. Bureaucratic Norms: The Governmental Response Process • Bureaucratic pathologies and the disaster response system. • Survival concerns led to the shift in focus from natural disasters to national preparedness. • State and local governments often must share emergency management functions with other activities to justify budgets. • Response speed and coordination is a chronic problem for emergency management. • Division of labor problems caused by unclear picture of how actions fit into a larger whole. • Indifference and bureaucratic red tape to victims.

10. Bureaucratic Norms: The Governmental Response Process • Bureaucratic behavior can proved order, consistency, and predictability. • But, it can also produce rigidity, duplication, and confusion.

11. Emergent Norms: Human Behavior in Disaster Situations • On a day-to-day basis, people naturally develop beliefs and expectations about their own lives and their interactions with others. • These expectations help guide and coordinate patterns of activity during normal, routine situations. • Traditional norms, values, and expectations generate a sense of continuity and regularity among members of society.

12. Emergent Norms: Human Behavior in Disaster Situations • The effects of unanticipated events. • Human interactions are usually guided by the existing social norms. • Standard forms of interaction, however, are upset when an unanticipated event occurs. • Personal tragedies rarely upset social norms. • Other unanticipated events are so severe that universally understood and accepted values no longer appear to be relevant.

13. Emergent Norms: Human Behavior in Disaster Situations • The effects of unanticipated events (contd.). • The people most directly affected are confronted with unimaginable and incomprehensible conditions. • Some people may mill randomly, some may engage in unusual behavior, some may engage in unconventional behavior (rioting or looting). • Human behavior appears to be abnormal or chaotic, but it has patterns. • These patterns are known as collective behavior. • Disasters are certainly some of the most obvious, sudden and significant disruptions that can occur.

14. Emergent Norms: Human Behavior in Disaster Situations • Four basic components of collective behavior. • Milling. • Rumor circulation. • Keynoting. • Emergent norms.

15. Emergent Norms: Human Behavior in Disaster Situations • Milling • How do we deal with this? • The widespread search for meaning and appropriate standards of behavior among the affected population. • Milling is most pronounced when existing organizations and institutional procedures are inadequate or inappropriate for the situation at hand. Exacerbated by breakdowns in communication and transportation.

16. Emergent Norms: Human Behavior in Disaster Situations • Rumors • During the milling process, new forms of communication and interaction develop among the affected population. • More reliance placed on informal and unconventional channels of communication. • Rumors may appear random or malicious, but are also a means of transmitting critical information about the nature of the disaster within the affected population.

17. Emergent Norms: Human Behavior in Disaster Situations • Keynoting. • During milling many rumors circulate. Some are discarded; Others change and distort into other rumors. • Over time, certain ideas and features come to be repeated more frequently and hence are emphasized by the participants in the rumor process. • The selection of specific ideas, and the concurrent elimination of others, is called “keynoting”.

18. Emergent Norms: Human Behavior in Disaster Situations • Keynoting (contd.). • The nature of the event and the existence of preexisting ideas can cause keynoting to occur quickly. • In other situations, it occurs more slowly. • Keynoting identifies the specific themes and symbols that will eventually give meaning the disruptive situation.

19. Emergent Norms: Human Behavior in Disaster Situations • Emergent norms. • The dominant symbols and ideas that emerge from keynoting activity serve as a new set of norms for guiding behavior. • These emergent norms help disaster-stricken individuals understand what has happened to them. • As the situation stabilizes and predisaster conditions are restored, traditional norms come back into play, and emergent norms are discarded.

20. The Gap Between Bureaucratic and Emergent Norms • Two distinct set of norms operate together during a disaster situation. • On the one hand, bureaucratic norms provide the foundation for the governmental response system. • On the other hand, emergent norms serve to structure behavior within the affected population. • Both are necessary, but they may not be consistent with one another. • If they are not, there can be serious consequences for the entire relief effort.

21. The Nature and Significance of the “Gap” • The sources of bureaucratic and emergent norms are largely independent of each other. • Bureaucratic norms develop slowly and methodically inside public organizations; they set the parameters for acceptable government activity. • Emergent norms originate instantaneously and spontaneously within a disaster-stricken population, providing a framework for individual and social behavior. • Bound to be some discord or disagreement.

22. The Nature and Significance of the “Gap” • Each type of norm will naturally change or evolve over time. • Bureaucracies can become more or less flexible. • Emergent norms can shift to antisocial behavior or quickly return to traditional norms. • The sets of norms are likely to evolve in different directions.

23. The Nature and Significance of the “Gap” • The result is a noticeable gap between expectations under the bureaucratic norms and expectations under the emergent norms. • The size of the gap has important consequences for disaster relief effort.

24. Factors Affecting the Size of the Gap • The magnitude of the disaster. • Unpredictability, scope, and disruption can generate major shifts in collective behavior. • Major cataclysmic events can also disrupt normal disaster response activities. • Catastrophic disasters are likely to create situations where emergent and bureaucratic norms are most in conflict.

25. Factors Affecting the Size of the Gap • Degree of governmental preparedness. • The entire disaster response system rests on the presumption that government can and should plan for disasters. • The viability of the system requires several assumptions: • Knowledge of roles; • Willingness to act; • Availability of resources; And. • Open communication channels. • Temporary or limited disruptions.

26. Factors Affecting the Size of the Gap • Degree of governmental preparedness (contd.). • The problem arises when these assumptions do not hold. • Actual government preparedness is highly inconsistent across the nation. • During a crisis, processes may not work. • Delays in government responses are likely to occur. • When they occur it increases the gap between plans and needs.

27. Factors Affecting the Size of the Gap • The orientations of disaster victims. • Close-knit communities are likely to provide mutual support during a crisis. Social norms are very strong. • Communities with little internal cohesion are likely to suffer more disruption. Social norms may not be as binding. • Experience with previous disasters also shapes responses.

28. Immediate Consequences and Inevitability of the Gap • The gap affects local governments by affecting first response. Collective behavior disrupts social norms. • The gap disrupts state actions as well. • Local problems interfere with coordination. • Local governments deviate from preexisting plans. • State governments are often unprepared as well.

29. Immediate Consequences and Inevitability of the Gap • The gap compromises the effectiveness of the federal government’s disaster relief efforts as well. • Largely the result of lower level failures that cause the feds to exceed their coordinating functions. • Complicated by the unclear lines of authority in intergovernmental implementation. • Separate policy development separately arrived at.

30. Three Implementation Patterns for Disaster Relief • The bottom-up approach. • Relief efforts starts at local level and works it way up through the system following the normal procedures of the intergovernmental system. • The bottom-up approach can only occur if the gap between bureaucratic norms and emergent norms is very small.

31. Three Implementation Patterns for Disaster Relief • The confusion pattern. • Local governments fail to respond quickly. Local capacities may be exceeded. State and national governments may hesitate because they are waiting for local initiative. Overall coordination of the relief effort is poor. • The confusion patter is most likely to occur when the gap is moderate between bureaucratic and emergent norms.

32. Three Implementation Patterns for Disaster Relief • The top-down approach. • The federal government takes over all emergency management activities because of catastrophic failure at the state and local level. Completely preempts and overrides the traditional system. • Most likely to occur when there is a large gap between emergent and bureaucratic norms. • Especially when local government cease to exist. • Emergent norms generate radical and illegal behavior. • Response likely to be inefficient and criticism intense.

33. The Broader Impact of the Gap • The gap between bureaucratic and emergent norms determines which of the three implementation patterns takes place. • The size of the gap ultimately determines public assessments of success or failure. • By any objective standard, virtually all government relief efforts can be labeled successes. • But, objective indicators are often outweighed by the subjective assessments produce after catastrophic disasters.