Remove 2004 Remove Emergency Planning Remove Hazard
article thumbnail

A Proposed Strategy to Advocate for Improved Civil Protection in the United Kingdom

Emergency Planning

The lessons of the Covid-19 pandemic, alas largely negative, show that a good civilian system designed to protect the public against major hazards and threats can save thousands of lives and billions in losses and wasted expenditure. Standardised,"all hazards" emergency planning methodology applied at all levels.

article thumbnail

Managing Emergencies: The Challenges of the Future

Emergency Planning

In the UK this is the Civil Contingencies Act of November 2004. Wording of this kind is designed to defy the country's leading philosophers of logic, and let's remember that the Act is designed to tackle a major emergency–sorry, disaster. It lacks a national emergency operations centre. Emergency planning is a vital occupation.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

The 2019 Global Assessment Report (GAR)

Emergency Planning

The GAR uses the 'pressure-and-release' model of Wisner et al, (2004) in an adapted form, consisting of: context. Unofficial voices have suggested that the 'cure to damage ratio' for natural hazards is 1:43. Global probabilistic assessment of risk from natural hazards for the Global Assessment Report 2013 (GAR13). GNCSODR 2015.

article thumbnail

State of the Nation - a UK Perspective on Covid-19

Emergency Planning

Since the start of the crisis, I have constantly affirmed that the key to understanding the effects of this pandemic is the UK Government's failure to give adequate weight to emergency planning and management (Alexander 2020a, 2020b). Plans were made in the UK in 2006, 2008, 2011 and 2014. I have taught it every year since then.