بررسی مدل های مدیریت سوانح طبیعی با استفاده از مفاهیم تحلیل مضمون

محورهای موضوعی : مدیریت بلایای طبیعی

مهدی نوجوان ¹ , اسماعیل صالحی ² , بابک امیدوار ³ , شهرزاد فریادی ⁴

1 - دکتری برنامه ریزی محیط زیست- مدیریت در سوانح طبیعی، دانشکده محیط زیست، دانشگاه تهران. *(مسوول مکاتبات)
2 - دانشیار دانشکده محیط زیست، دانشگاه تهران.
3 - دانشیار، دانشکده محیط زیست، دانشگاه تهران
4 - دانشیار، دانشکده محیط زیست، دانشگاه تهران

تاریخ دریافت : 1395/05/23 تاریخ پذیرش : 1395/06/16 تاریخ انتشار : 1400/07/01

کلید واژه: گونه‌شناسی, مدیریت سوانح, برنامه استراتژیک, مدل مفهومی, تحلیل مضمونی,

چکیده مقاله :

زمینه و هدف: مدل های مختلفی برای مدیریت سوانح ارایه شده که با توجه به نقاط ضعف این مدل ها، علی رغم کارآیی آن ها در برخی مکان ها و تحت شرایط خاص، سوانح طبیعی همچنان چالش اساسی در دستیابی به توسعه پایدار است. هدف از این تحقیق تحلیل مدل های مدیریت سوانح است تا بتوان از آن به مثابه ابزاری نظری در تحلیل شرایط موجود و نیل به وضع مطلوب بهره برداری کرد. روش بررسی: جهت دستیابی به هدف تحقیق، رویکرد کیفی و آمیخته ای از روش های تحلیل مضمونی، طبقه بندی و گونه شناسی استفاده شد. در این راستا ابتدا مدل های مدیریت سانحه از سال 1941 تا سال 2016 گردآوری شدند. سپس با استفاده از روش تحلیل مضمونی در مرحله نخست یعنی کدگذاری توصیفی، عناصر موجود در هر مدل به عنوان کد، استخراج و سپس از میان کدها، مضامین پایه شناخته شدند. سپس در مرحله کدگذاری تفسیری ، مضامین پایه در سه دسته طبقه بندی شد که آن ها را مضامین سازمان دهنده گویند. آخرین مرحله، تعیین مضمون فراگیر است که تمامی مضامین پیش گفته را در بر می گیرد. یافته ها: مضامین محوری که در مرحله کدگذاری تفسیری به دست آمد عبارتند از مضامین مدیریت عملیات، مدیریت ریسک و ارزیابی خطر. بر اساس تحلیل مضمونی مدل ها می توان نتیجه گرفت که مدیریت سوانح، سه عنصر اصلی دارد. بنابراین، مدل جامع مدیریت سانحه باید این سه عنصر و مضامین پایه ذیل آن ها را دربرگیرد که گونه ایده آل یا گونه معیار نامیده می شود. نتیجه گیری: نتایج نشان داد که برخی محققان به مدیریت سانحه، یک بعدی نگریسته اند؛ حتی در بعضی از مدل های دو بعدی نیز یک بعد غلبه دارد. در حالی که گونه شناسی ارایه شده در این تحقیق نشان داد که با توجه به نوع ایده آل، مد ل جامع باید دربرگیرنده هر سه عنصر اشاره شده باشد. مطابق گونه شناسی ارایه شده، برنامه راهبردی مدیریت سانحه بایستی تحت مدیریتی جامع با در نظرگرفتن کلیه عناصر مرتبط با سوانح اجرایی گردد.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Background and Objective: Different models have been proposed for disaster management. Considering their weaknesses so far, despite their efficiency in some locations and under certain circumstances, natural disasters are still a fundamental challenge in the way of sustainable development. The purpose of this research is to analyse disaster management models to be used as a theoretical tool in analyzing the current condition and to achieve the desired condition. Material and Methodogy: To achieve the goals, qualitative approach and combinations of the concepts of thematic analysis, classification and typology are used. In this regard, first, the models of disaster management from 1941 to 2016 are collected. In the next stage the themes of each model are extracted and categorized in three phases. In the first phase which is descriptive coding, available elements in each model are extracted as code and the basic themes are recognized. Then, in the phase of interpretive coding, basic themes are classified in three categories which are called organizing themes. The final phase is determination of global or overarching theme which is consisted of all the other mentioned themes. Findings: Basic themes which were obtained during the interpretive coding are the themes of operations management, risk management and hazard assessment. Based on thematic analysis, it can be concluded that disaster management has three main elements. Therefore, comprehensive model of disaster management should include these three elements and their sub basic themes that is called the ideal or criterion type.  Discussion and Conclusion: Results showed that in some models, one dimension is emphasized. Even in two-dimensional models, one dimension has advantage over the other one. While the proposed typology showed that, considering the ideal type, the comprehensive model should include all the three mentioned elements. According to the ideal type, the strategic plan of disaster management should be performed under a comprehensive management considering all the elements of disasters.

منابع و مأخذ:

1. Adger, W.N. and Hodbod, J., 2014. Ecological and social In Handbook of sustainable development, G. Atkinson, S. Dietz, E. Neumayer, M. Agarwala, eds., Cheltenham, UK., Northampton, MA, USA, Section I, pp. 91-104.


2. Kraas, F., 2008. Megacities as Global Risk Areas. In Urban Ecology: An International Perspective on the Interaction Between Humans and Nature, J. M. Marzluff, W. Endlicher, G. Bradley, U. Simon, E. Shulenberger, M. Alberti, C. Ryan and C. ZumBrunnen, eds., Springer, LLC., 233 Spring Street, New York, NY10013, USA, Section V, pp. 583-596. See also URL http://www.springer.com.


3. Dutta‚ V., 2012. War on the Dream‚ How Land use Dynamics and Peri-urban Growth Characteristics of a Sprawling City Devour the Master Plan and Urban Suitability‚ A Fuzzy Multi criteria Decision Making Approach‚ proceeded in 13th Global Development Conference “Urbanization and Development: Delving Deeper into the Nexus” ‚ Budapest‚ Hungary.


4. Jha, K.‚ Miner‚ W. and Geddes‚ S., 2012. Building urban resilience: principles, tools, and practice. The world Bank‚ pp 155.


5. León‚ J. and March‚ A., 2014. Urban morphology as a tool for supporting tsunami rapid resilience: A case study of Talcahuano, Chile. Habitat International‚ Vol 43: 250–262.


6. Jadali, H., 2003. Security of Urban Areas, 8th international seminar earthquake prognostics, Tehran. (In Persian)


7. Chang, S.E., 2014. Infrastructure resilience to disasters. The Bridge, Vol 44: 36-41.


8. Bastaminia, A., Rezaie, M.R. and Saraie, M.H., 2016. Explaining and Analyzing the Concept of Resiliency and its Indicators and Frameworks in Natural Disasters. Disaster Prev. Manag. Know, 6 (1): 32-46. (In Persian)


9. Laframboise, N. and Acevedo, S., 2014. Man versus Mother Nature. Finance and Development, 51: 44- 47.


10. Rafieian, M. and Parsaeian, A., 2016. The Assessment of Risk Perception Spatial Pattern Segregated Neighborhoods in Yazd City, Journal of Emergency Management, 4 (2): 37-46. (In Persian)


11. Bryson, J.M., 2001. Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations, Tranlated by Monavarian, A. State Management Training Center, Tehran. (In Persian)


12. Mohapatra, R., 2009. Community Based Planning in Post-Disaster Reconstruction: A Case Study of Tsunami Affected Fishing Communities in Tamil Nadu Coast of India. A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Planning, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.


13. Alexander, D., 1997. The Study of Natural Disasters, 1977-1997: Some Reflections on a Changing Field of Knowledge. Disasters, 21 (4): 284-304.


14. Asghar, S., Alahakoon, D., and Churilov, L., 2006. A Comprehensive Conceptual Model for Disaster Management. Journal of Humanitarian Assistance.


15. Nathan, M., 2000. The Paradoxical Nature of Crisis, Review of Business, 21 (3): 12-16.


16. Seeger, M., Wayne, S., Lester, U. and Robert, R., 2003. Communication and Organizational Crisis, Westport, Greenwood Publishing Group.


17. ADPC, 2000. Community Based Disaster Management (CBDM): Trainer's Guide, Module 4: Disaster Management. Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC). Bangkok, Thailand.


18. Manitoba-Health-Disaster-Management., 2002. Disaster Management Model for the Health Sector: Guideline for Program Development. Version 1.


19. Bankoff, G., 2001. Rendering the world unsafe: ‘Vulnerability’ as Western Discourse. Proceedings of International Work-Conference on Vulnerability in Disaster Theory and Practice, Wageningen.


20. Heijmans, A., 2001. Vulnerability: A Matter of Perception. Disaster Management Working Paper 4/2001, Benfield Greig Hazard Research Centre University College of London.


21. Cannon, T., 2004. At Risk: Natural Hazards, People's Vulnerability and Disasters. Proceedings of the CENAT Conference, Switzerland.


22. Marcus, O., 2005. A Conceptual Framework for Risk Reduction. World Conference of Disaster Reduction, Kobe, Japan.


23. Ibrahim, M.S., Fakharu'l-razi, A. and Mustapha, S., 2003. Technological Disaster's Criteria and Models. Disaster Prevention and Management, 12 (4): 305-311.


24. Shaluf, I., Ahmadun, F., Rashid, S. and Saari, M., 2003. Fire Explosion at Mutual Major Hazard Installations: Review of a case History. Loss Prevention in Process Industries, 16 (2): 149-155.


25. Ibrahim, M.S., Fakharu'l-razi, A. and Aini, M.S., 2003. A Review of Disaster and Crisis. Disaster Prevention and Management, 12 (1): 24-32.


26. DPLG-2, 1998. Green Paper on Disaster Management: Chapter 2 and 3. Available: http://www.local.gov.za/DCD/policydocs/gpdm/gpdm2-3.html.


27. ‏ Kimberly, A., 2003. Disaster Preparedness in Virginia Hospital Center-Arlington after Sept 11, 2001. Disaster Management and Response, 1 (3): 80-86.


28. Tuscaloosa, EMA, 2003. Tuscaloosa County Emergency Management Cycle. Available: tuscoema.org/cycle.html.


29. Kelly, C., 1998. Simplifying Disasters: Developing a model for Complex Nonlinear Events. Proceedings of International Conference on Disaster Management: Crisis and Opportunity: Hazard Management and Disaster Preparedness in Australasia and the Pacific Region, Cairns, Queensland, Australia, pp. 25-28.


30. Lechat, M. F., 1990. The international decade for natural disaster reduction Background and objectives. Disasters, 14 (1): 1-6.


31. Mitroff, I. and Pearson, C.M., 1993. Crisis Management: A Diagnostic Guide for Improving Your Organization's Crisis-preparedness. Jossey-Bass Publishers, Pp: 139.


32. Gupta, M., 2010.Afghanistan National Disaster Management Plan. UNDP.


33. Mitroff, I., 2000. Managing Crises Before They Happen: What Every Executive Needs to Know About Crisis Management. AMACOM Publishers, Pp: 172.


34. Hoseini, H. and Jeddi, M., 2006. Crisis Management with an Approach to Public Security. Naja Training Deputy. (In Persian)


35. Heinreich, H.W., 1941. Industrial Accident Prevention. New York and London.


36. Mc Conkey, D., 1987. Planning for Uncertainty. Business Horizons Journal, 30: 40-45.


37. Weichselgartner, J., 2001. Disaster Mitigation: The Concept of Vulnerability Revisited. Disaster Prevention and Management, 10 (2): 85-94.


38. Moe, T.L. and Pathranarakul, P., 2006. An integrated approach to natural disaster management. Disaster Prevention and Management, 15 (3): 396 – 413.


39. McEntire, D., Crocker, C. G. and Peters, E., 2010. Addressing vulnerability through an integrated approach. Disaster Resielence in the Built Environment, 1 (1): 50-64.


40. Mitroff, I., Shrivastava, P. and Udwadia, F. E., 1978. Effective CrisisManagement. Academy of Management Executive Journal, 1 (4): 283-292.


41. Aguayo, R., 1991. Dr. Deming: The American Who Taught the Japanese about Quality, Fireside. Touchstone Publishers, 304p.


42. Blaikie, P., Mainka, S. and McNeely, J., 2005. The Indian Ocean Tsunami Reducing Risk and Vulnerability of Future Natural Disasters and Loss of Ecosystem Services. An Information Paper: The World Conservation Union (IUCN), Switerzerland.


43. Fink, S., 1986. Crisis Management: Planning for the Inevitable. New York: American Management Association.


44. Littlejohn, R. F., 1983. Crisis Management- A Team Approach, American Management Associations, New York.


45. Australian Development Gateway, 2008. “The Disaster Risk Management Cycle.” http://www.developmentgateway.com.au/jahia/webdav/site/adg/shared/DRMC_Torqaid.pdf


46. Baas, S., Ramasamy, S., DePryck, J. D. and Battista, F., 2008. Disaster Risk Management Systems Analysis. A guide book, Rome.


47. PDMCA, 2013. Badakhshan Provincial Disaster Management Plan, Provincial Disaster Management Committee, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, National Disaster Management Authority.


48. Zimmermann, M. and F. Stössel., 2011. Disaster Risk Reduction in International Cooperation: Switzerland‘s Contribution to the Protection of Lives and Livelihoods. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, Berne, Switzerland, 23 pp.


49. Rooshandel, A., PoorEzzat, A.A. and Gholipoor, A., 2008. Developing a Comprehensive Model of Crisis Management with an Approach to Security. Journal of Research Police Sciences, 10 (2): 63-80.


50. Cuny, F., 1998. Principles of Management: Introduction to Disaster Management. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin-Madison press.


51. González-Herrero, A. and Pratt, C.B., 1996. An integrated symmetrical model for crisis-communication management. Journal of Public Relations Research, 8 (2): 79-105.


52. Penrose, J. M., 2000. The role of perception in crisis planning. Journal of Public Relations Review, 26 (2): 155-171.


53. Statoil, 2013. The in Amenas Attack: Report of the investigation into the terrorist attack on in Amenas. Prepared for Statoil ASA's board of directors. Statoil ASA.


54. Okada, N., 2004. Urban Diagnosis and Integrated Disaster Risk Management. Journal of Natural Disaster Science, 26 (2): 49-54.


55. Shi, P., Xu, W., Ye, T., He, C., Wang, J. and Li, N., 2011. Developing Disaster Risk Science, Discussion on the Disaster Reduction Implementation Science, Journal of Natural Disaster Science, 32 (2): 79-88.


56. King, N. and Horrocks, C., 2010. Interviews in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: SAGE


57. Parker, G., 1995. Dimension of risk management: definition and implication for financial service. Risk management problems and solution. Mcgraw hill.369p.


58. Attride-Stirling, J., 2001. Thematic Networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1 (3): 385-405


59. Bailey, K.D. 1994. Typologies and taxonomies: An introduction to classification techniques, Sage University papers: Quantitative applications in the social sciences, No. 07-102. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.