Information Systems Frontiers

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 857–869 | Cite as

Event-cloud platform to support decision-making in emergency management

  • Matthieu Lauras
  • Frédérick Benaben
  • Sébastien Truptil
  • Aurélie Charles
Article

Abstract

The challenge of this paper is to underline the capability of an Event-Cloud Platform to support efficiently an emergency situation. We chose to focus on a nuclear crisis use case. The proposed approach consists in modeling the business processes of crisis response on the one hand, and in supporting the orchestration and execution of these processes by using an Event-Cloud Platform on the other hand. This paper shows how the use of Event-Cloud techniques can support crisis management stakeholders by automatizing non-value added tasks and by directing decision-makers on what really requires their capabilities of choice. If Event-Cloud technology is a very interesting and topical subject, very few research works have considered this to improve emergency management. This paper tries to fill this gap by considering and applying these technologies on a nuclear crisis use-case.

Keywords

Emergency management Cloud-computing Complex-event processing Service-oriented architecture Business process modeling Decision-making support 

Notes

Acknowledgment

The PLAY project (Pushing dynamic and ubiquitous interaction between services Leveraged in the Future Internet by ApplYing complex event processing) is being funded by the European Commission under Seventh Framework Program (Grant FP7-258659). The authors would like to thank the project partners for their advices and comments regarding this work.

References

  1. Bharosa, N., Lee, J., & Janssen, M. (2010). Challenges and obstacles in sharing and coordinating information during multi-agency disaster response: propositions from field exercices. Information Systems Frontiers, 12(1), 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Charles, A., Lauras, M., & Van-Wassenhove, L. N. (2010). A model to define and assess the agility of supply chains: building on humanitarian experience. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistic Management, 40(8/9), 722–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Maio, C., Fenza, G., Gaeta, M., Loia, V., & Orciuoli, F. (2011). A knowledge-based framework for emergency DSS. Knowledge-Based Systems, 24(8), 1372–1379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Etzion, O., & Niblett, P. (2010). Event processing in action. Greenwich: Manning Publications Co.Google Scholar
  5. Faraj, S. & Xiao, Y. (2006). Coordination in Fast-Response Organizations. Management Sciences, 52(8), 1155–1169.Google Scholar
  6. Filali, I., Pellegrino, L., Bongiovanni, F., Huet, F., & Baude, F. (2011). Modular P2P-based Approach for RDF Data Storage and Retrieval. Proceedings of The Third International Conference on Advances in P2P Systems.Google Scholar
  7. Harris, S., & Seaborne, A. (2010). SPARQL 1.1 query language.Google Scholar
  8. Hiroi, K., Yamanouchi, M., & Sunahara, H., (2010). A proposal of disaster information system based on the internet technologies. Proceedings of the IEEE sensors conference, Waikoloa, USA, 1848–1853.Google Scholar
  9. Huang, C. M., Chan, E., & Hyder, A. A. (2010). Web 2.0 and internet social networking: a new tool for disaster management? – Lessons from Taiwan. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 10(57). doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-10-57.
  10. Iannella, R., Robinson, K., & Rinta-Koski, O.-P. (2007). Towards a framework for Crisis Information Management Systems (CIMS). Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of The International Emergency Management Society (TIEMS), Trogir, Croatia, 5–8 June.Google Scholar
  11. Ibrahim, N. H., & Allen, D. (2012). Information sharing and trust during major incidents: findings from the oil industry. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(10), 1916–1928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jurič, M. B., Mathew, B., & Sarang, P. (2006). Business process execution language for web services. Birmingham: Packt Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  13. Klyne, G., & Carroll, J. J. (2004). Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and abstract syntax, W3C Recommendation.Google Scholar
  14. Lee, W. B., Wang, Y., Wang, W. M., & Cheung, C. F. (2012). An unstructured information management system (UIMS) for emergency management. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 12743–12758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pottebaum, J., Artikis, A., Martere, R., Paliouras, G., & Koch, R. (2011). Event definition for the application of event processing to intelligent resource management. Proceedings of the 8th International ISCRAM Conference, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
  16. Preece, G., Shaw, D., & Hayashi, H. (2013). Using the Viable System Model (VSM) to structure information processing complexity in disaster response. European Journal of Operational Research, 22(1), 209–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sarrat, O., & De Geoffroy, V. (2011). Sigmah: Free software for humanitarian project management. Proceedings of the 8th International ISCRAM Conference, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
  18. Shaluf, I. M., & Ahamadun, F.-R. (2006). Technological emergencies expert system (TEES). Disaster Prevention and Management, 15(3), 414–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Shankar, K. (2008). Wind, water, and wi-fi: new trends in community informatics and disaster management. Information Society, 24(2), 116–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Taohidul Islam, S. M., & Chik, Z. (2011). Disaster in Bangladesh and management with advanced information system. Disaster Prevention and Management, 20(5), 521–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Turoff, M. et al. (2004). The design of a dynamic emergency response management information system (DERMIS). Journal of Information Technology Theory and Apllication, 5(4):1–36.Google Scholar
  22. Yu, B., & Cai, G. (2012). Coordination of emergency response operations via the event-based awareness mechanism. Proceedings of the 9th Internationa ISCRAM Conference, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthieu Lauras
    • 1
    • 2
  • Frédérick Benaben
    • 1
  • Sébastien Truptil
    • 1
  • Aurélie Charles
    • 3
  1. 1.Université Toulouse – Mines AlbiAlbiFrance
  2. 2.Université Toulouse - Toulouse Business SchoolToulouseFrance
  3. 3.Université Lumière Lyon 2LyonFrance

Personalised recommendations