Skip to main content
Log in

Advances in multi-agency disaster management: Key elements in disaster research

  • Published:
Information Systems Frontiers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Multi-agency disaster management requires collaboration among geographically distributed public and private organizations to enable a rapid and effective response to an unexpected event. Many disaster management systems often lack the capability to cope with the complexity and uncertainty. In this introduction to the special issues on advances in multi-agency disaster management we discuss the role of information, enterprise architecture, coordination and related human efforts aimed at improving multi-agency disaster management. The paper concludes that although there is a common body of knowledge, disaster management is still an under-developed area. There is a need to relate practice and theory by using human-centered approaches such that disaster management can realize its full potential.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alberts, D., & Hayes, R. (2007). Planning: Complex endeavors. Washington, DC: DoD Command and Control Research Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberts, D. S., Garstka, J. J., & Stein, F. P. (2002). Network-centric warfare: Developing and leveraging information superiority (2nd ed. Vol. 2.): CCRP Publication Series.

  • Argote, L. (1982). Input uncertainty and organizational coordination in hospital emergency units. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27(3), 420–434. doi:10.2307/2392320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ASE. (2008). Alle hens on deck: ASE Veiligheid. Retrieved June 2008. from www.minbzk.nl.

  • Bharosa, N., Janssen, M., Rao, H. R., & Lee, J. (2008). Adaptive information orchestration: Architectural principles improving information quality. Paper presented at the the 5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM 2008), Washington, DC, USA.

  • Bigley, G. A., & Roberts, K. H. (2001). The incident command system: high reliability organizing for complex and volatile task environments. Academy of Management, 44(6), 1281–1300. doi:10.2307/3069401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Board on Natural Disasters National Research Council. (1999). Mitigation emerges as a major strategy for reducing losses caused by natural disasters. Science, 284(5422), 1943–1947. doi:10.1126/science.284.5422.1943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, R. P., & Heinen, J. S. (1977). MIS problems and failures: a socio-technical perspective. Part I: the causes. MIS Quarterly, 1(3), 17–32. doi:10.2307/248710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, R., Sharman, R., Rao, R., & Upadhyaya, S. (2008). Coordination in emergency response management. Communications of the ACM, 51(5), 66–73. doi:10.1145/1342327.1342340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comfort, L. (1999). Shared risk: Complex systems in seismic response. New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comfort, L., & Kapucu, N. (2006). Inter-organizational coordination in extreme events: the World Trade Center attacks, September 11, 2001. Natural Hazards, 39(2), 309–327. doi:10.1007/s11069-006-0030-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659–669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faraj, S., & Xiao, Y. (2006). Coordination in fast-reponse organizations. Management Science, 52(8), 1155–1169. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1060.0526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. R. (1977). Organization design. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horan, T., & Schooley, B. (2007). Time-critical information services. Communications of the ACM, 50(3), 73–78. doi:10.1145/1226736.1226738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, M., Gortmaker, J., & Wagenaar, R. W. (2006). Web service orchestration in public administration: challenges, roles and growth stages. Information Systems Management, 23(2), 44–55. doi:10.1201/1078.10580530/45925.23.2.20060301/92673.6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longstaff, P. H. (2005). Security, resilience, and communication in unpredictable environments such as terrorism, natural disasters, and complex technology. Retrieved July 2007, from http://pirp.harvard.edu/pubs_pdf/longsta/longsta-p05-3.pdf.

  • Mendonca, D. (2007). Decision support for improvisation in response to extreme events: learning from the response to the 2001 World Trade Center attack. Decision Support Systems, 43(3), 952–967. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2005.05.025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milward, H. B., & Provan, K. G. (1995). A preliminary theory of network effectiveness: a comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 1–33. doi:10.2307/2393698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, E. (2006). The story of socio-technical design: reflections on its successes, failures and potential. Information Systems Journal, 16, 317–342. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2006.00221.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2007). Improving disaster management: The role of IT in mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. Washington, DC: National Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, L., Jackson, B. M., & Dickson, G. (1990). A principle-based enterprise architecture: lessons from Texaco and Star enterprise. MIS Quarterly, 14(4), 385–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockart, J. F., & Scott Morton, M. S. (1984). Implications of changes in information technology for corporate strategy. Interfaces, 14(1), 84–95. doi:10.1287/inte.14.1.84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, J. (2003). Creating a strategic IT architecture competency: learning in stages. MISQ Quarterly Executive, 2(1), 31–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C., & Hayne, S. (1997). Decision making under time pressure. Management Communication Quarterly, 11(1), 97–126. doi:10.1177/0893318997111005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smithson, S., & Hirschheim, R. A. (1998). Analysing information systems evaluation: another look at an old problem. European Journal of Information Systems, 7(3), 158–174. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winograd, T., & Flores, F. (1987). Understanding computers and cognition. A new foundation for design. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, J., Lee, J., Rao, A., & Touqan, N. (2009). Inter-organizational communications in disaster management. In V. Weerakkody, M. Janssen & Y. Dwivedi (Eds.), Handbook of research on ICT-enabled transformational government: A global perspective: IGI Global.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marijn Janssen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Janssen, M., Lee, J., Bharosa, N. et al. Advances in multi-agency disaster management: Key elements in disaster research. Inf Syst Front 12, 1–7 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-009-9176-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-009-9176-x

Keywords

Navigation