Proper Waste Disposal
Review of related literature
While elements of disaster preparedness have long been a social adjustment to environmental hazards, both the art and science of disaster preparedness are relatively new courses of study in business, non-profit, government, and academic sectors (Fox,
2006). As with any new course of study, the beginnings of established practice will have inherent weaknesses and areas for improvement. To date, a multitude of issues that should be addressed by stakeholders have been introduced. Some of the issues pertain to 11 problems created by the theoretical aspects of disaster preparedness, while others relate to the practice and application. Some of these issues have been resolved, while others have been neglected or ignored.
John Twigg of Benfield Gregg Hazard Research Centre, University College
London, presented eighteen disciplinary and institutional groups involved in disaster reduction during his presentation at the International Conference on Climate Change and
Disaster Preparedness (2002). Each of these eighteen groups represents broad stakeholder classifications and can be further divided by disciplinary and institutional boundaries
(Twigg, 2002). The many factions of independent researchers and stakeholders can complicate advancements where collaboration is an essential aspect. Cooperation and collaboration tends to lag when groups vie over limited available funding and strive to become the premier group of its respective area.
Each discipline and organization involved takes its own approach to disaster preparedness, tailoring its metrics, data, works, and products to its specific needs. In general, however, there is a lack of uniformity of data, which further decreases the potential for cooperation among the stakeholders.
The lack of cross-compatibility also affects the consistency of the language, as definitions are aligned with organizational needs (Kirschenbaum, 2002). Definitions are created that take on
While elements of disaster preparedness have long been a social adjustment to environmental hazards, both the art and science of disaster preparedness are relatively new courses of study in business, non-profit, government, and academic sectors (Fox,
2006). As with any new course of study, the beginnings of established practice will have inherent weaknesses and areas for improvement. To date, a multitude of issues that should be addressed by stakeholders have been introduced. Some of the issues pertain to 11 problems created by the theoretical aspects of disaster preparedness, while others relate to the practice and application. Some of these issues have been resolved, while others have been neglected or ignored.
John Twigg of Benfield Gregg Hazard Research Centre, University College
London, presented eighteen disciplinary and institutional groups involved in disaster reduction during his presentation at the International Conference on Climate Change and
Disaster Preparedness (2002). Each of these eighteen groups represents broad stakeholder classifications and can be further divided by disciplinary and institutional boundaries
(Twigg, 2002). The many factions of independent researchers and stakeholders can complicate advancements where collaboration is an essential aspect. Cooperation and collaboration tends to lag when groups vie over limited available funding and strive to become the premier group of its respective area.
Each discipline and organization involved takes its own approach to disaster preparedness, tailoring its metrics, data, works, and products to its specific needs. In general, however, there is a lack of uniformity of data, which further decreases the potential for cooperation among the stakeholders.
The lack of cross-compatibility also affects the consistency of the language, as definitions are aligned with organizational needs (Kirschenbaum, 2002). Definitions are created that take on
Bibliography: 1. Adger, W.N., Brooks, N., Bentham, G., Agnew, M., & Eriksen, S. (2004). New indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity (Technical Report 7). 2. Adger, W.N., Hughes, T.P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S.R., & Rockstrom, J. (2005) Social-Ecological Resiliience to Coastal Disasters 3. Alexander, D. (2005). Towards the development of a standard in emergency planning 4. American National Government: Government and Finance Division. (2006). FY2006 homeland security grant distribution methods: Issues for the 109th congress (CRS Order Code RL33241) 5. American National Government: Government and Finance Division. (2005). FY2006 homeland security grant guidance distribution formulas: Issues for the 109th congress (CRS Order Code RS22349) 6. American National Government: Government and Finance Division. (2005). RL32892). Washington, D.C.: Shawn Reese.