The textbook “Emergency Management” exemplifies the opportunities available currently in regard to building disaster-resilient communities to strengthen emergency management in the US. Namely, the proposed actions include the utilization of 1% of the budget of the Department of Defense (DoD) towards mitigation actions to its facilities (5), focusing on local funding sources (1), risk identification (3), increasing the involvement of political entities (4), and letting local business sectors take the lead (2) (Bullock et al., 2020). In order for the challenge mitigation to be efficient and for the COVID-19 pandemic outcomes to be minimized, there is a need for the business sector to be involved. However, due to the significant financial losses most organizations, especially small ones, have experienced during the lockdown, the measure can be rated as 2.
Needless to say, the measure is crucial as local businesses are interested in keeping their communities safe and prosperous. Yet, not all companies have yet recovered enough to be able to invest in emergency management. Looking for local funding sources, on the other hand, implies the participation of more stakeholders, such as taxpayers, specific non-profit organizations, and similar actors. The measure can be rated as 1, especially as technological progress allows people to actively participate in funding the safety of their communities.
Moreover, addressing the pandemic can be executed by supporting hospitals and non-profit organizations to help with the adverse outcomes, which can be done through donations. The involvement of political entities, on the other hand, can deal facilitate emergency response to the pandemic through policies. Yet, it cannot fully financially support the cause of emergency response due to the increased federal spending in the area. This is why the measure can be rated as 4.
Allocating a percentage of the DoD budget, however, appears to be based on the fact that the threats can be classified as national security threats, a connotation that certain entities may not agree with. The importance of the measure can be rated as a five due to the fact that it addresses only a certain demographic instead of having a complex overview of emergency management and mitigating challenging situations requiring the involvement of various stakeholders. On the other hand, risk identification, rated with a 3, effectively addresses specific issues. Yet, factors such as global pandemics are almost impossible to predict and prepare for since it was the only instance in recent history.
Reference
Bullock, J. A., Haddow, G. D., & Coppola, D. P. (2020). Introduction to emergency management. Butterworth-Heinemann.