MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W165556021

Local government emergency management : emergency operations centres, training and decision making : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of a Masters in Emergency Management at Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand

2011· dissertation· en· W165556021 on OpenAlex
Helen Sinclair

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMassey Research Online (Massey University) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmergency managementTraining (meteorology)Government (linguistics)Emergency responseOperations managementBusinessPublic administrationMedical emergencyEngineeringPolitical scienceMedicineGeographyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Local government organisations play a critical role in achieving community resilience to disasters. As part of their response capabilities most local governments operate an Emergency Operations Centre (EOC). EOCs function as the command and communication headquarters for planning and decision-making during a disaster or an emergency. This thesis has two research objectives. The first is to conduct preliminary exploratory research about how local government EOCs are used during preparedness activities. The second is to contribute information and recommendations that could better equip emergency managers to prepare for and respond to emergencies and disasters.
\nThe broad concepts and common terminology of contemporary emergency management are introduced. Information about the jurisdictional terminology, frameworks, and the major emergency management organisations for New Zealand, Canada, and USA are discussed. Research was carried out using recent literature and the results of a questionnaire that 48 local government departments with EOCs participated in. This investigation was guided by seven research questions from three inter-related areas of investigation. They are EOC operation and activation, emergency management training, and emergency management decision making.
\nLiterature shows there is a growing realisation that many disaster preparedness practices are based largely upon anecdote and are lacking systematic study or objective validation. Results and conclusions presented in this thesis reveal local government organisations need and desire more information and support in operating their EOC, and in emergency management training and decision making. What each individual organisation does by way of training and related assessment is unique to each organisation. Local government organisations are operating in blind faith that their preparedness activities are actually enhancing their response and recovery capabilities.
\nRecommendations for future research and of where emergency managers should direct their attention during preparedness concludes this study. The research community needs to focus attention on local government emergency management and the greater emergency management community needs to support and guide local government emergency management offices.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it