Нов български университет

Abstract:

All disaster emergencies and crisis events are by nature chaotic and highly dynamic, creating physical, emotional, and social disorder. In such crisis events and emergencies, communications is critical at all phases of disaster management. Communications during emergencies incorporates a wide range of measures to manage risks to communities and the environment [1].

Drawing from various sources that include telecommunication satellites, radar, telemetry, meteorology and remote sensing, early warning is made possible. Before disasters strike, telecommunications can be used as a conduit for disseminating information about the impending danger thus, making it possible for people to take the necessary precautions to mitigate the impact of these hazards [2]. Other telecommunication applications, including remote sensing and global positioning system (GPS) [3], have critical roles to play in tracking approaching hazards, alerting authorities, warning affected populations, coordinating relief operations, assessing damages and mobilizing support for reconstruction. It is clear therefore that telecommunications play a pivotal role in disaster prevention, mitigation, and management.

INTRODUCTION

The breakdown of essential communications is one of the most widely shared characteristics of all disasters.  Whether  partial  or  complete,  the  failure  of  telecommunications   infrastructure leads to  preventable  loss of  life  and damage to  property,  by causing delays and errors in emergency response and disaster relief  efforts.  Yet  despite  the  increasing reliability  and  resiliency  of  modern  telecommunications [4] networks to physical damage, the risk associated with communications failures remains serious because of growing dependence upon these tools in  emergency operations. Finally, this  report  does  not  focus  only  on  official communications  channels,  but  is concerned with the entire universe of civil telecommunications infrastructure that plays  a crucial role in crisis communications [5].

1.    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

During disasters, telecommunications infrastructure failures occur through a variety of mechanisms. Investigation of communications failures during large urban disasters in the past fifteen years reveals three primary categories of causes:

3.1.     Physical destruction of network components

The most common and well-documented cause  of  telecommunications  failures  in recent disasters has been the physical destruction of network infrastructure. Because of  the  time  and  funding  needed  to  repair  or  replace systems,  service  disruptions caused by physical destruction also tend to be more severe and last longer than those caused by disconnection or congestion [6].

3.2.     Disruption in supporting network infrastructure

While less common than outages caused by physical damage, outages caused by disruption in supporting infrastructure tend to be far more widespread and damaging to response and recovery efforts. Telecommunications networks rely upon many other local  and regional [7] media  technical  systems  to  ensure  their  proper  operation. These supporting infrastructures often date from an earlier era and lack resiliency to physical damage.

Electrical distribution systems are by far the most important supporting infrastructure  for  telecommunications  networks.  Electrical  power  is  required  to  operate  all modern telecommunications equipment, often in large amounts [8]. Yet electric power distribution systems  lack the “self-healing” capabilities of  telecommunications net-works,  although future improvements are expected to  give power  networks greater capabilities in this area .

3.3.    Network congestion

    The final major cause of telecommunications failures during disasters is network congestion or overload [9]. Crises generate intense human need for communication [10] - to coordinate response activities, to convey news and information about affected groups and individuals, and as a panic reaction to crisis. Historically, major disasters are the most intense generators of telecommunications traffic, and the resulting surge of demand can clog even the most well-managed networks [11]. Under this strain, calls are blocked and messages are lost [12].

4.      European Union Alert Protocol

4.1.     European Union Civil protection Introduction

Through the EU Civil Protection Mechanism [13], the European Commission plays a key role in coordinating responses to crises in Europe and worldwide. The Emergency Response Coordination Centre monitors existing and potential crises round the clock.

It coordinates contacts between the country concerned, experts in the field and the countries participating in the EU Civil Protection Mechanism. The Mechanism currently includes all 28 EU countries. Between 2010 and 2014, the EU responded to over 80 emergencies worldwide:

-  The triple disaster in Japan  -  Ebola epidemic in West Africa -  Conflict in Ukraine

-  Civil war in Syria [14]  -  Forest fires in southern Europe & the Balkans

-  Floods in central Europe & the Balkans (Serbia, Bosnia & Herzegovina)

In January 2014 new legislation on civil protection took effect, providing a framework for closer cooperation on:

 -  Disaster prevention

 -  Risk assessment

 -  Preparedness & planning

 -  Including more regular joint training and exercises for European civil protection teams.

   Sectors receiving most funding from EU

Source ‘HUMANITARIAN AID AND CIVIL PROTECTION’

4.2.     Policy and Institutional Framework for Emergency Communications

Policy and regulations are important elements of emergency communications planning and management. One of the main hindrances to effective establishment of telecommunications for disaster mitigation is the lack of a legal and regulatory regime. Before 2004, institutional frameworks and policies of regulatory commissions [15] were far from incorporating contingency planning for disaster management [16].

Governments need to take important steps to eliminate the monopoly of public telecommunications [17] enterprise and to undertake a review of current telecommunications legislation, including regulations incorporating emergency telecommunication system and protocols to support emergency services [18]. For example, SMS messages are more resilient against blocking than voice calls in GSM networks, as they are distributed in a different way, hence emergency messages can be delivered via SMS broadcasts to select user groups [19].

The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is looking at practical ways of helping countries ratify the Tampere Convention and is making an assessment on the implementation of this treaty [20]. This will no doubt, help countries determine how best to smooth the rough edges of the implementation process so as to pave the way for a faster, unhindered, and effective deployment of telecommunications resources by all humanitarian actors before, during and after disasters strike.

4.3.     Emergency Communications for Disaster Preparedness

It is said that keeping people connected is keeping people safe [21]. Communication is a part of everyday life. Think of a day without communications! It has long been recognized that if a community is capable of receiving or communicating advance information on hazards, their associated adverse effects can be minimized. Effective early warning and proper evacuation orders empower individuals and communities to respond appropriately to a threat in order to reduce the risk of death, injury, and property loss and damage.

The communication of warning message should inform what is happening, what it is relevant to that person, and what that person can do. It should be communicated in a clear, simple language and delivered with enough lead-time for the recipient to take any necessary action. Multiple communication channels are required by communities to ensure receipt of warning information from all levels of government structures.

There are two type of communication methods available for warning dissemination [22]:

(1) Mass notification methods and

(2) Addressable notification methods.

Mass notification methods are not individually addressable and generally provide the same alert or message to everyone within a particular geographic area, regardless of level of individual risk. These include: outdoor systems – sirens, local sirens/ loud speakers, mobile electronic signs and mass broadcasting systems – conventional radio and television, cable television and low power radio [23].

Addressable notification methods are tailored and targets alerts and messages only to those at risk or to specific groups (such as emergency responders). Some latest addressable technologies are flexible enough to support many of the same functions of traditional mass notification systems. These include:

- Broadcasting systems – provincial radio broadcasting [24], amateur radio [25], VHF/HF radios [26], weather radio, micro phone, mosque, temple

-  Telecommunication systems – telephone, fax, cellular mobile, Short Message Service, paging and tone-alert radio, internet, VoIP, and satellite .

-  Inter personal communication – door-to-door, residential route-warning, etc.

4.4.  Emergency Communications for Disaster Response

Public networks, such as fixed line and mobile telephone system, are the basis of first responders. With involvement of partners from outside the immediate vicinity of an event, responsibilities and, thus, communication requirements shift to larger dimensions.

Decision-making in such unpredictable operational conditions becomes a process involving a multitude of institutions. In these circumstances, private networks, such as dedicated radio networks [27] including satellite links, are needed to bridge information gaps and facilitate information exchange. Contingency initiatives among and between operators and telecommunication providers will enhance redundancy and safety. Very few telecommunication systems are designed to carry all traffic that the users could possibly generate during an emergency or events with large casualties.

4.5.     Emergency Communications for Disaster Prevention

In disaster prevention, the avoidance of hazards, telecommunications have a key role in the distribution of knowledge and in raising awareness [28]. They are vital tools for day-to-day prevention and early warning. Preparedness to respond to emergencies is a task of institutional responders, commonly known as emergency services. Due to the character of such services, their telecommunication equipment and network can be expected to be in a permanent state of readiness.

Response to disasters, including relief operations following such events, is likely to involve institutional responders, national and international humanitarian organizations. Different from usual local emergency services, these responders need to be prepared to operate in unpredictable locations and under widely different conditions. Telecommunications under these circumstances are a great challenge  [29].

One of the important aspects related to disaster prevention is a well-designed telecommunication network and information system that is suitable in coping with chaotic situations during and after disaster emergencies. Telecommunication and IT facilities are the two expected aspects in dealing with disaster and emergency situations.

Many countries have developed this kind of system in coping with disasters and emergency situations. Japan for example, a country with constant disaster threats is a good example of a country that has developed a robust prevention and mitigation system for disaster and emergency situations, demonstrating that investing in a good communication system is integral to providing accurate information during disaster emergencies [30] .

4.6.     Emerging Technologies and Trends

Fast evolving and emerging technologies are mainly in two main areas: the core network and the access network including inter-operability. Internet Protocol (IP) technology is being generalized in the core network. Data rates on the air are increasing to allow new applications like multimedia, video, and telemedicine, etc. The use of a Common Alert Protocol, which will become an ITU Standard by mid-2007 was encouraged as a means of ensuring that all media can effectively deliver alerts and information [31].

Generally, the simpler time-tested forms of radiocommunication work best in disaster situations. There are robust versions of equipment designed to meet the rigors of transportation and operations in the field [32].

Experience with both natural and man-made disasters highlights the simple truth that communications are useful only to the extent that they are accessible and useable by people in communities at-risk. During disaster events, many vulnerable communities are often cut off from national response systems due to a lack of appropriate communications that should have been in place before a disaster occurs. We have to remember that effectiveness is partially reflective of preparedness. In this regard, training plays a critical role, no matter how sophisticated or robust the system. An effective notification system always requires continuous public education and awareness about the purpose and capabilities of the system. Whatever existing communication methods are chosen for disaster management, all groups that are part of the disaster cycles should be involved in the planning, implementation and operation of their systems.

5.   Conclusions

These investigations indicate that local radio plays a particularly critical role in a community-based response to a crisis [33].  Disaster researchers often note that all disasters are local in their impact, and that the first response to a crisis comes from the community itself. 

Local radio stations [34], given their resilience [35], flexibility, and accessibility, play a critical role in informing the public, coordinating response, and reconstituting community connections.  Moreover, the finding that smaller-market stations more fully understand and embrace that role is troubling. Regardless, a battery-powered or hand-crack radio is an essential part of an emergency preparedness kit.

References:

1.M Moss and A M Townsend. 2003. “Response, restoration, and recovery: September 11 and New York City’s Digital Networks” in Crisis Communications: Lessons "om September.

2.National Radio and Television Council (2014), Access Date 02/28/2014 at http://www.esr.gr"terrestrialbroadcasting"http://www.esr.gr/arxeionxml/pages/esr/esrSite/view?section=e5f2cfb3c0aa1e7683571826e98263e5&categ=11031aafd0871e7683571826e98263e5&last_clicked_id=link4 .

3.National Telecommunications and Post (2014), Access Date 19/02/2013 at http://www.eett.gr "(Government Gazette 161A/2007)" http://www.eett.gr/opencms/opencms /EETT/Electronic_Communications/Radio_Communications/Monitoring/N3592_2007 .html .

4.Dana Whitlow, “Design and operation of automatic gain control loops for receivers in modern communications systems”, Analog Devices Inc, www.analog.com.

5.Government Emergency Telecommunications Service. [http://gets.ncs.gov/]

6.Anthony L. Fusco, “Report from the Chief of Department,” in William Manning, ed., The World  Trade Center Bombing: Report and Analysis (FEMA, undated), p. 11.

7.E M Noam and H Sato. 1996. “Kobe’s lesson: dial 711 for “open” emergency communications” Science.

8.Patric R. Spence (2011) crisiscommscholars web page https:// crisiscommscholars. wordpress.com/ publication ‘’ radio critical role in crisis communication ‘’

9.J R Piece and AM Noll. 1990. Signals: The Science of Telecommunications. (Scientific American Library: New York). p. 4.

10.  Dermertzis, N., Skamnakis, A. (1998), "regional media in Europe",

11.  Yeager. K E 2004. “Electricity for the 21 st  century: digital electricity for a digital economy” Technology in Society. 26:209-221.

12.  Los Angeles County Disaster Communications Service. “History of DCS”. [http://www. lacdcs.org/history. htm]

13.  Joseph Turow (1997) , “ media systems society ” USA ,LONGMAN Second edition .

14.  A Faiola and T Reed. January 18, 1994. “L.A. communications in chaos”. Miami Herald. p A11.

15.  EQE International. 1994. “The January 17, 1994 Northridge, California Earthquake”. http ://www.lafire.com/famous_fires/940117_NorthridgeEarthquake/quake/00_EQE_contents.htm]

16.  Radio Tv Link, http://www.radiotvlink.gr

17.  EU Civil Protection Mechanism http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications

18.  S Branigan and B Cheswick. 1999. “The effects of war on the Yugoslavian Network”. (Bell Labs).  [http://research.lumeta.com/ches/map/yu/index.html]

19.  Papazisis.Psychogiopoulou, E., and Kandyla, A. (2013) "Media policy-making in Greece: Lessons from digital terrestrial television and the restructuring of public service broadcasting. "International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics 9.2 (2013).

20.  BBC Research & Development Department Publications

21.  Baltzis, A, and Christos Barboutis. (2013) "Doubt is in the Air." Modeling the Comparison Between Traditional and Web Casting Radio on the Greek Case. "Journal of Radio & Audio Media 20.1 (2013): 53-67.

22.  Bourdena, Athina, (2012) "A radio resource management framework for TVWS exploitation under the RTSSM policy. ", 2012 International Conference on. IEEE, 2012.

23.  Media Data "Statistics for Greek SMEs' Access Date 04/03/2014 at: http:// www2.media.uoa.gr/mediadata/index.php?l=gr&c=radio.

24.  European broadcasting Union EBU (2015). Day of access  22/12/2015 from web address http://www.ebu.com

25.  Hendy, D.,  ( 2013) “Radio in the global age”. John Wiley & Sons .

26.  Anthony M. Townsend Mitchell L. Moss Center for Catastrophe Preparedness and Response

27.  Kozamernik , F. , (2013) “Digital Audio Broadcasting : coming out of the tunnel”, World DAB Forum DAB EBU Technical Review 2013

28.  Hoeg, W., (2009) “Digital Audio Broadcasting DAB+ ” 3[rd] Edition , Wiley .

29.  F. Hoffman, C. Hansen, W. Schäfer, “Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) Digital Sound Broadcasting in the AM Bands”, IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting, VOL. 49, NO. 3, 09/2003, pp. 319-328

30.  American Radio Relay League. January 7, 2005. “Amateur radio praised as lifeline in South Asia”.   [http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/01/07/7/

31.  D. Guerra, U. Gil, D.de la Vega, G. Prieto, A. Arrinda, J.L. Ordiales, P. Angueira, “Medium Wave Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) Field Strength Time Variation in Different Reception Environments”, IEEE Transactions On Broadcasting, VOL. 52, NO. 4, 12/2006, pp. 483-491

32.  B Schaller. February 2005. “Learning from the subway fire” Gotham Gazette.

33.  E L Quarantelli. 1989. “The social science study of disasters and mass communication”, in Bad Tidings: Communication and Catastrophe, L M Walters et al, eds. (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, New Jersey

34.  S.J. Kim, K.-W. Park, K.-W. Kwon, J.-H. Palk, “An effective frame detection and FFT window point tracking algorithm for Digital Radio Mondiale receivers”, IEEE  Digest of Technical Papers, International Conference of Consumer Electronics, 2009, pp. 1-2121.

35.  P Andrews. January 21, 1994. “Quake can’t shake cellular-phone network”. The Seattle Times. p. A4.

36.  Hoeg[ ], W., Lauterbach , T.,(2001 ) “ Digital Audio Broadcasting: Principles and Applications” , John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Published Online: 2 APR 2002 .

37.  ENIRS, Radio Station Owners Association (2014), Access Date 20/02/2014 at http://www.enirs.gr

38.  V Koptyoff. September 11, 2001. “Communications severely tested”. San Francisco Chronicle.

39.  Michigan Public Service Commission. November 2003.  “Michigan Public Service Commission Report on August 14th Blackout”. p. 75. 

40.  G. Prieto, D. Guerra, J.M. Matias, M.M. Velez, A. Arrinda, “Digital Mondiale (DRM) Measurement - System Design and Measurement Methodology for Fixed and Mobile Reception”, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, VOL. 57, NO.3, 03/2008, pp. 567-570

41.  Chris Bowick, “RF Circuit Design”, Newnes, 2007

42.  ITU Radiocommunication Sector , http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-R/Pages/default.aspx

43.  Goffman, E. (1980). “The Radio Drama Frame” in Corner, J. & Hawthorn, J. (eds)  Communication studies: an introductory reader . London: E. Arnold.

44.  L Rosencrance. July 19, 2001. “Baltimore train fire disrupts Internet service in Northeast”.

45.  American Red Cross Amateur Radio Service. [http://www.qsl.net/arcars/]

46.  Papathanasopoulos, Stelios (1997) "The power of television, the logic of the medium and the market", Athens:  Routledge.

47.  General Secretaria For Civil Protection   http://civilprotection.gr/en/~gscp3st/en

48.  Civil Protection , Area West Macedonia  individual communication protocol in cases of disasters  Arthur Kalogiannidis Stavros

49.  National Telecommunications and Post

50.  Silvey, R.(1974). “Who’s Listening? ” London: George Allen & Unwin.

51.  Patric R. Spence (2011) crisiscommscholars web page https:// crisiscommscholars. wordpress.com/ publication ‘’ radio critical role in crisis communication ‘’

52.  Crisell, A. (1986). “ Understanding Radio ”  ,London: Routledge.