Discussion Thread 3: Public and Private Mitigation
The Meaning of Mitigation
“Mitigation is defined as any activity or action taken that reduces or eliminates hazard
risks to citizens and property” (Islam & Ryan, 2015, p. 14). This is usually the last phase in the
emergency management cycle, but prevention of future occurrence is the goal. This ongoing
planning process is deliberately pursued before an incident occurs to achieve long-term hazard
resistance. While it isn’t possible to prevent many types of hazards, these efforts can certainly
help reduce the risk through effective planning. Careful planning initiated by leadership and in
coordination with the local community is how mitigation works. This can be measured through
after action assessments when a disaster occurs, but also by what does not happen. If the
mitigation efforts prevented catastrophic damage to infrastructure, property and or loss of life,
this can be a success.
The “Whole Community Approach”
The Whole Community Approach was introduced in 2011 by FEMA to “promote public-
private partnerships and help building community resilience” (Islam & Ryan, 2015, p. 101). It
focuses on “understanding a community’s needs, empowering community members, and
strengthening effective daily community practices” (Sobelson et al., 2015, p. 2). The basic
premise is to involve the community and gain buy in for policies and practices that directly affect
them. This can include changes in behavior and taking proactive steps that help protect the
community in which people live for the future.
As it pertains to mitigation, sustainability is the ability to maintain or support a process
continuously over time. The principles of sustainability include the development of a plans that
are supported through community involvement that protects their current and future needs.
Just like with aircraft or any vital system that affects human life, there should be backup
systems that provide redundancy. By duplicating critical functions of a system, reliability of the
system is increased through fail-safe systems. Redundancy is essential when it comes to
mitigation planning as disasters can often cripple primary systems and response mechanisms.
Resiliency comes when there are sufficient resources available to anticipate, resist and
recover from disasters. Mitigation allows for resiliency by not only assisting in the ability to
cope, but the ability to also flourish in the face of disaster. “Proactive resilience is what can help
prepare an affected community to accept the new normal and flourish” (Islam & Ryan, 2015, p.
110). “Tools aiding in building a whole community approach to emergency preparedness are
being discovered, and range in sophistication from various checklists to an interactive Web site
that provides resources to build community resilience” (Sobelson et al, 2015, p. 2).
Public Private Partnerships
“Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are collaborative relationships built on the needs,
capabilities, and communication channels of public- and private-sector partners” (Islam & Ryan,
2015, p. 101). When public agencies work together with private partners, they help to mutually
gain social, economic, or environmental objectives. This is done though the “sharing of
resources, risks, responsibilities, and rewards” (Rybnicek et al., 2020, p. 4). This approach to
mitigation isn’t without risk, as there can often be competing goals. Good communication and
adhering to a common strategy are important tenets to adhere to with PPPs to be successful.
Business Continuity Planning
Business Continuity Planning (BCP) is designed “to avoid or mitigate risks; to reduce
the impact of a crisis (i.e., disaster condition); and to reduce the time to restore conditions to a
state of business as usual” (Cerullo & Cerullo, 2004, p. 71). Getting back up and running is a key
goal with BCP after a disaster or major event. As discussed by Islam & Ryan, FEMA developed a
4-step process for BCP that requires doing a business impact analysis, creating recovery
strategies, establishing a plan development framework, and using exercises and testing to
incorporate lessons learned (2015, p. 115).
The Bible speaks about planning saying: “For which of you, intending to build a tower,
sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it?” (King James
Bible, 1769/2017, Luke 14:28. Cost isn’t the only factor to consider, but it is a big part of
planning for future and the possible events and outcomes. That is where collaborating with others
to arrive at the best conclusion is paramount. “Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the
multitude of counsellors there is safety” (King James Bible, 1769/2017, Proverbs 11:14).
References
Cerullo, V., & Cerullo, M. J. (2004). Business continuity planning: a comprehensive
approach. Information systems management, 21(3), 70-78.
Islam, T., & Ryan, J. (2015). Hazard mitigation in emergency management. Butterworth-
Heinemann.
King James Bible. (2017). King James Bible Online. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org
(Original work published 1769)
Rybnicek, R., Plakolm, J., & Baumgartner, L. (2020). Risks in public–private partnerships: A
systematic literature review of risk factors, their impact and risk mitigation
strategies. Public Performance & Management Review, 43(5), 1174-1208.
Sobelson, R. K., Wigington, C. J., Harp, V., & Bronson, B. B. (2015). A whole community
approach to emergency management: Strategies and best practices of seven community
programs. Journal of emergency management (Weston, Mass.), 13(4), 349.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
