Systems Thinking in Disaster Management

by Dr. Jose Edgar Mutuc

The increasing gravity and frequency of disasters is rather alarming. But it seems many equate disaster as a random “Act of God” that we are hopeless and helpless to prevent. There is a common feeling that we are simply victims of the wrath of nature. Will nature always cause death and destruction? If this were the real sentiment of the people then our efforts for disaster reduction and mitigation will be a waste. We need to change this prevailing view and one way is the practice of systems thinking.

Systems thinking views reality from a more holistic perspective. It avoids a very narrow focus that creates a limited understanding and therefore a rather ineffective solution to a problem. Systems thinking looks at the entire picture in an effort to see not only the parts but also their interactions and interdependencies that lead to the problem.

Take the case of disasters due to natural hazards. Are they really random events? The common argument is that disasters are caused by random natural phenomena. However, should all typhoons lead to death and destruction of property? How is it that the Batanes islands suffer little destruction despite its being on the typhoon path? In comparison, a study that started in 2011 showed that Tacloban was already vulnerable to disaster because of the city’s large population, high level of urbanization, location and weak coastal areas, among others. The study proved that the extreme weather conditions are random but not disasters!

Second, we tend to react only to extreme events. Thus, when the storm has little or no effect on lives and property, we tend to dismiss it as random with little concern. Systems thinking views some events as being interrelated. Is the situation, which seems benign, not getting worse if we do not do something about it? Is there not a pattern on the occurrence of the event that tells us it is not random and therefore will not simply go away without us doing something about it? Look at the graph of the flood levels in Marikina. Does it indicate that floods are random because rains are random? Or does it not indicate that flood levels will be worse in the future if we do not do anything about it? This is happening despite efforts to prevent a repeat of Ondoy in 2009!

 

Systems thinking tells us that events that follow a pattern of occurrence (behaviour) are caused by a structure. The structure involves the established relationships among variables. The interactions involve information transfer and movement that leads to actions and reactions. What makes the structure difficult to deal with are the feedback loops formed by these interactions and reactions that arise from them.

Peter Senge, a leading systems thinker, suggests “laws” of real systems. Here are some of them:

1. Cause and effect are not closely related in time and space. Garbage collected from the neighborhood was piled out in another location where it caused pollution and disease after months of accumulation.
2. Today’s problems come from yesterday’s solutions. Hurriedly built houses made from poor materials (to reduce cost) for relocated families are the first to be affected by strong winds and rains.
3. The harder you push, the harder the system pushes back. There is not enough relief goods. The more relief goods and food was distributed, the more “evacuees” came to ask for more.
4. The cure can be worse than the disease.  It was reported that the flood control project that was conceptualized in 1997 and that began in 2003 in CAMANAVA was delayed by right of way acquisition. Of the 308 lots that have to be expropriated, only 176 were paid for in 2009. DPWH explains that the property owners have changed their minds. Because of this, some components of the project were dropped including the channel improvements.
5. There is no blame.  We tend to blame the rains for the floods but it is our system that causes the floods. Who brought in the trash that clogged the waterways? Who built dams that need to release water? Who built buildings that made subsidence worse?     

We propose that natural events are not directly related to disasters but are a result of a system that reacts and responds to extreme events. The complicated way in which such system reacts could lead to disastrous effects.

 

The community is a system involving people, their livelihood and business. It breeds other parts like infrastructure and housing that affects the natural environment. It attracts more people to migrate and find employment. It seems to be an organic system that grows and expands to surrounding areas and towns. Are houses and infrastructure built to withstand extreme events? Do the people develop habits and activities that avoid disasters or unknowingly create risks? Does government have policies that aggressively avoid disasters or short-term focused policies that unintentionally create vulnerabilities? Indeed as its population increases and urbanization advances it becomes more vulnerable to disasters because of the complexity and seeming necessity of actions!

Disaster preparedness is also a system. There is a focus on information, technology and training. But is this sufficient to prepare the community? Does it address the habits and attitudes of the people? Is it dependent on randomness of events or severity of possible damage? Does it breed complacency or vigilance? Is it reactive or proactive? Is it long-term focused or short-term focused?

The third system, disaster mitigation, is an after-the-fact system that aims to minimize the effects of the event. It involves evacuation facilities, relief and health care provisions. How fast and efficient is the system in responding to calamities? How much provision can it provide to the unpredictable number of victims? Can it anticipate and prevent the spread of disease? Can its centers provide the comfort and protect its occupants? Are there foolproof logistics plans that provide for sufficient food, clothing and medicine, transportation and communication?

The needs of the systems and the problems that arise from these complexities highlight the necessity of effective solutions because the cost of disaster is not simply monetary. The loss of lives and livelihoods, perhaps entire economies is more expensive than lost property. Rebuilding communities and livelihoods is a not an easy task. Relief can only last for a while but sufferings can continue. Thus solutions should not focus on relief but on more coordinated systemic solutions.  

Our task in disaster management is to design systems that prevent or avoid death and destruction of property. We need communities with infrastructures, businesses, government policies and processes that are resilient to any extreme event. We need disaster preparedness systems that are vigilant and pro-active. A fast and efficient relief system will minimize discomfort and health issues that might arise after the event. The solutions have to be built-in so that we do not have to think and plan when the extreme events occur. If we have resilient communities and vigilant disaster preparedness systems, we will not be very dependent on the relief system. The relief system should take care of the unpredictables from the randomness of events.

About the the author: Dr. Jose Edgar "Jojo" Mutuc is an associate professor in Industrial Engineering at DLSU-Manila. He graduated PhD from University of Glasow, Scotland and his research interest is on systems dynamics modeling. Email: jose.edgar.mutuc@dlsu.edu.ph.