Ove Njå

Incident Command and Information Flows in a Large‐Scale Emergency Operation

In this article social and information network theory is used to study information flows through the incident command post in a large-scale emergency operation. The case presented is the 2011 terrorist attacks in Norway.The data were collected from evaluation reports, media and interviews with the incident, fire, medical and ambulance commanders.The article presents the incident command system in Norway and how this was used as a base for improvisation during the operation on initiative from rescue workers on scene. The main internal information flows in each separate rescue service were connected and coordinated at the incident command point through strong ties between the commanders. Important and novel information also reached the commanders through weak and informal ties to more peripheral actors.

An Essay on Research Methodology: An Alternative Approach to Incident Command Research Through Participatory Action Research

Current incident command research faces several challenges. The incident commanders behaviour and related assessments in the crisis response are context bound, and our understanding of these factors requires close awareness of the context. Reconstruction of the on-scene behaviour encompassing situation awareness and cognitive reasoning is difficult. There is a need to develop better understanding of decision-making in crisis settings and methods for rigorous observation and knowledge elicitation. In order to understand the importance and actual influence of incident commanding, the researchers need to assess the response in real time, not only based on studying logs etc. afterwards. Participatory action research provides ideas in which the researcher, besides being an observer, would be involved in the rescue work. This raises ethical questions, but there is a need for naturalistic decision-making research to evolve beyond descriptive models.

Dominant Learning Processes in Emergency Response Organizations: A Case Study of a Joint Rescue Coordination Centre

Research on decision‐making and expert performance in operational settings generally considers extensive personal experience and deliberate practice to be decisive for development of expertise. Learning and development of decision‐making abilities therefore tend to be explained in terms of human cognition. This study examines the dominant learning processes in a Joint Rescue Coordination Centre, revealing that personal experience, individual problem‐solving, knowledge accumulation, and collective reflection are the key processes in the individual development of decision‐making abilities. These findings show that both individual and contextual (including organisational) aspects need to be considered if we are to fully understand the development of decision‐making abilities and consequently be better able to explain and analyse decision‐making and expert performance in natural settings.

A model for learning in emergency response work

Several studies have shown that emergency response personnel repeatedly perform inadequately in the critical phase of responses, thus bringing into question their ability to learn from failures occurring in these situations. This paper presents a model for describing, analysing and planning learning in emergency response settings. The model focuses on the individuals need to learn, and is based on a combined approach to learning (socio-cultural elements and individual cognitive aspects). It acknowledges the importance of decision-making during emergency responses, and hence the importance of learning to make adequate decisions and reflecting on these after responses. Finally, founded on a view that learning in emergency response work is essentially about improving performance or making sure that chosen behaviour during responses is adequate and appropriate, the model considers learning to be related to changes in structures, behaviours or working methods, confirmation of existing knowledge and/or comprehension of existing practice.

Critical reflections on municipal risk and vulnerability analyses as decision support tools : the role of regulation regimes

Abstract Risk and vulnerability analyses are a required decision support tool in processes to improve societal safety and crisis preparedness at national, regional and local levels in several European states. Analyses result in risk images, which are the stakeholders’ views of events that must be addressed in planning processes related to topics such as land use and crisis management. Hence, risk and vulnerability analyses are used to support decisions regarding which issue areas to prioritize, as well as to choose between alternatives. In Norway and Sweden, municipal risk and vulnerability analyses are mandated and described in regulations, laws and guidelines. This article examines how the two countries’ regulation regimes address, characterize and facilitate risk-based decision-making. We found that the Swedish regulation regime emphasizes use of risk and vulnerability analyses in decision-making regarding emergency preparedness. In Norway, this is also an important issue, but decision-making with regard to long-term and strategic planning is also emphasized. In both regulation regimes, decision-makers must determine on their own how they should use the analyses as a foundation for decision-making regarding emergency preparedness and societal safety. While the regulation regimes contain method and content prescriptions, they do not specify how criteria regarding desirable levels of preparedness and societal safety should be determined, nor who should be involved in such processes. These are challenges that should be addressed in regulation guidelines and in audits carried out by regional authorities.

Reflections on the ontological status of risk

In this article we discuss the concept of risk in an ontological perspective. Risk per se is not a self-explaining concept that ‘exists’ by its own virtue. Our discussion is therefore based on existing methodologies and epistemological claims concerning risk. With these claims as our point of departure, we examine risk in relation to the concept of time, state of affairs (the state of the world) and events and discuss relations and constitutional issues for the risk concept. Drawing on a relation between time and state of affairs, we argue that risk is rooted in the transition from the future to the present. Risk is being constituted by the transition from a myriad of future possibilities into one present reality (one actual contingent world). This implies that risk is not ontologically something of the future, but rather something of the present. However, we argue that risk does not exist in any ontological sense. What actually exist are possible (future) states of affairs and these may or may not be interpreted to hold risk. An implication of this is that all risk claims are subjective.

A discussion of decision making applied in incident command

Rescuers respond to unique emergency situations. Decision making on the scene of an accident is context-bound, embedded in ever-changing environments. Thus, decisions in action sometimes involve huge uncertainty. This paper discusses decision making as part of incident management, as presented in the research literature. Two main theoretical perspectives on decision making in crises are compared. The Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM) and Contingent Decision Path perspectives show the similarities and differences in on-scene crisis decision making. In the light of prevailing crisis management research, we conclude that the researcher faces several challenges. Assumptions about experiences, situation awareness, cognitive reasoning and the reconstruction of on-scene behaviour are not easily retrieved. There is a need to develop a better understanding of and methods for rigorous observation and knowledge elicitation of decision making in crisis settings.

The concept of validation of numerical models for consequence analysis

Abstract Numerical models such as computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models are increasingly used in life safety studies and other types of analyses to calculate the effects of fire and explosions. The validity of these models is usually established by benchmark testing. This is done to quantitatively measure the agreement between the predictions provided by the model and the real world represented by observations in experiments. This approach assumes that all variables in the real world relevant for the specific study are adequately measured in the experiments and in the predictions made by the model. In this paper the various definitions of validation for CFD models used for hazard prediction are investigated to assess their implication for consequence analysis in a design phase. In other words, how is uncertainty in the prediction of future events reflected in the validation process? The sources of uncertainty are viewed from the perspective of the safety engineer. An example of the use of a CFD model is included to illustrate the assumptions the analyst must make and how these affect the prediction made by the model. The assessments presented in this paper are based on a review of standards and best practice guides for CFD modeling and the documentation from two existing CFD programs. Our main thrust has been to assess how validation work is performed and communicated in practice. We conclude that the concept of validation adopted for numerical models is adequate in terms of model performance. However, it does not address the main sources of uncertainty from the perspective of the safety engineer. Uncertainty in the input quantities describing future events, which are determined by the model user, outweighs the inaccuracies in the model as reported in validation studies.

Uncertainty—Its Ontological Status and Relation to Safety

The concept of uncertainty is difficult to comprehend, even when we restrict our focus to safety science. In a world with various scientific philosophical stances, “uncertainty” is debated in various contexts. However, in an effort to go deeper into a more basic understanding of uncertainty our knowledge is quickly challenged. What exists? How do we know what exists? What can we know about it? Aiming these questions at uncertainty reveals that interpreting uncertainty as existing in any ontological sense is difficult to defend. Does this imply that uncertainty can only be understood in an epistemological sense or merely as a construct? Epistemological understandings of uncertainty encompass, in principle, the whole rationality spectrum from relativism to positivism, thus not excluding any form of analyses or understanding of uncertainty. However, we recognize the need for an increased understanding of which elements the uncertainty concept comprises, and possible consequences of an unreflective discarding of elements. Within the framework of a linear time concept consisting of the past, the present and not least the future, we claim that uncertainty’s ontological status exists on various levels. In the present uncertainty is a purely epistemological category, and in the past uncertainty has its meaning related to what has been observed, recognized and comprehended, thus a methodological challenge. In the futuristic perspective uncertainty exists and cannot be reduced.

Learning from incidents at a Norwegian and a Polish refinery

Today companies are expected to learn from incidents in the form of accidents and near misses to improve safety at their facilities. In this article, we examine how two refineries located in Poland and Norway work to learn from incidents. We address the nature of their classification systems and how they select incidents for particularly thorough analysis or investigation, methods for analysis of less severe and severe incidents as well as participation in activities, the nature of follow up activities at the refineries and who these are directed at, as well as learning among contractors who carry out maintenance and projects at the refineries. For each of the stages of incident treatment, we consider the similarities and differences between the refineries and how the practices that are used may affect learning.