Improvement Direction for the Operating System of CRISIS Management Manual in KOREA

Abstract

Through analysis of operating system of crisis management manual in Korea, this study attempts to suggest the right direction for future improvement. First, it is necessary to simplify the preparation through accurate understanding of laws and regulations. In the meantime, given the Korean crisis management manual written too specifically, rather, there is too much in manual volume and there is not enough time to follow the manual sequentially in case of settlement disaster. At the time of the East Japan great earthquake disaster, they were accused of missing the Golden Time when they sequentially followed Japan's well‐written manuals. Therefore, it is desirable to make it simple and easy to understand through an accurate understanding of relevant laws and regulations. Second, it is necessary to clearly distinguish roles between institutions through practical exchanges and cooperation networks. Under the current laws, this redundant design leads to an ironic situation in which when the actual disaster occurs, leaving responsibilities of an agency to another occurs between the agencies. Therefore, manual design to enable clear division of roles among institutions to some degree through practical exchanges and cooperation will enable quicker disaster response. Third, it is necessary to build a highly effective manual based on a scenario. Although the current crisis management manual is well written, but when applied to settlement actual disaster, it is difficult to apply due to the difference between reality and theory. Therefore, in order to be practical or to increase the possibility of reality, based on the scenarios, it will be easier to apply the reality by coping with the virtual scenarios by disaster type. Fourth, it is necessary to conduct situational judgment exercises through training. In the currently available crisis management manuals in Korea, all institutions are unified in identifying the level of crisis alarms such as concern, attention, warning, and seriousness, each level has different responses and its collaboration is different. However, in case of actual disaster, it is difficult to collaborate because it shows difference in crisis alarm level by each department or each institution. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct self‐assessment exercises through scenario training. Fifth, there is an increasing need for preparing integrated manuals for complex disasters. Today, disasters do not simply end in one type of disaster, but multiply into multiple disasters. That is, when an earthquake occurs, the earthquake can lead to fire, collapse, environmental pollution, and even nuclear accident. As a result, the crisis management manual is a manual for one type of disaster, which makes it difficult to cope with a complex disaster. Therefore, the need for preparing integrated manuals considering complex disasters increases.