Groups of partners and alliances
The partnership groups taking part in emergency management can be categorized into three, which are, social groups, economic groups, and governmental or political groups. They are equally essential as far as emergency involvements are concerned, but each one of them tends to vary from the others as far as priorities are concerned (Brennan, 2012).
Social groups, for instance, have three emergency systems namely; the family system, Community response teams, and the private sector groups. Individuals are, in this groupings the building block for units of emergency management, thus, their importance should never be underestimated. One person can inspire the whole family or community to participate honorably towards emergency management. Households and families, irrespective of size, will always have varied interest and affects caused by emergency policies and plans (Brennan, 2012).
The community response groups, on the other hand, usually maintain formalized programs for their organizations. They are formed by local arrangements in communities and provinces where citizens join private sector groupings which work in close relationship with both the local and the provincial organizations of emergency management.
Private sector category in most cases offers a full scale of preparedness, mitigation, prevention, recovery and response services. The organizations in this category are never created for the purpose of emergency management but share a common interest as far as emergency response and risk reduction are concerned about their perceived interest (Brennan, 2012). Most of these voluntary and nonprofit organizations work every day educating the public, feeding the needy families, protecting human rights, supporting the disabled individuals and also exercising environmental conservation activities. In addition to the above mentioned daily activities, these organizations possess potential and established emergency management functions. The groups falling under this category includes religious organizations, community-based organizations (CBOs), non-profit organizations (NPOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and businesses.
Vulnerable groups
The most vulnerable groups are referred to those people, who due to various cultural, heath and social determinants, have the highest chance of experiencing severe impacts resulting from public emergency instances. At the same time, they stand the least chance of gaining from moderate recovery and response measures or still, may encounter adverse effects of such conventional recovery or response actions (Chen, 2010).
One of such vulnerable group involves tourists and students. Tourists will always be in danger of emergency occurrences as they would neither lack what to do or where to hide. They will probably be new to the real setup, cultural setting, and language of communication and thus will be more vulnerable in comparison to the local people who will have an idea of either where to go or use the emergency information to escape. Students also experience similar situations like tourists as their appropriate response is mostly hindered by the lack of familiarity with both the surrounding and the local emergency systems (Chen, 2010).
The other vulnerable groups are those falling under institutionalized population such as hospitals, established care homes, jails, prisons among others. Their situation worsens when, for example, mass evacuations are required at awkward moments like midnight and stakeholder collaboration is at its lowest point. Even though they are all mandated to access emergency response mechanisms, but such awkward moments would certainly make them vulnerable.
There is yet again the vulnerability aspect associated with height, especially for the residential buildings and towers. Emergencies occurring when people are based on say, 60th or 70th floors deprive such people the access to emergency response without using a free and safe elevator. Height-related emergencies put everyone in the same environmental concern irrespective of their fitness standards, age, health status, and income.
Reference
Brennan, J. (2012). Emergency Management. Partnership Groups in Emergency Management Continuum, 13(5), 62-87.
Chen, J. (2010). Issues, considerations and recommendations on emergency preparedness for vulnerable population groups. Emergency Management, 134(3-4), 32-45.
