IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/johsem/v9y2012i1p19n30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Responding in Crises: A Comparative Analysis of Disaster Responses between Mainland China and Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • MA Chun-Chieh

    (National University of Tainan, Harvard University)

Abstract

The management of crisis events involves activity at the organizational and governmental jurisdiction levels and is comprised of an integrated system of practice and structure. However, because there are two systems involved in crisis response, namely centralization and decentralization of disaster management, there are differences in governmental actions in response to crisis events. This article analyzes and compares the actions of disaster responses undertaken by mainland China and Taiwan when faced with major natural disasters in order to demonstrate the different response results and defects of centralized and decentralized crisis response systems, respectively. The results showed that the efficiency of decentralized response systems is higher than that of centralized systems, as respondents in a decentralized system have the ability to make independent judgments and respond to crisis situations flexibly. However, there are also restrictions on the successful operation of decentralized response systems, including problems concerning the organizational command and control model, military operations, and communication and coordination between different response organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • MA Chun-Chieh, 2012. "Responding in Crises: A Comparative Analysis of Disaster Responses between Mainland China and Taiwan," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:johsem:v:9:y:2012:i:1:p:19:n:30
    DOI: 10.1515/1547-7355.1993
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/1547-7355.1993
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/1547-7355.1993?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:johsem:v:9:y:2012:i:1:p:19:n:30. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.