Home C2 Agility for Emergency Management: Examining the Katrina and Sandy Responses
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

C2 Agility for Emergency Management: Examining the Katrina and Sandy Responses

  • Caroline R. Earle EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: October 11, 2018

Abstract

The Command and Control (C2) Agility theory developed by experts from the Command and Control Research Program based upon analysis of military operations, posits that a C2 approach is characterized by three dimensions: (1) allocation of decision rights, among entities, (2) patterns of interaction, and (3) distribution of information. An entity’s C2 approach is agile when these three dimensions can be changed as required due to a change in circumstances. The Institute for Defense Analyses has produced a handbook C2 by Design to guide operationalization of the C2 Agility theory. C2 agility becomes salient as complexity increases; and the complex, dynamic nature of disaster response environments suggests the applicability of C2 Agility theory to emergency management. This article builds on early NATO study panel findings that used disaster response case studies to validate C2A theory, and draws on existing case literature to identify what factors influenced C2A during Hurricane Katrina and explore how lessons learned from that response impacted C2A during the subsequent US response to Hurricane Sandy. The analysis uses C2A assessment factors from C2 by Design to examine these cases and recommends how the US government can achieve improved C2A during future responses to complex disasters.

  1. Funding: Institute for Defense Analyses, Grant Number: Central Research Program Funding.

References

Alberts, David S. 2011. The Agility Advantage: A Survival Guide for Complex Enterprises and Endeavors. Washington, DC: DOD CCRP Publication Series. http://www.dodccrp.org/files/agility_advantage/Agility_Advantage_Book.pdf.10.21236/ADA631225Search in Google Scholar

Alberts, David S., and Richard E. Hayes. 2007. The Future of Command and Control: Planning Complex Endeavors. Washington, DC: DOD CCRP Publication Series. http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_Planning.pdf.10.21236/ADA465653Search in Google Scholar

Alberts, David S., Reiner K. Huber, and James Moffat. 2010. NATO NEC C2 Maturity Model. Washington, DC: DOD CCRP Publication Series. http://www.dodccrp.org/files/N2C2M2_web_optimized.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Alberts, David S., Kathleen M. Conley, Waldo D. Freeman, James H. Kurtz, and Mark E. Tillman. 2015. C2 by Design: Putting Command and Control Agility Theory into Practice Version 2.0. Alexandria, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses. https://www.ida.org/∼/media/Corporate/Files/Publications/IDA_Documents/SFRD/2016/D-5614.ashx.Search in Google Scholar

Bier, Vicki. 2006. “Hurricane Katrina as a Bureaucratic Nightmare.” In On Risk and Disasters, edited by Ronald J. Daniels, Donald F. Kettl, and Howard Kunreuther, 243–254. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.10.9783/9780812205473.243Search in Google Scholar

Burke, Ryan, and Sue McNeil. 2015. Toward a Unified Military Response: Hurricane Sandy and the Dual Status Commander. Carlisle, PA: U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute. http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=1263.Search in Google Scholar

Comfort, Louise. 2007. “Crisis Management in Hindsight: Cognition, Communication, Coordination and Control.” Public Administration Review 67 (Special Issue): 189–191. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4624696.10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00827.xSearch in Google Scholar

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. 2011. Joint Publication 5-0, Joint Operation Planning. Washington, DC: Department of Defense. http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp5_0.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Chamlee-Wright, Emily, and Virgil Henry Storr, eds. 2010. The Political Economy of Hurricane Katrina and Community Rebound. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. doi: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849806541.10.4337/9781849806541Search in Google Scholar

Department of Homeland Security. 2011. National Preparedness System. Washington, DC: DHS. Accessed http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1855-25045-8110/national_preparedness_system_final.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Department of Homeland Security. 2015a. National Preparedness Goal. Second Edition. Washington, DC: DHS. http://www.fema.gov/national-preparedness-goal.Search in Google Scholar

Department of Homeland Security. 2015b. “Disasters Overview.” July16. Accessed September 2, 2015, http://www.dhs.gov/disasters-overview.Search in Google Scholar

DiPace, Michael S. 2014. The National Response Framework: A Cross-Case Analysis. Fort Leavenworth KS: Army Command and General Staff College. Accessed December 27 2016. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA611764.Search in Google Scholar

Drabek, Thomas E., and David A. McEntire. 2003. “Emergent Phenomena and the Sociology of Disaster: Lessons, Trends and Opportunities from the Research Literature.” Disaster Prevention and Management 12 (2): 97–112. doi: 10.1108/09653560310474214.Search in Google Scholar

FEMA. 2010. “Fact Sheet: Incident Management Assistance Teams.” October 5. Accessed September 2, 2015, http://www.fema.gov/pdf/media/factsheets/2010/imat_fact_sheet_10_05_10.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

FEMA. 2011. A Whole Community Approach to Emergency Management: Principles, Themes, and Pathways for Action FDOC 104-008-1. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1813-25045-0649/whole_community_dec2011__2_.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

FEMA. 2013. Hurricane Sandy FEMA After-Action Report. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security. https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/33772.Search in Google Scholar

FEMA. 2014. FEMA Strategic Plan 2014-2018. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security. https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/96981#Search in Google Scholar

FEMA. 2016. “Core Capabilities.” Accessed December 27, 2016. https://www/fema.gov/core-capabilities.Search in Google Scholar

Government Accounting Office. 2006. Coast Guard: Observations on the Preparation, Response and Recovery Missions Related to Hurricane Katrina GAO-06-903. Washington, DC: United States Governmental Accountability Office. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06903.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Government Accounting Office. 2008. Actions Taken to Implement the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 GAO-09-59R. Washington, DC: United States Governmental Accountability Office. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-59R.Search in Google Scholar

Harrald, John. 2006. “Hurricane Katrina: Recommendations for Reform.” Testimony to the Senate Homeland Security Government Affairs Committee. March 8, 2006. http://www.gwu.edu/∼icdrm/.Search in Google Scholar

Jacoby Jr., Gen. Charles H., and Gen. Frank J. Grass. 2013. “Dual-Status, Single Purpose: A Unified Military Response to Hurricane Sandy. Homeland Security Today. March 11. Accessed September 2, 2015, http://www.hstoday.us/columns/guest-commentaries/blog/exclusive-dual-status-single-purpose-a-unified-military-response-to-hurricane-sandy/805345bdee0530ceef07d9e5b4c31002.html.Search in Google Scholar

Jensen, Jessica, and William L. Waugh. 2014. “The United States’ Experience with the Incident Command System: What We Think We Know and What We Need to Know More About.” Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 22 (1): 5–17.10.1111/1468-5973.12034Search in Google Scholar

Kadushin, Charles. 2004. “Some Basic Network Concepts and Propositions, Chapter 2.” In: Introduction to Social Network Theory. Working manuscript. New York. Accessed July 6, 2018, http://www.cin.ufpe.br/∼rbcp/taia/Kadushin_Concepts.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Morris, John C., Elizabeth D. Morris, and Dale M. Jones. 2007. “Reaching for the Philosopher’s Stone: Contingent Coordination and the Military’s Response to Hurricane Katrina.” Public Administration Review 67 (Special Issue): 94–106. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4624687.10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00818.xSearch in Google Scholar

Moynihan, Donald P. 2007. From Forest Fires to Hurricane Katrina: Case Studies of Incident Command Systems. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government. http://www.businessofgovernment.org/report/forest-fires-hurricane-katrina-case-studies-incident-command-systems.Search in Google Scholar

Moynihan, Donald P. 2009a. “The Network Governance of Crisis Response: Case Studies of Incident Command Systems.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19: 895–915. DOI: 10.1093/jopart/mun033.Search in Google Scholar

Moynihan, Donald P. 2009b. The Response to Hurricane Katrina. Geneva, Switzerland: International Risk Governance Council. https://irgc.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Hurricane_Katrina_full_case_study_web.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

North Atlantic Treaty Organization. 2013. C2 Agility Task Group SAS-085 Final Report STO-TR-SAS-085. Brussels, Belgium: NATO. http://www.dodccrp.org/sas-085/sas-085_report_final.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Smith, Jeffrey M. 2012. Comprehensive Common Operating Picture for Disaster Response. Fort Leavenworth, Kansas: School of Advanced Military Studies, United States Army Command and General Staff College. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a566815.pdf.10.21236/ADA566815Search in Google Scholar

Townsend, Frances. 2006. Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina Lessons Learned. Washington, DC: The White House. http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS67263.Search in Google Scholar

U.S. House of Representatives. 2006. A Failure of Initiative H. Rept, 109–377. Washington, DC: US. Government Printing Office. http://www.katrina.house.gov/.Search in Google Scholar

Wachtendorf, Tricia, and James M. Kendra. 2006. “Improvising Disaster in the City of Jazz: Interorganizational Response to Hurricane Katrina.” SSCR. Accessed September 2, 2015, http://understandingkatrina.ssrc.org/Wachtendorf_Kendra/.Search in Google Scholar


Supplementary Material

The online version of this article offers supplementary material (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2017-0046).


Published Online: 2018-10-11

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 23.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jhsem-2017-0046/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button