ANALYSIS OF CASE STUDIES

The case study of recent disasters in Saudi Arabia examined in this Section has further exposed the gaps and limitations in the current practice within disaster response in the country. Identifying similar lessons and complexity that hinder effective response to disasters indicate that capacity assessment is lacking in the system. The researcher is basing this inference of the evidence presented during the case study where causalities, injuries and evacuations were required. Various factors hampering disaster response efforts as identified in Chapter 3 (e.g. poor communication and coordination, lack of training, clear definition of roles and responsibilities) can be seen in play within these case studies, affecting capabilities of effective response.

It is also established from the case studies that the evidence of direct and indirect disaster impacts in KSA is an indication that capacity assessment and its corresponding activities are lacking in preparing the responders, partnering organisations and volunteers for disaster response. While no reference is made to whether or not equipment is sufficient, it can be noticed from some of the pictures that even with the presence of rescue equipment in some cases, responders were still unable to carry out their duties as required to save lives and properties. These are all indicators of lack of capacity assessment of the disaster management system, as well as lack of focus on risk impacts and how to assign roles and responsibilities of all emergency organizations and volunteers to deal with the risk and mitigate its impacts.

Table 2.2 in Chapter 2 may be used to further identify areas where gaps are present in order to determine the inquiry process and rationale for collecting the primary data. Various best practice features of capacity assessment frameworks are analysed based on Saudi disaster response experiences (Column 3 in Table 4.1) and areas of improvements are identified.

104

Table 4-1: Comparison of Global Capacity Assessment Practices with analysed cases studies

Capacity Assessment best practice features Country identified

or source

Saudi Arabia

 Structured UN (UNDG, 2007) √

 Focus on short and long-term impacts of risks x  Readiness arrangement that focuses on EMFs US (FEMA, 2014) x  Cover all readiness actions and activities during

the preparedness phase

√  Conduct survey or ask critical questions from all

stakeholders

UK (NAO, 2008) x  Critical questions should focus on risk

consequences, level of capability and implementation of readiness arrangement for response

x

 Focus on 4 levels i.e. central government, local government, community and community groups to respond

Japan (Shuhei, 2014)

x

 Comprehensive to cover all phases x

 Conduct evaluation post response to determine if capacity i.e. equipment, skills facilities, resources were sufficient

x

 Tool that identifies gaps, areas of improvement, strengths and weakness

New Zealand (Civil Defence NZ, 2014)

√  Periodic or regular assessment must be done x  Use of performance indicators Taiwan (Deng et al.

2005)

x  Define & use of Primary and Secondary indexes x  Capacity assessment system/framework must be

multi-hazard that ensures that consequences of hazards are prevented and risks are mitigated

x

It can be seen that there are very few best practice in capacity assessment practiced in Saudi Arabia, especially ones that align with the best practice identified in literature review. The Table 4.1 shows that while structure exists in the Saudi system and readiness actions and activities are indicated in the disaster management arrangements as reviewed in the literature chapter section 2.4, it appears actual response capability does not measure up to what is required during disasters. As noticed in the Table above, other best practice for capacity assessment are also lacking, which may be one of the factors responsible for inadequate response.

105 However, this is an assumption that need to be investigated through the fieldwork inquiry. Although it seems tools exists for identifying gaps and areas of improvement as outlined in the case studies which showed the complexity and lessons learned in each disaster scenario. However, it is evident that the current practice in Saudi Arabia are insufficient and have continued to aggravate the disaster impact in the country. Hence, the next section presents result of responses provided by the experts regarding the gaps identified in the literature review and via this case study analysis.

4.5 CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter has critically examined case studies of disaster scenarios which indicate that the response capacity for dealing with disasters in KSA may be insufficient. In addition to this, the chapter has shown that disasters occur frequently in KSA and as such may not leave sufficient time for capturing learned lessons to be put into consideration and influence planning for future disasters. In this sense, it appears that approaches for assessing response capacity may not be effective enough. The case study analysis further indicates that one of the key challenges that may continue to influence capacity assessment methods used in KSA is the frequency of disaster occurrence that makes it difficult for the same organisations to both identify lessons, learn and incorporate them for future planning.

Therefore, the case study analysis reveal that it is important that the competency assessment framework is developed to incorporate arrangement for monitoring and evaluation that is simultaneously conducted pre-disaster, during and post disasters. Shuhei (2014) also highlighted the need for a response capacity assessment activity, that is embedded into the phases of disaster management perhaps one that includes tool that identifies gaps, areas of improvement, strengths and weaknesses (Civil Defence NZ, 2014).

Despite the outcome of the case study analysis, the key challenges in disaster response capacity assessment methods used in Saudi Arabia remains based on assumptions and not yet verified using a scientific method. Therefore, the next chapter focuses on presenting findings from questionnaire and interview sessions conducted in KSA in order to ascertain challenges identified from the case study analysis. Through the primary data collection, information gathered is also constituted as means of evaluating the existing capacity assessment of methods and approaches used in KSA.

106