I need 4 simple responses to 4 of my classmates’ answers.

please remember that – simple responses without advance vocabulary (international students).

– less than half page each response.

– I need them with references.

Here is the first question:

1-Is it reasonable to utilize mitigation actions or techniques for international or humanitarian disasters? Discuss why or why not. What are some of the challenges that may be encountered?

For this question, I need responses about the challenges.

-First student’s answer

There are some challenges trends have become apparent in recent years that have promoted a reconsideration of approaches to hazard mitigation. One of these is global warming is beginning to be a main major in changing weather patterns which leads to a rise of the sea levels, Rise in temperature is due to increasing industrials practice and automobiles. Other factor is economic crises. For example, poor nation is vulnerable to any kind of disaster because of limit resources, poor education and risk awareness. We conclude that it is reasonable using mitigation action and tech for saving lives and through build community resilience, better infrastructure and public awareness. Finally, policy amendment and update with adequate funding mechanism is highly required to achieve sustainable development and progress to build capacity for future challenges in term of mitigation.

-second student’s answer

From the outset I would like to state that international and humanitarian disasters are unique in several ways. First, they are quite complex in nature because they affect a large number of people sometimes, a population, which might span across nations. A good case in point here is the Syria ISIS conflict whose effects are being felt as far as Europe as refugees flock most European countries for safety. In addition, the fact that international and humanitarian disasters happen in a large scale and involve many people make it a little bit uncertain. However, this does not mean that mitigation measures should not be used in management of international and humanitarian disasters. I do believe it is still reasonable to utilize mitigation measures on international and humanitarian disasters, their magnitude, complexity and uncertainty notwithstanding (Coppola, 2015).

Utilization of mitigation measures can go a long way in improving management of international and humanitarian disasters. For instance, mitigation measures such as predicting disasters reduce uncertainty in its management (Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA)., n.d.). For instance, identification of hazards and hazard vulnerability analysis can go a long way in encouraging effective use of resources because priority is given to more likely to happen hazards. Due to prior planning that comes with utilization of mitigation measures coordination efforts are made more efficient and as such it become cheaper and easier to confront disasters of international and humanitarian magnitude. Anticipation of disasters makes it possible to minimize its effects in advance

Challenges, however can face utilization of mitigation measures. A good case in point here is that most of these disasters span across nations that have different cultures, policies and legal frameworks. It therefore becomes challenging to apply some mitigation measures due to differences in languages and legal frameworks. In addition to this as indicated earlier, humanitarian and international disaster are of high magnitude. It is therefore expensive to mobilize resources to meet them especially in a case whereby resource mobilization depends on people goodwill (Chikoto, & Fordyce, 2013).

2-Here is the second question and this is different subject.

Explore the FIOP (Federal Interagency Operations Plan) described in the NRF. What are the key tasks to be accomplished? Which agency would logically be assigned each task? Do the Incident Specific Annexes clarify that assignment?

-first student’s answer

NRF is supported by FIOP for all hazards. The key task of FIOP is the four mission area: mitigation, protection, response, and recovery. “The Protection FIOP is organized as a single base plan with annexes for the joint development of core capabilities and the mutual support of Protection coordinating activities.” (homeland security, 2016). the NMF addresses the critical tasks to deliver the Mitigation core capabilities.the FIOP describe the core capabilities at the federal level. The response contains different agencies, federal laws and private organizations. The Recovery FIOP provides organizational structure to perform the Recovery core capabilities after a disaster incident (homeland security, 2016).

-second students answer

The main goals of National Preparedness System are to integrates efforts to achieve the five preparedness mission areas—Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery.

For each preparedness mission area, The Federal Interagency Operational Plans (FIOPs), describe how the federal government or aligns all resources. The FIOPs established the strategy for a whole community to make sure delivers the core capabilities described in the National Preparedness Goal.(FEMA,2018)

The National Preparedness System integrates efforts across the five preparedness mission areas—Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery— to achieve the goals. One component of the National Preparedness System is a Federal Interagency Operational Plan (FIOP) for each mission area that provides

1-Protection Federal Federal Interagency Interagency Operational Plan

FIOP describe the network-centric way that the Federal Government delivers Protection core capabilities.
National Security Council and Federal Departments and Agencies are the principal policy body for consideration of national and homeland security policy issues requiring Presidential determination.

2-Mitigation Federal Interagency Operational Plan
Mitigation core capabilities are delivered under incident-driven National Planning Frameworks (NRF and NDRF).

3-Response Federal Interagency Operational Plan
DHS Office of Infrastructure Protection and relevant Sector-Specific Agencies, collect and disseminate status updates on critical infrastructure operations, impact and consequences, and analyses and recommendations for restoring critical infrastructure.

4-Recovery Federal Interagency Operational Plan

The Recovery FIOP explain how Federal recovery field leadership—the Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) and Federal Disaster Recovery Officer (FDRC)—and Recovery Support Function (RSF) agencies coordination with nongovernmental and other private sector organizations, nonprofit organization to support local community for fast recovery.(Kaiser,2011)