Co-operation in disaster zones
In the chaos that follows natural disasters, assistance companies sometimes help each other on an ad-hoc basis. But can this co-operation be centrally organised? Advocates claim it would save time and money, while detractors argue it’s unworkable. David Robinson enters the fray
First published in ITIJ 125, June 2011
In the chaos that follows natural disasters, assistance companies sometimes help each other on an ad-hoc basis. But can this co-operation be centrally organised? Advocates claim it would save time and money, while detractors argue it’s unworkable. David Robinson enters the fray
The South Asian tsunami on Boxing Day 2004 was one of the worst natural disasters in recent history. An earthquake off the coast of Sumatra sent a wall of water crashing into hundreds of coastal communities across the Indian Ocean without warning. The scale of the devastation was awesome. More than 230,000 people died and the damage ran into tens of billions of dollars.
Travel Insurance Suppliers Network director Julie Remmington arrived in Thailand the following day to manage the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office response. Thousands of British nationals were missing. “It was total chaos,” she recalls. “There was rubble and upturned cars everywhere.”
Many assistance companies had teams on the ground in Thailand within 24 hours, but establishing their exposure proved extremely difficult. “No-one knew how many clients they had, or where these people might be,” Remmington adds. “Everyone was running around like headless chickens.” The vast number of casualties left hospitals struggling to cope. The injured were crammed into every available space, including the corridors. The doctors had to work flat out.
Into this disarray, came team after team of assistance companies looking for clients on behalf of insurers – much to the annoyance of stressed hospital staff. “They said ‘why can’t you liaise, rather than one assistance company after another arriving every ten minutes?’,” Remmington recalls.
As time wore on, some assistance companies did look out for rivals’ clients on an ad-hoc basis – generally when one project manager was on friendly terms with another. But Remmington argues that the gravity of the situation required a more co-ordinated approach. “Most holidaymakers don’t know who their assistance company is,” Remmington says. “What was needed was central contact points on the ground where people could locate their assistance company, and vice versa.”
A meeting of minds
The South Asian tsunami, which struck 14 countries and affected hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals, was unique in the scale and breadth of its destruction. In its aftermath, the insurance industry debated how it might handle large-scale disasters more effectively. But, six years on, little has actually changed.
The recent natural disasters in Japan and New Zealand provide a timely reminder that another large-scale incident is always around the corner. Richard Knight, emergency logistics manager at Europ Assistance, wants to shake the industry out of its slumber. He’s trying to set up a not-for-profit entity to co-ordinate how assistance companies – along with security companies, NGOs and government agencies – respond during major disasters. In order for it to remain neutral, the organisation it will not come under the Europ Assistance banner.
“The goal is to have a type of real life A-Team on the ground to act as a command and control unit to better utilise assets in a disaster,” Knight says, enthusiastically. In January last year, Knight was in Haiti managing Europ Assistance’s response to the 7.0Mw earthquake that struck the country. The situation was catastrophic. Haiti, one of the poorest countries in the world, was ill-equipped to cope with a huge quake so close to its capital Port-au-Prince. A quarter of a million homes were destroyed, leaving more than a million people homeless.
The recent natural disasters in Japan and New Zealand provide a timely reminder that another large-scale incident is always around the corner.
The quake wrecked all telecommunication networks in Haiti forcing Europ Assistance set up an operations centre in the neighbouring Dominican Republic. Knight recalls that a friend who worked for a rival organisation called him. The friend was trying to cross the border into Haiti but was worried about the dangers and obstacles that stood in his path. “I used my connections to source him updated satellite images showing which roads were safe, which bridges had collapsed, and where any groups of bandits were. It provided a safe passage in and out of Haiti,” Knight says. “Essentially, I acted as a middle man. But it got me thinking: why not apply this to everything else? If you put the right people and skill sets in contact with each other you can make a huge difference. You can apply this to everything related to disaster management – getting teams on ground, sharing intelligence, and working with governments. At the moment, people don’t really communicate and as a result the industry does not fully utilise its assets.”
Knight’s plans have the backing of a number of senior people in the industry. AXA Assistance medical director Thomas Buchsein says such co-operation makes a lot of sense. “In a disaster scenario everyone has the same goal,” he says. “It’s a mystery why we haven’t done it before.”
Andrew Lee co-formed Travelsolve Assistance in the early 1990s: He now runs Atlas International Rescue, an air ambulance company based in Florida. Lee blames a culture of ‘commercial confidentiality and arrogance’ for undermining any efforts to co-operate in the past. “In major incidents, commercial interests should be put to one side,” he says. “There’s a lot the industry can do in a disaster situation that could reduce costs and create an all-round better service.”
Assistance companies could, for example, share air ambulances in certain situations. “If you’ve got two patients with similar injuries – albeit clients of rival assistance companies – that need to be pulled out of the same location why not use the same air ambulance? It would halve the costs,” Knight says.
But implementing this idea could prove tricky. Robert Lamb, the CEO of Dubai-based air ambulance company RMSI Medical Solutions, says his company has mooted putting rival assistance companies’ patients on the same flight before. But assistance companies invariably disagree to such suggestions. “The assistance companies expressed concerns that one patient might turn up to the airport late, or be in a worse condition than had been anticipated. For example, a patient might enter the aeroplane in a stable condition and then go into cardiac arrest a few feet away from the other patient,” he says.
Efforts to co-operate in the aftermath of a disaster could also extend to assistance companies shipping the deceased home on shared chartered planes. “Under the right circumstances it could be a good idea,” says Melanie Walking, a director at Rowland Brothers, a Croydon-based funeral directors that specialises in international repatriation. But Walking adds that such efforts might be complicated by the processes involved in certifying and transporting the deceased, which can sometimes drag out. “Certain paperwork is required. A coffin has to be acquired. And the body has to be embalmed,” Walker says, adding that in disaster zones, Rowland Brothers tends to operate independently of the assistance companies, which focus on repatriating the living.
If you put the right people and skill sets in contact with each other you can make a huge difference.
However, Walking says the company is open to suggestions. “If a group of assistance companies got together and chartered an aeroplane to bring a number of bodies home it might be a better option than bringing the bodies home independently,” she says.
Each to their own
Some senior industry figures, however, give short thrift to the idea that assistance companies will ever be able to co-operate effectively in the chaos and turmoil that follows a natural disaster. “Globally, assistance companies are in competition. They are not non-profit organisations,” says Dr Gerhard Mueller, head of medical, travel and health at Mondial Assistance. “They will always be in competition, even in a disaster. The individual assistance companies – which are mostly financed by the big insurance companies – always want to show that they are better than their rivals. Their priority will always be to look after their clients – not somebody else’s clients.”
The German Insurance Association (GDV) – an umbrella organisation for private insurers in Germany – seeks to channel the industry’s response in crisis situations. But Mueller says that in reality the group acts as little more than a talking shop. “It has no legal impact. Sometimes the different parties sit down together and talk. But in the event of a disaster, everyone acts alone,” he says. Mueller predicts that any global assistance company co-operation group would ultimately prove as toothless as the GDV.
“Mondial would participate in any discussions [to co-ordinate assistance companies in disaster zones] but in the event of a big disaster I have doubts whether we would follow any instructions telling us what to do,” confirms Mueller.
International SOS is one of the largest assistance companies in the world with more than 8,000 employees operating in more than 70 countries. The Singapore-headquartered group’s involvement in any global disaster co-ordination effort would therefore be important. International SOS, however, is renowned for the careful protection of its global database. An International SOS spokesperson dismissed the idea of cooperation with its rivals. “We work on behalf of our members. They are our priority. Other assistance companies have different members,” the spokesperson said. “We decide internally what rescue force to send to the ground and what we need to do. Our crisis centre works with 28 ‘alarm centres’ around the world. It’s a co-ordinated effort. To then bring another assistance company into that planning is just bizarre.”
Despite compelling arguments in favour of co-operation, Julie Remmington is sceptical as to whether rival assistance companies will ever be able to rise above their own commercial interests and work together in a centrally organised capacity. “There is a lot of distrust in the industry. Everyone has got their own views and ways of working. They don’t want to share,” she says.
any global assistance company co-operation group would ultimately prove as toothless as the GDV
A host of issues stand in the way of even basic acts of co-operation, such as sharing an air ambulance or allowing one assistance company to act on behalf of a rival’s client, Remmington adds. “One assistance company might repatriate a client on behalf of a rival assistance company and put in a bill for £1,000 only for the other assistance to come back and claim they could have done it for £500 because they don’t use a certain supplier or they don’t pay for this, or they don’t pay for that. You could run into all sorts of complications.”
Remmington also worries that systematic co-operation across the assistance industry could draw the attention of monopolies authorities. “We can’t be seen to be running a cartel,” she says.
But Richard Knight remains undaunted. He says he already has the commitment of enough senior people to make the project viable. The next step is turning concept into reality, and have it up and running by 2012. “No-one has tried to do this before because it’s a bit taboo,” he says. “People are scared of working with the competition but that needs to change. Everyone could benefit. I’m not saying it needs to happen on a day-to-day basis. But when we have these major incidents we should come together.”
At the end of the day it is the mission of assistance companies to help people and pull them out of trouble, Knight adds. And it is this basic humanitarian calling, he argues, that must rise above any petty, personal, and protectionist concerns.