The United States does not have an established history of applied research to continually improve emergency management responses through technological advancements and system improvements.  This is based on the vast array of “all-hazards” being addressed by the emergency management system, particularly at the local and state levels through the response of the fire service. Most of the advances in the emergency management system can be traced to specific issues identified during previous events; clearly a reactive as opposed to a proactive approach.   In contrast to the vast resources dedicated to law enforcement research and technology implementation, which has been primarily funded by the Department of Justice (DOJ). 

As part of the emergency management system, the American Fire Service is composed of about 2.5 million fire fighters working for some 35,000 different fire departments, both career and volunteer.  This makes for a very small potential market segment.  The influence of profit cannot be underestimated when it comes to applied research and development.  If a reasonable “rate-of-return” on research and development dollars can not be guaranteed, then it should not surprise anyone; why little if any corporate research and development is dedicated to these efforts.  I have witnessed this on both a personal and commercial level within the emergency community. 

One of my personal experiences has been that I approached a large company with an idea to modify their construction equipment so it could be used for fire service application.  Although initially interested, the company ultimately decided not to pursue the fire service application and the fire service market.  They estimated that at least 10,000 units would have to be sold in order to recover the research and development costs.  Ultimately, the reason for not moving ahead with the fire service project was the projected small profit for a small market area.  Other non-fire-oriented projects predicted better profits.
Another personal experience that I shared was with a family acquaintance, which has spent many years working for a large telecommunication company.  He told me; typically the minimum marketing sector is 15 million sales before they commit to any research and development project.  Very much like the previous experience, emergency management issues are in the same predicament of small profit for a small market area. 

On a commercial level, this is a very similar occurrence in the medical research field.  On one end of the medical research spectrum, drug companies are battling for discovering new cures that will reap the best “rate-of-return” for their research dollar.  At the opposite end, many medical conditions go with little or no research because the potential patient pool is too small.  The medical research field has described these disorders as “orphan diseases.”  Very much like “orphan diseases”, research and development in the emergency management filed have been vastly ignored based on small profit for a small market area.
A serious effort in addressing the ignored research and development in the fire service was reconstituted in 1998 the United States Fire Administration (USFA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).  USFA and NIST announced a joint agreement to better identify, prioritize and meet the research needs of the nation’s fire fighting community.  Actually, both USFA and NIST have been working on many projects together for many years prior to 1998.  USFA’s research and development has been to protect the fire fighting personnel.  While NIST has been mainly working on fire safety issues since the 1940’s with an emphasis on the “built” environment thus reducing the impact of fire losses to structures.  This agreement was established to better coordinate projects that were all ready underway.   Although, many valid breakthroughs have been made, an appreciable portion of these breakthroughs conflict within the framework of existing response systems.  More often then not, these advances are dismissed due to high implementation costs or challenge the existing institutional pyridine.  This is not to say that some technological advances have not taken place, but in most instances the technological advancement is a case of a product looking for a market such as the fire service.  The bottom line is – a systematic research and development program has driven none of the recent advancements in emergency management in particular the fire service due to the small market with limited profit.


The newly created Department of Homeland Security is being promised as a centralizing agency for science and technology development.   The White House web site specifically identifies a need to “ . . . consolidate and prioritize the disparate homeland security related research and development programs currently scattered throughout the Executive Branch.”  This new Department of Homeland Security would also “ . . . assist state and local public safety agencies by evaluating equipment and setting standards.” 
Congress has passed H.R. 5005 Act that establishes the Department of Homeland Security.  Part of this act under §307 outlines the conduct of research, development, demonstration, testing and evaluation of Homeland Security technological advances.  The Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary for Science and Technology, shall carry out this mission through both intramural and extramural research, development, demonstration, testing, and evaluation programs.  Under §506 of the Act, it is to import the role of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).  The functions of FEMA including but are not limited to, the following: all functions and authorities prescribed by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.)  and carrying out its mission to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards by leading and supporting the Nation in a comprehensive, risk-based emergency management program that includes (A) mitigation, (B) preparedness, (C) response, and (D) recovery.

    The Act creating the new Department of Homeland Security will require the appointment of an Under Secretary for Science and Technology.  The initial tasks outlined in the Act give specific direction for security-related research and development.  However, limited guidance is given within the Act, which addresses the issue of “all-hazards” responses.  This limited guidance needs to be further developed with details on how to address not only the wide range of potential disasters but to develop a standard for routine local and state emergency response concepts.  

Analysis of the new proposed approach versus the prior approach on the emergency management research organization.

The legislation passed in H.R. 5005 is unclear on how science and technology will be evaluated.  Several questions need to be addressed.  What specific programs will be well funded?  What programs will be given enough funding to barley survive?  What programs will be eliminated because they are not perceived as an “overall homeland security priority?”  The fact is §307, Conduct of Research, Development, Demonstration, Testing and Evaluation, goes on for several pages describing all types of research and development projects that have specific homeland security applications.  Not one requirement for “all-hazards” research and development program is mentioned within these pages.  It appears that funding for anything that is not related to a specific homeland security priority may not be available.  The implication to the emergency management community is that unless “all-hazards” issues can be combined with a homeland security priority, it stands little chance of getting any funding for research and development.

In the past FEMA has had the latitude to fund research and the development of smoke detector and fire sprinkler technology that over the years has proven to be an effective tool in reducing the number of fire deaths in this Nation.  FEMA has also supported the development of “Safe-Rooms” for the vast portions of this Nation that suffer from tornados.  Project Impact, a FEMA program that attempted to work with local communities to mitigate the damage caused by persistent and predicable hazards that may not have as such a high profile as protecting the Homeland.  These efforts are at risk in the future because they will be competing for funding with Homeland Security initiatives.  The future for applied research and development for “all-hazards” emergency management issues seems to have been given little consideration in the rush to pass Homeland Security legislation.  Many in emergency response community that I have spoken with seem to have adopted the “more bread, larger the crumbs” theory of federal funding will apply.  The hope is that additional funding for Homeland Security applied research; may possibly translate to more funding being made available for “all-hazards” projects.

Recommendations for the future emergency management research organization.
The emergency management system including the fire service communities will need to find a common ground together to ensure that funding for applied research and development for “all-hazards” is not overwhelmed by Homeland Security research needs.   To that end, I suggest at least four strategies to be considered; 1) Development of a broadly supported research agenda; 2) Academic or profit driven public/private partnerships; 3) Subsidized rescue technology incubators; 4) Funded “Proof-of-Concept” projects; 5) Development of shared technology platforms.

1) Development of a Broadly Supported Research Agenda

- Identify existing technology used by other industries that can quickly moved into the emergency management area such as “low hanging fruit” this will foster continued support for this concept.
- Identify existing needs common to both types of natural and terror based emergencies. 

Once a broadly supported research agenda that address the needs of the emergency management can be defined; then developing support will be easier than attempting to gain funding for specific research programs that will be in competition for funding with pure homeland security initiatives. 

2) Academic or Profit Driven Public/Private Partnerships

The Environmental Protection Agency has had success sponsoring Solar Car competitions at the university level.   The most useful part of this initiative might not be the competition itself, but the development of quantifiable task goals for the competitors to meet.  Development of quantifiable task goals will allow for others to come into the research arena with a known expectation for the end point of the research initiative.  Private industry partners can then further develop the concepts with the possibility of producing the product for profit to the emergency management community at large.

3) Subsidized Rescue Technology Incubators

The applied research for the emergency management community is considered a risky use of investment capital.  Subsidize proven technology incubators to work on emergency management issues that will bring together academic and for profit firms to deliver effective tools.  Technology incubators have a proven track record of helping small start-up firms and investors to come together. 

4) Proof-of-Concept Projects

Delivering a useable concept that is practical and economically feasible is the test of any research and development effort.  This initiative would identify potential parties within private industry that would be willing to take an idea to market successfully.

5) Development of Shared Technology Platforms

Many communities are reluctant to “buy-into” a technology that is the sole domain of a single company.   Development of technology that can be used by various companies will promote the adoption of a technology platform. 

Summary
    One of the expressions that most fire fighters learn is “Two-hundred years of undaunted tradition, in spite of two-hundred years of progress.”  Many revel in this as a justification to continue operations as they have been carried out in the past.  However, most do not realize the underlying reasons the fire service in particular and the emergency management research organization have been unable to keep pace with the advance of modern technology and systems that come into realization while we have accepted the past as a prediction of the future. 
    In summary, the emergency management research organization should develop a broadly supported research agenda, look into partnerships between private organizations and public agencies, and develop shared technology platforms for funding.  The integrating of Homeland Security issues with “all-hazards” issues may provide more flexibility for funding applied research and development.  Hopefully, efforts by the United States Fire Academy and the Emergency Management Institute will help future generations of emergency service professionals learn how to accept and implement new technologies within the existing organizational structures that will continue to meet an “all-hazards” perspective.
 
Bibliography

White House Homeland Security web site (2002).  Retrieved November 25, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/

H. R. 5005 an ACT to establish the Department of Homeland Security, and
for other purposes.  Retrieved November 25, 2002 from the World Wide Web:
http://hsc.house.gov/    

United States Fire Administration, Fire Safety Research Agreement Signed (August 18, 1998).  Retrieved November 28, 2002 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/dhtml/media/97-1105.cfm

Rensselaer University Incubator Program (2002).   Retrieved December 1, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.rpi.edu/dept/incubator/homepage/tenants.html


List of acronyms used
DOJ – Department of Justice
FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency
NFPA – National Fire Protection Association (private non-profit organization)
NIST – National Institute of Standards and Technology (part of Commerce Department)
USFA – United States Fire Administration (part of FEMA)

List of relevant websites for future information
http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/
White House Homeland Security web site
http://hsc.house.gov/    
U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Homeland Security web site

http://usfa.fema.gov/
United States Fire Administration