Building new relationships and connections in emergency management: The role of social work practitioners and human service professionals in disaster recovery

Natural-hazard disasters are exacerbated by climate change, and Canada is warming at twice the global rate (Warren & Lullham, 2021). Since 1900, Canada has experienced 844 natural-hazard disasters such as floods, severe storms, extreme cold, drought, wildfires, earthquakes, landslides and epidemics (Agrawal et al., 2021). The cost of natural-hazard disaster from extreme weather average about $2 billion annually and have increased by almost half a billion dollars from a decade ago (Warren & Lulham, 2021) and displaced thousands of people (Public Safety Canada [PSC], 2019). The 2016 Alberta wildfire is recognized as among the worst disasters in Canadian history (Brown et al., 2019). Social workers, and human service professionals, who assist to meet the needs of individuals, families, groups, and communities in overcoming challenges and performing at their optimum level, and who are part of the social service workforce[1], are increasingly involved in the mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery phases of disasters. However, their role is not always visible or understood by emergency management professionals. This article shares the findings of a study on the roles of social work practitioners and human service professionals in long-term disaster recovery.

Shifts in Emergency and Disaster Management: Whole-of-Society Approach

Disaster resilience is one of the foundations of the Government of Canada’s plan, including providing assistance to the most vulnerable (Government of Canada, 2020) and is also a focus of the United Nation’s (2015) Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 in which Canada is a signatory, and states:

it is urgent and critical to anticipate, plan for and reduce disaster risk in order to more effectively protect persons, communities, and countries, their livelihoods, health, cultural heritage, socioeconomic assets and ecosystems, and thus strengthen their resilience (p. 10).

In contrast to the previous Hyogo Framework, the Sendai Framework promotes reducing disaster risks (rather than managing the impact of disasters), thus shifting from reaction to prevention (Mizutori, 2020). The Sendai Framework also emphasizes promoting local solutions, and fostering inclusion, as well as shifting from a top-down centralized approach (government) to a “people-centered” and whole-of-society approach. The implication is that risk reduction becomes everyone’s business, spreading the responsibility across a range of public, private, and hybrid stakeholders.

Similarly, enhancing community-based or whole-of-society approaches and interprofessional collaborations are also the focus of Strategic Priority Areas 1 and 4 (respectively) in the Emergency Management Strategy for Canada (PSC, 2019). More specifically, Strategic Priority Area 1 is to “enhance whole-of-society collaboration and governance to strengthen resilience” (PSC, 2019, p. 10). All members of society and levels of government have an important role to play in emergency management and “include diverse voices at the operational-level and in decision-making processes” (PSC, 2019, p. 10). Such an inclusive approach has two main benefits for both non-emergency management members and emergency management partners (PSC, 2019). First, the improvement of the quality of emergency management and disaster risk reduction (including resilience climate change adaptation) efforts by integrating diverse views, experiences, and capacities. In the context of Indigenous engagement, this includes culturally sensitive and strength-based approaches and co-developing solutions. The second benefit is an enhanced understanding of the broad range of stakeholders and increased engagement. Strategic Priority Area 4 is “enhance disaster response capacity and coordination and foster the development of new capabilities” (PSC, 2019, p. 20). Priority 4 outlines the need for improving emergency management partner training through exercises to test and validate emergency management plans to ensure they are effective throughout all the disaster phases and encourage participation from emergency management partners, and communicating across different sectors[2] (PSC, 2019).

Priority Areas 2, 3, and 5 are also important and complement Priority Areas 1 and 4. Priority Area 2 is to “improve understanding of disaster risks in all sectors of society” (PSC, 2019, p. 13). Priority Area 3 is to “increase focus on whole-of-society disaster prevention and mitigation activities” (PSC, 2019, p. 17). And Priority 5 is “strengthen recovery efforts by building back better to minimize the impacts of future disasters”, with an overall goal of reducing vulnerability to hazards (PSC, 2019, p. 23). In sum, achieving the goals of the Emergency Management Strategy for Canada and the Sendai Framework requires inclusion of all affected stakeholders and interdisciplinary and interprofessional collaborations across the disaster phases.

Inclusion of Vulnerable Populations in Social Work and Disasters

Social work practitioners’ expertise in working with at-risk populations positions them to play an essential role in supporting society’s most vulnerable in times of disaster. A new global definition of social work passed in July 2014 provides the following:

Social Work is a practice-based profession and an academic discipline that promotes

social change and development, social cohesion, and the empowerment and liberation

of people. Principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility, and

respect for diversities are central to social work. Underpinned by theories of social

work, social sciences, humanities and indigenous knowledge, social work engages

people and structures to address life challenges and enhance wellbeing. (International Federation of Social Workers, 2014)

The social work profession adopts an advocacy-based and action-oriented framework for practice, which can facilitate addressing social justice-related issues in ways that align with Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) objectives. Social work practitioners work to ensure the inclusive and accessible participation of communities in the design and implementation of policies, plans, and standards (Miller, 2012), including those related to disasters. People’s individual and collective political, socio-economic and cultural rights, and their right to a safe, clean and healthy environment is at the core of social work and social development education, practice, research and policy debates and actions (IASSW, ICSW, IFSW, 2019).

Social workers play a critical role in supporting people’s preparedness for disasters and in navigating the post-disaster experience, particularly with people who face increased social disadvantage (Harms & Alston, 2018). In disaster contexts, some people are more vulnerable than others even within the same household (Alston et al., 2019). Fordham notes “vulnerability is embedded in complex social relations and processes and is situated squarely at the human-environmental intersection requiring social solutions if successful risk reduction is to occur (Fordham et al., 2013, p. 12). Intersectionality considers the factors (such as age, gender, race, ethnicity, class, disability) that shape vulnerability and resilience in different contexts at different times, for example elderly women (Alston et al., 2019; PSC, 2019; Wisner et al., 2003). Considering the intersectional vulnerabilities of people, it is critically important to take a people-centered approach throughout the disaster phases. Social work practice aims “to address the vulnerability of people and place, to understand the nuances of community in order to assess those on the margins, to foster inclusiveness and to ensure that resources are distributed fairly and equitably” (Alston, Hazeleger, & Hargreaves, 2019, p. 231).

The Sendai Framework’s people-centered approach is similar to that used by the social work profession (Wahlstrom, 2017). According to Alston et al. (2019), social workers around the world are engaged in strategies to build resilience such as assisting communities to undertake disaster risk reduction projects, organizing group work, undertaking community development, empowering local people, and advocating for changes in policies, services and supports. After the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China, social workers developed intervention programs in schools and trained social work students as volunteers to run the activities to build resilience (Sim & Dominelli, 2017). Social workers provided individualized interventions by conducting home visits and working closely with inter-disciplinary professionals for assessments. Social workers are known to use their skills of case management to help recovery in post-disaster (Rowlands, 2013). Following the psychosocial practice intervention in post-disaster recovery in China, social workers promoted the Sichuan model that adopts a whole-of-community approach using the principles of “local participation; culturally relevant ways of being, knowing and coping; self-help including mutual help; employing interdisciplinary approaches among stakeholders; and behaving ethically in a post-disaster context” (Sim & Dominelli, 2017, p. 608).

The field of post disaster social work practice has emerged as part of a broader paradigm shift in national discourses of emergency management in relation to community resilience and the importance of community-led recoveries and codesigned programmatic responses rather than top-down approaches (Harms & Alston, 2018). For example, in Australia, the Victorian Government’s Resilient Recovery Strategy is engaged in a highly consultative process to address these critical elements, which recognizes the need for interdisciplinary involvement and one where social work has a major contribution to make, not only at the front line of supporting people to restore their lives, but also in policy and research efforts (Harms & Alston, 2018).

Making a Case for Interprofessional Collaborations

Social work practitioners have a long history of providing humanitarian support during disasters (Dominelli, 2015). Historically, social work has emphasized emergency relief and services in wartime, disaster, and crisis situations requiring a volunteer cadre particularly in health and mental health services (Zakour, 1996). Recent research found that social work practitioners in Alberta are increasingly involved in all phases of disaster management, including disaster preparedness and long-term recovery (Drolet et al., 2021). The involvement of social workers in disaster contexts is increasing in the following areas: advocacy, assessment, advice on policy and practice, community redevelopment, outreach, social services, service coordination, psychosocial support, and trauma counseling (Drolet et al., 2021). A more comprehensive list of the roles of social work practitioners in disaster contexts is described in detail in the Findings and Discussion section below. As disasters continue to increase, so will the demand for social work practitioners. Despite social workers’ engagement in disaster and emergency management, their contributions are largely invisible and not recognized (Drolet et al., 2021; Hay & Pascoe, 2018).

Disaster management is complex and requires a comprehensive approach and interprofessional collaborations to be effective. Emergency management evolved from the civil defense programs of the 1950s (Canton, 2020). Emergency management personnel often have a background in military, police, and firefighting and the preparatory training tends to focus on first response or the tactical response level. Emergency Social Services is an emergency program that is run by emergency management to support individuals’ basic needs of food, clothing, shelter, and pet care when they have been impacted by a disaster within 72 hours of the event. It is important to recognize that emergency social services (often volunteers) and social work practitioners (registered professionals) occupy different roles in different spaces. The emergency management tactical response method is the Incident Command System (ICS) (see Figure 3.5 in Canton, 2020) which is “a standardized on-site management system designed to enable effective, efficient incident management by integrating a combination of facilities, equipment, personnel, procedures, and communications operating within a common organizational structure” (Microtek Corporation, 2021, para. 1). This hierarchical structure of command facilitates clear communication during the intense crisis period but does not allow enough time to tailor attention to the needs of specific individuals or social groups. Social work practitioners focus on the individual, family, group and community in ways that are participatory, collaborative, and build agency. Research shows that disaster recovery can take a long time (Brown et al., 2019; Drolet, 2019). Social work and emergency management practitioners can work together as allies to leverage each other’s strengths in the journey to rebuild and strengthen resilience.

[1] The social service workforce refers to government and nongovernmental professionals and paraprofessionals who work with children, youth, adults, older persons, families and communities to ensure healthy development and well-being (Global Social Service Workforce Alliance, 2021).

[2]Emergencies require immediate action and are at a smaller scale than disasters which cause significant damage or loss of life. Emergency management focuses on the preparedness and response strategies and is typically managed by emergency managers, first responders, and protection services. Disaster management has a broader scope, focused on all phases (preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation). A broader range of stakeholders at different organizational and societal levels are involved in disaster management (IPCC, 2012).