6446-Communication and Transparency For The Governance of Crisis Response-Br

Communication and
Transparency for the

Governance of Crisis
Response.
At a Glance
Flows of information across levels of government during a

crisis are challenged by issues of security, institutional culture,
incomplete information, and jurisdictional confusion. Within the
private sector, they are generally better across sectors than
between competitors.
Social media has radically altered the playing field in crisis

communications: information flows in two directions, and citizens
expectations regarding the speed, quantity, and quality of
communications during a crisis are higher than ever.
The quality of communications during a crisis can either magnify

or reduce the impact of the crisis. Even when emergency
response is effective, it can appear weak if crisis communications
are handled poorly.
BRIEFING AUGUST 2014

For the exclusive use of Remi Aborode, remi@accamail.com, TVDSB.
Communication and Transparency for the Governance of Crisis Response
Executive Summary
In 2007, The Conference Board of Canada
published a report entitled A Resilient Canada:
Governance for National Security and Public
Safety. The report was drafted after a CBoC-
convened meeting of public and private sector
leaders identified a lack of clarity around
governance as the greatest threat to national
security and public safety. The report outlined
six principles for multi-party crisis response.
This document presents an overview of the
developments in Canada with respect to one
of these principles, communication and
transparency.
This briefing conceives of crisis communications as information flows
both within and between responding entities, as well as from these
entities to the media and the public. Along these two dimensions,
the briefing investigates the degree to which the communication and
transparency principle has been integrated into Government of Canada
policy, as determined via relevant, publicly available operational
guidelines and strategic documents. This information is supplemented
with findings from interviews with a small sample of Canadian-based
experts in the fieldincluding academics, media commentators, and
practitioners in the public and private sectorsas well as information
from open sources, to illustrate how communications and transparency
structures have played out in practice over the past five years.
Prominent themes in this briefing include:
the role of the private sector in crisis communications;

the relationship between communications, transparency, trust,
and public confidence;
the implications of social medias increased prevalence.
Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 6

The Conference Board of Canada. All rights reserved. Please contact cboc.ca/ip with questions or concerns about the use of this material.
The Conference Board of Canada
This briefings key findings are illustrated in a case study comparison of

crisis communications in two municipalitiesCalgary and High River
during the 2013 southern Alberta floods.
Since effective communications are expected to be frequent, clear,

and credible, the widespread use of social media has placed new
requirements on crisis communicators. They are now expected to
communicate with unprecedented levels of speed and transparency,
and to act as senders and receivers of information flows to and from
the public. Overall, this briefing assesses that, despite some incidents
of confusion, responding entities are quite competent; it is more often
the case that poor crisis communication gives the impression of a weak
response, when the response is in fact quite effective. Accordingly, the
briefing concludes with a metaphor that views crisis communications as
a lens through which the given elements of a crisis are refracted to either
magnify or reduce its impact.
Introduction
In 2007, The Conference Board of Canada published a report entitled A
Resilient Canada: Governance for National Security and Public Safety.
The report was developed with a group of public and private sector
leaders directly involved in Canadian national security and public safety,
who identified a lack of clarity around governance as the greatest
threat to national security and public safety in Canada.1 The significance
of ambiguous governance structures as a threat to national security and
public safety cannot be overstated: delayed or contradictory messaging
can cause a loss of valuable time during a crisis situation and can open
up gaps in response or lead to duplication of efforts.
In response to this problem, the 2007 report elaborated six key principles
for the governance of multi-party crisis response. (See box Principles
of Effective Response.) This briefing examines the degree to which
the communication and transparency principle has been adopted and
1 Munn-Venn and Archibald, A Resilient Canada, 4.

employed by relevant actors. As defined in the original Conference

Board of Canada report, this multi-dimensional principle seeks to ensure
frequent, clear, and credible communications between responders and
the public. Accordingly, effective governance structures must address
the coordination of communication among responders, assurance that
communications technologies will function during a crisis, and effective
media and public engagement.
The research presented here received Government of Canada funding,

via Public Safety Canadas Research Affiliate Program and associated
Kanishka Project,2 for research related to terrorism and counter-terrorism
in the Canadian context.
Principles of Effective Response
Leadership and Accountability: Leadership and accountability must be clearly

defined and recognized when responding to national security and public
safety incidents.
Cooperation and Coordination: Organizations responding to a disaster must be

able to work together effectively toward a common goal.
Mandate and Resources: Organizations and individuals require clearly defined

mandates that other responders recognize, as well as adequate resources to do
the job.
Communication and Transparency: This principle has several elements, but

the fundamental goal is to ensure that communication is frequent, clear,
and credible.
Fairness: When responding to an emergency, it is essential to treat all

stakeholders fairly.
2 Through the Kanishka Project, the Government of Canada has invested $10 million
over five years to research terrorism and counter-terrorism. For more information on the
initiatives research themes, visit www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/ntnl-scrt/cntr-trrrsm/r-nd-
flght-182/knshk/rsrch-thms-eng.aspx.

Continuous Learning: Observations about what went wrong in response to a

disaster must be translated into a change in behaviour.
Source: Munn-Venn, Trefor, and Andrew Archibald. A Resilient Canada:

Governance for National Security and Public Safety. Ottawa: The Conference
Board of Canada, 2007.
The communications governance principle is relevant for a wide variety

of national security and public safety emergencies. In any situation
where communications are not effectively managed, information flows
will be hampered and widespread public confusion, or even civil unrest,
may ensue.
In Canada, many emergency managers aim to take an all-hazards

approach to emergency management. This approach allows crisis
communicators, and emergency managers more broadly, to manage
events irrespective of their cause. Furthermore, since Canada has
experienced few terrorism-related incidents in recent years, it is essential
to draw on experience from other public safety emergencies in order to
prepare for a potential large-scale terrorist attack in the future. Therefore,
although this briefing is not specific to the terrorism context, it furthers
the overarching goal of Public Safety Canadas Kanishka Project with
respect to generating practical tools for front-line individuals, and it
contributes knowledge to the respond pillar highlighted in Public Safety
Canadas Building Resilience Against Terrorism: Canadas Counter-
Terrorism Strategy, which entails proportionate, rapid, and organized
responses to terrorist incidents. The report addresses the strategys
requirements for coordination of effort across federal government
agencies, levels of government, private sector stakeholders, and the
general public, as well as requirements for public communications in the
event of a terrorist incident.

Methodology and Approach

This briefing seeks to define how communication and transparency
have been integrated into response frameworks and actions of first
responders, in order to provide more efficient and effective emergency
response. It deals with two overarching themes: information flows within
and across responding entities; and public communications and media
engagement.3 Along these two dimensions, the briefing investigates the
degree to which the communication and transparency principle has been
integrated into Government of Canada policy, as determined via relevant,
publicly available operational guidelines and strategic documents.
This information is supplemented with findings from a small sample of
qualitative interviews with Canadian-based experts in the fieldincluding
academics, media commentators, and practitioners in the public and
private sectorsas well as information from open sources, to provide
a preliminary illustration of how communications and transparency
structures have played out in practice over the past five years. Prominent
themes include the role of the private sector; the relationship between
communications, transparency, trust, and public confidence; and, in
particular, the implications of social medias increased prevalence.
Information Flows Within and Across

Responding Entities
The organization of communications among responders and
stakeholders is inherent to another of the 2007 reports governance
principles: cooperation and coordination. To effectively cooperate or
communicate, clear lines of communicationin terms of articulating
goals as well as who is doing what, where, and whenare necessary.
It is when response organizations have poor communications among
themselves that gaps and duplication of efforts are most likely to
emerge. Communication among responders is especially important when
3 Emergency telecommunicationsthat is, the requirement that communications

technologies will function during a crisis and thus uphold information flowsare
addressed in Appendix A.

one considers that crisis response often involves multiple jurisdictions

and a plethora of entities. A single crisis may involve all levels of
government; first respondersfire, police, and emergency medical
services (EMS); non-governmental organizations; and private sector
owners and operators of affected infrastructure. Strong communication
flows between these actors directly translate into a more effective and
efficient response.
The Three Levels of Government

Federal Level
At the federal level in Canada, the structure of required communication
flows is outlined in the Federal Emergency Response Plan (FERP).4
As an all-hazards response plan, the FERPs stated purpose is to
harmonize federal emergency response efforts with those of the
provinces/territorial governments, non-governmental organizations,
and the private sector.5 The plan assigns roles for federal government
institutions, identifying which will be the primary, supporting, and
coordinating departments to provide particular emergency support
functions. Public Safety Canada retains a federal coordinating role,
as it is the Minister of Public Safety who is mandated to do so under
the Emergency Management Act (2007). The department is also
charged with primary responsibility for communication activities during
emergencies for federal government institutions and their provincial/
territorial, international, and non-governmental partners.6 Many
other federal institutions are accorded a general supporting role for
communications in an emergency.
4 The technological requirements for communications, as exemplified in Canadas

Communications Interoperability Strategy (published 2011), are discussed in Appendix A.
5 Government of Canada, Federal Emergency Response Plan, 1.
6 Emergency support function (ESF) #12, as outlined in the Federal Emergency Response
Plan.

Despite stating that the plan will be republished annually,7 the FERP
was last amended in December 2010 and republished subsequently in
January 2011. Interviewees for this briefing presented differing opinions
on the FERPs effectiveness in terms of coordinating information flows.
One interviewee with decades of experience in federal departments
was unambiguous in his praise of the planIt absolutely works
which was contrasted with a more skeptical view from a municipal
emergency management (EM) professional: I dont know if theres
complete agreement on how the information flows and when. Maybe
agreement is there, but that could be communicated or shared with
the municipalities. This difference in opinion suggests that the FERP
works more effectively among federal agencies than across levels
of government.
Provincial/Territorial Level
At the provincial/territorial level, there is no standard method for
crisis communications across each province/territory, although each
province/territory maintains strong communications structures both
within the province and with the federal government. Generally, intra-
organizational communications structures are most clearly defined,
while communications with other provincial/territorial organizations
and the federal government tend to vary according to the nature of the
given emergency.
Municipal Level
At the municipal level, there is greater variation in communications
structures, with large urban centres being generally better equipped than
smaller cities and towns. At one end of the spectrum are cities such
as Calgary, which have practiced and tested contingency planseach
including a crisis communications annexin place. At the other end of
the spectrum, however, are the roughly 80 per cent of municipalities
according to the Calgary Emergency Management Agencys (CEMAs)

Manager of Emergency Management and Agency Planning8 that have

neither crisis communications structures nor emergency management
models in place. Resources in municipalities are often allocated (or not
allocated) to EM as a function of risk assessments or prior experience
with emergencies; and smaller towns or rural areas low levels of
investment in this area may result from their low perceived levels of risk
based on experience.
The Private Sector

Flows of information are further complicated when crises affect both
public and private sector stakeholders.9 Canadas National Strategy
for Critical Infrastructure (2009) seeks to build a safer, more secure
and more resilient Canada [by advancing] more coherent and
complementary actions among federal, provincial and territorial
initiatives and among the ten critical infrastructure sectors.10 Clear
communications is one of the principles of cooperation that the
strategy emphasizes.
Annual meetings bringing together representatives from each sector

appear to do a good job coordinating communications between sectors,
by offering a forum to discuss inter-sector impacts. Interviewees,
however, identified variations in the degree of coordination and
information sharing within each sector. For example, the energy
and utilities sector was identified as having robust sharing, while
the water sectordespite its significancewas identified as lacking
strong public and private partnerships. Many interviewees identified
challenges in the information and communication technology sector
due to telecommunications companies fight for customers and their
unwillingness to share proprietary information, especially concerning
8 Greg Solecki (Calgary Emergency Management Agency), phone interview with author,
October 15, 2013.
9 Since approximately 85 per cent of critical infrastructure (CI) in Canada is owned or
operated by the private sector, such flows are inevitable.
10 Public Safety Canada, National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure, 2. The 10 CI sectors
are energy and utilities; finance; food; transportation; government; information and
communication technology; health; water; safety; and manufacturing.

network vulnerabilities, which could lead to financial losses. Some

interviewees commented that the federal government must play a greater
role in improving information flows and in mediating information sharing
among competing telecommunications companies.
General Challenges to Information Flows Across

Responding Entities
Despite the coordination efforts described above and overall
assessments that pathways for communication exist, interviewees
identified the following four interconnected barriers to inter- and intra-
organizational flows of information during crises:
1. security sensitivity
2. institutional culture
3. partial information
4. jurisdictional confusion
1. Security Sensitivity
While issues remain around the sharing of sensitive information with
relevant players, interviewees discussed progress that has been made
in this area. For instance, most companies in critical infrastructure
industries have representatives who have been pre-approved for
secret clearance during the planning phase, so that they are eligible to
receive classified information during the crisis itself. At the more local
level, however, one interviewee identified a hesitance on the part of
police servicesmunicipal or the RCMPto share certain operational
information over concerns about security sensitivity. The result is that
the public does not have access to key information that could affect
them and the carrying out of their daily activities. For example, during
the 2011 royal tour, Calgary experienced difficulties when the RCMP did
not share information about timing and venue selection that resulted in
road closures and challenges for traffic and transit services. There is a
concern that sharing certain information might compromise operational
success, andin the case of criminal activitiesthat sharing sensitive
information might complicate criminal investigation or prosecution. When

business interests are involved, players in both the public and private
sectors are hesitant to share proprietary information that might have an
impact on competitive practices.
2. Institutional Culture
Even where no issues exist regarding sensitive information, institutional
stovepipes can impede effective communication. For example, the
2007 report documented the animosity between New York Citys
fire and police services that created a breakdown in the sharing of
evacuation orders during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
While interviewees stated that there is no hostility between first
responders themselves, one interviewee identified an institutional
culture among operational managers that impedes information flows
to communications officials. This problem exists due to the perception
among some operational managers that they are doing the real work
and that communications people need to get in line. The challenge
with managing public confidence, however, is that, even if an effective
response is under way, perception is all-important, thereby underlining
the crucial nature of the crisis communications effort.
3. Partial Information
Even when a lot of information is shared among players at the outset
of an emergency, nobody has a clear or complete picture of what is
happening; information is always incomplete. Compounding this reality
is the public sectors risk-averse institutional culture: public servants
are generally unaccustomed toand uncomfortable withmaking
public statements with little lead time and based on partial information.
However, as one interviewee put it: Crises unfold in real time, not
planning time or comfort-level time. This means that responders cannot
wait until they have a comprehensive understanding of the situation
before communicating with one another or the public, although there may
be a tendency for some actors to do just that.

4. Jurisdictional Confusion
Despite the fact that harmoniz[ing] federal emergency response efforts
with those of the provinces/territorial governments, non-governmental
organizations, and the private sector is the FERPs stated purpose,11
confusion remains about who is responsible under certain conditions.
For instance, during the 2009 H1N1 (swine flu) pandemic, there was
a communications breakdown regarding who could acquire and provide
Tamiflu vaccinations.
With a worldwide shortage of the vaccine, jurisdictional confusion made

the situation worse. As one interviewee put it, People end up looking
up the chain. You go to the city, then the province, then the federal
government when youre looking for answers. However, even though
the pandemic was affecting the entire country, since municipalities had
not declared states of local emergency, there was no clear, ultimate,
command authority. A communications breakdown ensued, despite
the fact that many major urban centres had successfully practised and
exercised pandemic plans. In this case, jurisdictional confusion was
compounded by partial information.
Public Communications and Media Engagement

In addition to information flows among responding entities, information
during a crisis must also flow between these entities and the public,
either directly or via media outlets. These information flows are not
simply to manage perceptions and build trust and confidence in the
resolution of the crisis, but also to serve as an important alert or warning
function. Crisis communications must effectively and credibly transmit
directions to the public concerning required individual responses. In all
of the interviews conducted, respondents were generally satisfied with
the level of communication among responders (despite the enduring
challenges to governance listed above), but identified numerous
instances where public communications complicated perceptions of
otherwise effective emergency responses.

Community Relations
During a crisis, it is important that communicators have a strong
relationship with the community in need. The communications
surrounding the Lac-Mgantic train disaster in July 2013 was cited
by multiple interviewees as an example of poor communications,
predominantly because the Montreal, Maine and Atlantic Railway
(MM&A) failed to effectively approach and acknowledge the affected
community. The companys first news release was issued only in
English, despite Lac-Mgantic being a francophone town. It was then
reissued with a poor translation, seemingly completed via a digital
translation program: a slap in the face for a suffering community, as
one interviewee put it. In addition, the company chairman took four days
to arrive on the scene and, in the eyes of locals, appeared to act without
compassion when he finally did.
Even when emergency response is effective, weak public

communications can give the impression that the response is more
poorly managed than it actually is. The 2007 report cited the 1998 ice
storm to this effect, and information gleaned from interviews confirms
that this challenge largely persists. For example, following the June
2012 mall collapse in Elliot Lake, Ontario, the individual providing the
vast majority of front-end communications had been brought in from
Toronto and communications were provided on a technical level.12 These
communications from an outsider were useful and important, but were
not intended to focus on local, community needs; they therefore were
not able to foster the healing process.13 This incident highlights the need
for involving local community leaders, political or otherwise, in the crisis
communications process.14
12 See the timeline provided in CBC News, Elliot Lake Mall Collapse: Tracking the
Rescue Effort.
13 See, for instance, Friscolanti, Elliot Lake: The First Rescuers.
14 In a blog post entitled The Communications Complaint, MacGillivray argues that, in a
crisis, the publics feelings are perhaps more significant than their objective reasoning. In
failing to effectively connect withand provide information tothe affected communities,
responders are unable to project confidence in their response, however effective it may in
fact be.

Although local leadership is particularly important, one interviewee

emphasized that during a crisis, the public has a tendency not
to distinguish between the levels of government; rather, it views
government as a monolithic entity. It is therefore particularly important
for government actors to speak with a unified voice to minimize confusion
and maximize confidence in the message being disseminated.15 Trust
that the responding entities are in control of the situation is important
not just in terms of public perceptions, but also in terms of individual
response behaviours.
Crisis Communications 2.0: Social Media and Public

Engagement
Effective crisis response requires information to flow frequently, clearly,
and credibly both within and between responding entities, as well as
from these entities to the media and the public. To this end, social media
has radically altered the crisis communications playing field: we are now
operating in an era of crisis communications 2.0, where information
flows in two directions and citizens expectations about the speed,
quantity, and quality of communications during a crisis are higher than
ever before.
To reach the affected community, it is important to communicate via the

same modes of communication the population regularly uses. Since
the 2007 reports publication, these modes of communication have
shifted from traditional media to social media platforms such as Twitter,
Facebook, Instagram, and Vine. It was approximately in 2007 that this
form of media gained currency in crisis communications in most of
15 Efforts to consolidate messaging, however, must be mediated: mechanisms for airing

dissenting opinions and preventing the most powerful (but not necessarily best-equipped)
voice from dominating the conversation must be considered.

Canada, but not until 2012 (with the student protests in Montral) that the
surge in public organizations use of social media during crises became
more evident.16,17
The widespread use of social media has changed crisis communications

to such an extent that most interviewees claimed true comparisons
cannot even be drawn between public crisis communications in 2007 and
now; the context has changed so drastically that we are now playing an
entirely different game. One interviewee commented that social media is
moving so quickly thatalthough his municipality had been consistently
recognized as effectively employing social mediathe municipalitys
crisis communications procedures and policies, as formally written, were
vastly out of date.
Increasing social media usage means that there is no longer a linear

process of controlled information flows from responding entities to the
public. Whereas in the past it could take hours before any information
on a crisis was made public or broadcast, today individual citizens
surviving residents and passers-by, the first first responders, in the
words of Groenendaal and Scanlonare able to instantaneously share
pictures, videos, or tweets even before first responders arrive at the
scene.18 As one interviewee put it, You have to move at the speed of
your audiencethat is, the speed of social networksor else you lose
your relevance. The ubiquitous online sharing of information places
extra requirements on responding entities in terms of transparency and
the requirement to provide information. Pre-approved messaging and
dark websitesin which organizations prepare specific website content
ready to be published live to the Internet in the event of a given crisis
allow communications departments to occupy the public space as early
as possible following crisis onset, to show the public that the government
16 Hartley, Post-Event Recap.

17 For instance, during the Slave Lake fire of 2011, there were significant voids in both
internal and external communications. It was not until the recovery period that social
media was introduced as a means of providing information. See Northern Alberta
Development Council, Wisdom Gained.
18 Groenendaal and Scanlon, Phase One: Bystanders.

is in control of the situation. Considering the required preparation for

this, emergency management organizations need to build a strong social
media messaging presence ahead of any crisis.
Social media also involves two-way flows of information: it is not

simply about getting the message out, but also about monitoring social
mediato gauge the effectiveness of messaging strategies and to gain
situational awarenessand actively engaging with the population. For
instance, social media monitoring allows emergency managers to adjust
messaging strategies that are not being appropriately acted upon, to
provide reassurance, to detect and dispel rumours, to identify factors
that might threaten their reputation (which could in turn affect their ability
to fulfil their response mandate), and to receive information regarding
damage assessment or suspicious activities.
However, a significant gap remains between the publics expectations

and responders capabilities with respect to social media monitoring.
An October 2012 Canadian Red Cross survey found that one in three
Canadians believes emergency services will respond to calls for help
posted on social media; a majority of these respondents expect that
help would arrive within an hour.19 In Canada, however, while some
organizations do have the resources and capacity to monitor social
media, 9-1-1 centres are not presently monitoring social networks for
help requests.20
Canadas official bilingualism policy presents particular challenges for the

use of social media that are not present in other jurisdictions. Because
federal agencies must disseminate communications simultaneously in
both official languages, there are technological barriers that exist to the
Canadian federal government fully harnessing social medias potential.
This challenge was recently highlighted by Environment Canadas public
safety alerts about tornadoes.21
19 Canadian Red Cross, Social Media During Emergencies.

20 Royal Canadian Mounted Police, 911 and the Trouble With Technology.
21 See Leo, Environment Canada Tornado Tweets.

While the game has changed to a significant degree, interviewees

generally conceded that the rise of social media has not put an end
to traditional media. Major urban centres across Canada have shifted
toward crisis communications 2.0, but in smaller cities and towns there
is either a lack of recognition of social medias importance or a lack of
resources, technology, or expertise that would enable organizations to
adopt modern crisis communications postures. There is a need to get
social-media-oriented processes down on paper to facilitate sharing
of best practices across jurisdictions. Nevertheless, given that 36 per
cent of Canadiansincluding some of those emergency management
professionals who earned their experience in the pre-social media era
do not participate in online communities,22 traditional media will still be
required to reach this portion of the population.23
Social Media: A New Platform for Issues Management
In a recent poll of English-speaking Canadians, nearly two-thirds of respondents

said they had used social media in the past month; 71 per cent of those
identifying as Internet users considered themselves to be active social media
users.24 With such widespread public use of these new communications
platformsincluding Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and Vineit is essential for
crisis communicators to make use of these same modes of communications to
get the message out. These platforms enable crisis communicators to establish
credible information flows directly with individual citizens well in advance of a
crisis, such as via a municipal Twitter handle.
Given social medias capacity to quickly capture images and to disseminate

information in real time, citizens have increasingly high expectations of crisis
communicators. They expect that crisis communicators will:
22 Canadian Red Cross, Social Media During Emergencies, 2.

23 Furthermore, given the possibility that Internet technologies may not work during a given
crisis (see Appendix A), it is essential to have alternate means of communications in place
and ready to function in any contingency.
24 Oliveira, Canadians Social Media Use Plateauing, Mobile Usage Surging.

transmit messages with unprecedented speed and volume, with

frequent updating;
maintain a high degree of transparency and accuracy;
act as both senders and receivers of information flows;
actively monitor social media for calls for help (often a false assumption).
Traditional media outlets are similarly playing a dual role with respect to social
media: they are using it both as a platform and as a source from which to draw
reporting. There is no longer a linear process of controlled information flows
from responding entities to the public.
Although 9-1-1 centres in Canada are not monitoring social media for calls for
assistance, social media does provide a new source of information for crisis
communicators and governments. It allows them to:
monitor social media to test whether messaging strategies are effective,

especially with respect to providing instructions for individual response;
acquire situational awareness, based on damage assessments and reports of
suspicious activities.
Working With and Through the Media

Traditional media outlets can be an effective conduit for information, but
newsmakers also seek to sell headlines and stories that are not always
conducive to a healthy crisis response. This situation becomes more
likely when responders fail to communicate clear facts.
The 2007 Conference Board of Canada report provided the example of

sensationalized media reports of criminal gang looting that did not at all
match reality during the communications blackout that occurred when
Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans in 2005.25 Interviewees for this
briefing perceived Canadian media as responsible actors who typically
interact well with emergency operations centres (EOCs). Building
25 Munn-Venn and Archibald, A Resilient Canada, 15.

strong relations between the media and the responding EOC was also
highlighted as a best practice in a recent Conference Board of Canada
review of the 2013 Calgary flood.26
Although the media are important for conveying responders

transparency, recent crises show that challenges do remain in this field.
For instance, when the town of Slave Lake was evacuated during the
2011 wildfire, the medias access to the site was restricted; they were
allowed only one bus tour for footage and were subsequently provided
with information only via the EOC. In such casesand particularly when
dramatic images and videos are shared through social media at the
onset of a crisispublic perceptions suffer because people expect the
media to continue their direct, frequent, and transparent reporting.
The Importance of Transparency for Public Trust and

Confidence
In communicating with the public, whether by traditional or social media,
transparency is key. In the words of one interviewee, Transparency
and communications are essentially one and the same. Perceptions
of transparency are bolstered when the public has confidence in, and
trusts, the communicating entity. To this end, communicators are best
poised to succeed when they have long-standing, strong relationships
with their respective communities. In a social media context, these
relationships require municipalities or other responding entities to use
the same social media platforms their citizens are using, and to build
pre-existing network followings. Likewise, communications between
responding entities are strongest when the pathways of communication
are clearly defined well in advance of an emergency. The middle of a
disaster, one interviewee asserted, is not the time to be handing out
business cards.
There is thus a feedback loop between effective, transparent

communications and organizational effectiveness, where public
trust and confidence serves as a mediator. During the crisis itself,
26 Vroegop, Forewarned and Forearmed, 58.

when communications are effective, citizens are more likely to follow

warnings and instructions for individual response (such as evacuation
orders or health and safety tips) because they have confidence in the
communicating entity. This, in turn, bolsters organizational effectiveness.
When communications are ineffective, organizational effectiveness
is reduced because citizens are either unaware of instructional
guidelines for personal action or they do not perceive that the guidelines
communicated to them are in their best interest. The effects of trust (or
a lack thereof) in a communicating entity are cumulative: mishandled
communications in one crisis are likely to reduce citizens trust of
communications in future scenarios.
Case Study: Crisis Communications in Calgary and High

River
In June 2013, extremely high volumes of rainfall caused several rivers in

southern Alberta to increase in size and flow, producing the worst flooding in the
provinces history. With over 100,000 citizens displaced, 32 local governments
had declared states of local emergency, and costs of response and recovery
have been estimated to be as high as $6 billion.27
At the provincial and federal levels, both Albertas then-premier Alison Redford
and Prime Minister Stephen Harper pledged financial assistance in the early
days of the crisis and maintained a physical presence in the affected areas. At
the municipal level, however, there was disparity in responses. In the interviews
for this briefing, comparisons were frequently drawn between the responses
of Calgary and High River, the former as an example of effective crisis
communications by a well-prepared, larger city that improved resilience and
generated a speedy response and the latter as a case study that revealed the
problematic crisis communications in a much smaller municipality.
In Calgary, both the City and the Calgary Police Service were actively engaged
in online media efforts, providing frequently updated Google maps of evacuation
areas, blog posts, and tweets. At the onset of the crisis, the citys Twitter handle
doubled its following, reaching 41,000 registered followers by the second
27 Wood, Province Boosts Cost of Alberta Floods to $6 Billion.

day of flooding. Communications teams were also actively involved in social

media monitoring, responding to questions and correcting misinformation.
Even before the flood hit, Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi had been recognized
for his appreciation of the value of timely, consistent, and high-quality public
communications; this crisis scenario was no exception, and his visible leadership
role served to reassure the public.
In High River, it was the Calgary Police Service that first tweeted for boat
owners volunteer assistance. In terms of local leadership, there were a number
of different actors, each following separate agendas and contributing different
messages to the overall uncertainty. This stands in contrast to the general unity
of effort and clarity of messaging that was observed in Calgary.28 There was
particular frustration on the part of the towns 13,000 residentsall of whom
had been evacuatedwith respect to a lack of communication and clarity from
officials concerning the timeline for post-evacuation returns. In the lead-up to the
flood, High Rivers investment in emergency management had been quite low,
reflecting the limited resources of a town its size. As one interviewee familiar
with the situation noted, the municipality did not have a flood contingency plan
or response manual in place, nor did they have a practiced, general emergency
management model to follow. These structures had to be built on the spot,
and with efforts focused on establishing a minimally functioning emergency
operations centre (EOC) (an immense task under regular circumstances, and
further exacerbated by the EOCs flooding), no communications structures
were in place until representatives from out of town arrived to provide
assistance. Communications suffered, as did public confidence in the overall
response effort.
While these differences in response can be attributed to the obvious disparity

in community size and available resources, one interviewee emphasized that
having an exercised, practiced, and validated flood manual in place should
be feasible regardless of a towns budget and population. A large portion of
Calgarys success in crisis communications was attributed to its experience with
major floodingthe after-action report of the 2005 flood generated a number of
recommendations, all of which had been acted upon to a degreebut also to its
Flood Emergency Manual and corresponding communications annex, which had
been practised and served to streamline responses. This manual has already
been updated to incorporate learnings from the 2013 flood.
28 Vroegop, Forewarned and Forearmed, 59.

Communications and Crisis Outcomes

Although Canadas record over the past five years has not been perfect,
the majority of interviewees emphasized that responding entities
are quite competent. Instead of observing actual weak responses,
interviewees noted that emergency response is often quite effective, but
can appear weak when crisis communications are lacking. While new
challenges are being posed by the ubiquity of social media, responding
entities are aware of the requirement to meet the demands of social
networks and mobile technologies.
Impediments to Building Strong Crisis Communications

Networks
Several interviewees identified the loss of the Canadian Emergency

Management College (CEMC)a federal college, hosted by Public Safety
Canada, for training stakeholders with an emergency management roleas
an impediment to building strong crisis communications networks. Even before
CEMC was closed, its crisis communications course had been discontinued,
since it dealt primarily with physical technology and, for lack of resources, had
not been upgraded to reflect the present technological context.
In January 2013, the Canadian Centre for Emergency Preparedness, a federally

incorporated not-for-profit organization, also closed its doors, reflecting a trend
of decreased resources being allocated to emergency management training
at the federal level. EM training options continue to exist; for example, Public
Safety offers training via the Canada School of Public Service, and a number of
Canadian universities and colleges offer theory-based and applied educational
programs, including bachelors degrees, masters degrees, certificates, and
diploma programs.
A notable example of emergency management education is the Justice Institute

of British Columbia (JIBC), a public, post-secondary institution with a dedicated
School of Public Safety & Security that offers bachelors degrees in public
safety administration and emergency and security management studies. What

remains lacking at the national level is a forum for cross-country interactions

and the hands-on training in emergency management that the federal college
previously provided.
Crisis Communications as a Lens

As this briefing has intended to demonstrate, crisis communications can
literally be conceived of as a lens through which the given elements
of a crisis are refracted to either magnify or reduce the impact of the
crisis. When communications are robust, they act as a convex lens,
converging the crisiss effects narrowly to a clear focal point. With weak
crisis communications, the corresponding lens is concave, bending the
crisis rays outward and diverging its effects even more widely than the
given input. (See Exhibit 1.) In physics, a diverging lens produces what
is called a negative focal length, since the incoming light rays diverge
after passing through the lens and thus never intersect at a focal point
or produce a real image after the lenss refraction. Carried through to
the present metaphor, weak communications quite literally produce a
negative effect: they can generate a complete lack of clarity in crisis
scenarios that not only influences public perceptions in the short and
long terms, but also confuses messaging in terms of required actions
during the crisis itself.
Requirements for Robust Crisis Communications
Before the crisis:
Address existing barriers to sharing sensitive information among relevant players

in the public and private sectors.
Get social-media-related processes on paper to facilitate sharing of best
practices and procedures across jurisdictions.
Clarify jurisdictional responsibilities prior to crisis onset.
Reduce hostilities that may exist in the institutional cultures of responders and
communications officials.

Exhibit 1
Crisis Communications as a Lens
How robust communications minimize crisis effects:
COMMUNICATIONS
ROBUST
CRISIS EFFECTS
How weak communications aggravate crisis effects:
COMMUNICATIONS
WEAK
CRISIS EFFECTS
Establish rapport between government communicators and citizens via social

media platforms.
During the crisis:
Occupy the public space as early as possible following crisis onset (e.g., via pre-
approved messaging or dark websites); do not postpone communications until
a complete picture of the crisis has emerged.
Optimize information flows within and across responding entities (emphasizing
interoperability), as well as with the public and media.

Transmit messages via the same communications platforms used by the public,
including social and traditional media.
Encourage responsible reporting practices among the media and provide
journalists with the information and access necessary to do so.
Ensure that communications are frequent, clear, and credible and provide timely
updates to show that authorities are in control of the situation.
Maintain transparency and coordinate government messaging to build credibility,
minimize confusion, and quickly dispel rumours and misinformation.
Employ communicators who have a strong relationship or affiliation with the
community in need and ensure linguistic compatibility.
After the crisis:
Assess the effectiveness of crisis messaging (e.g., via social media monitoring)
and update processes accordingly.
Update crisis communications plans to reflect learning from previous crises and
to reflect advances in communications technologies.
Conclusion
This briefing considered both robust and weak crisis communications
occurring in Canada over the past five years. While on the whole, crisis
responders in Canada are attempting to clarify lines of communications,
structure, and command, social media has introduced new challenges
as well as opportunities for bolstered responsethat make comparisons
with crisis communications identified in the 2007 Conference Board
of Canada report difficult. Social media has radically altered the
communications landscape for emergency managers.
Despite a changed operational environment, certain challenges are

enduring. Security sensitivity, institutional culture, partial information,
and confusion over where jurisdictional boundaries lie all appear to pose
barriers to inter-jurisdictional crisis communication flows (that is, the
flows across levels of government and between responding entities).
In addition, transparency, trust, and public confidence continue to
shapeand be influenced bythe quality of crisis communications flows
between media, authorities, and the public. Strong community relations

and effective leadership are essential. As with all areas of governance

and emergency management, the stage must be set for crisis
communicationsboth as information flows and as communications
technologieswell in advance of an actual emergency.
Tell us how were doingrate this publication.

www.conferenceboard.ca/e-Library/abstract.aspx?did=6446

Appendix A | The Conference Board of Canada
APPENDIX A
Emergency
Communications
and Communications
Technologies
Industry Canadas Telecommunication Incident Notification Guidelines

(2013) recognizes that [s]ociety is more reliant than ever on
telecommunications infrastructure. Unavailability of telecommunications
can result in adverse security, public safety (including response and
recovery capabilities) and economic consequences. Information and
communications technologies, as critical infrastructure that might be
affectedor even explicitly targeted by malicious actorsin a crisis,
are thus an object of security in and of themselves and underpin the
requirement of open and clear information flows.
Communications technologies are both an object of security (that is,

something to be secured) and a tool for effective security response. As
an object of security, it is essential that continuity of communications
be upheld during a crisis. Public crisis communications depend on
Internet and wireless networks to transmit messages to the public.
In addition to requiring telecommunications as an essential service
during an emergency, however, responding entities themselves require
this technology to uphold information flows among themselves and to
perform their response function. To do so, technology must be operable,
and different actors systems must be interoperable with one another.

1. Continuity of Communications: Ensuring

Responding Entities Can Uphold Public
Communications
Under the FERP, Industry Canada is charged with the primary
responsibility for telecommunications (ESF #2). In a major event, Industry
Canada runs an emergency telecommunications operations centre
(ETOC) that responds to and mitigates crisis effects. Internationally,
Canada is engaged with NATOs Senior Civil Emergency Planning
Committee (SCEPC), which shares research on the impact of crises
on telecommunications among NATO members and is party to
the Tampere Convention on the Provision of Telecommunication
Resources for Disaster Mitigation and Relief Operations, a multilateral
treaty governing the transborder availability and provision of
telecommunications equipment.
Since, as with other critical infrastructure sectors, information and

communications technology is predominantly owned and operated by
the private sector, emergency telecommunications efforts on the part of
industry are also required. To this end, telecommunications companies
engage in voluntary mutual aid, whereby even companies that are in
strong competition with one another will share network lines to support
networks that are down during an emergency.
2. Operability: Sustaining Communications in

Support of Emergency Personnel
When communications infrastructure is destroyed during a crisis,
it is important to have alternate technologies in place. The 2007
Conference Board of Canada report documented how, when terrorists
exploded a series of coordinated bombs in the London transit system
in July of that year, communications were weak because the subways
underground, internal systems had been damaged in the attacks
and the first responders radios could not work underground. With
these means of communication unavailable, firefighters had to rely
on runners to carry messages from the underground tunnels to the

Appendix A | The Conference Board of Canada
above-ground response site. The failure in this scenario is particularly

glaring, given a 1988 official inquiry into a fire at Londons King Cross
station that recommended emergency services acquire the capability to
communicate underground.1
While respondents in the interviews for this briefing did not identify any
such cases over the past five years, they did acknowledge that first
responders rely too heavily on Internet technology (e-mail in particular)
and cellular networks. One way that responding entities are working to
prevent challenges to this end is by maintaining telephone and Internet
connections with multiple network providers. While this approach is
duplicative, it has helped to prevent breakdowns in situations where
one network has broken down but others continue to operate. Alternate
technologies, such as radio technologies or facsimile that rely on
independent networks, are also important as a backup plan. To this
end, Public Safety Canada issued in June 2009 the Policy Principles for
Public Safety Radio Interoperability, to guide the departments actions
when considering radio use in public safety emergencies.
3. Interoperability: Ensuring Responding

Entities Communication Across Jurisdictions
and Disciplines
Interoperability among responders is an important element of crisis
communications technologies; for information to flow, responders
must be on compatible networks. In January 2011, the government
of Canada published its first Communications Interoperability
Strategy. The strategys stated purpose is to provide a structure for
the creation of national policies, standards, and plans to improve
responder communications capabilities in support of safety, operational,
procurement and infrastructure efficiencies, and ultimately increased
citizen safety and security.2 Every jurisdiction within Canada is
1 U.K. Department of Transport, Investigation Into the Kings Cross Underground Fire.
2 Public Safety Canada, Communications Interoperability Strategy for Canada, 3.

encouraged (although not required by law) to develop emergency

communications models in line with this strategy and consistent with
provincial/territorial plans.
There are a number of recent initiatives to foster communications

interoperability in Canada. Defence Research and Development Canada
has been developing Multi-Agency Situational Awareness System
National Information Exchanges (MASAS-X), a pilot project initiated
in November 2011 to facilitate operational information sharing among
stakeholders, as well as a national framework for social media and crisis
communications that would facilitate communications with the public
in addition to integrating these technologies into inter-organizational
response frameworks. Independent research centres have been pursuing
interoperable communications networks, too. For instance, since 2012,
the University of Ottawa and the Canadian Advanced Technology
Alliance have been developing the First Responder Networked Vehicle
Test-Bed as a pilot project to improve communications between
emergency vehicles.

Appendix B | The Conference Board of Canada
APPENDIX B
Bibliography
Canadian Red Cross. Social Media During Emergencies. Ottawa:

Canadian Red Cross, October 2012.
CBC News, Elliot Lake Mall Collapse: Tracking the Rescue Effort, June
26, 2012. www.cbc.ca/news/canada/elliot-lake-mall-collapse-tracking-the-
rescue-effort-1.1130615 (accessed August 5, 2014).
Friscolanti, Michael, with Andrew Stobo Sniderman. Elliot Lake:

The First Rescuers Inside the Mall Share Their Harrowing Account.
Macleans.ca, July 9, 2012. www.macleans.ca/news/canada/disaster-
none-of-us-wanted-to-leave-it-was-heartbreaking/
(accessed August 5, 2014).
Government of Canada. Federal Emergency Response Plan (FERP).

Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2011.
Groenendaal, Jelle, and Joseph Scanlon. Phase One: Bystanders:

Focusing on Ordinary Peoplethe First First Responders. Natural
Hazards Observer 38, no. 2 (November 2013): 911.
Hartley, Samantha. Post-Event Recap: A Successful Lesson in Social

Media Crisis Communications. Ottawa: International Association of
Business Communicators, April 21, 2013. ottawa.iabc.com/post-event-
recap-a-successful-lesson-in-social-media-crisis-communications/
Industry Canada. Telecommunication Incident Notification Guidelines.

October 21, 2013. www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/et-tdu.nsf/eng/wj00302.html

Leo, Geoff. Environment Canada Tornado Tweets Stalled by Language

Laws. CBC News, June 26, 2014. www.cbc.ca/news/canada/
saskatchewan/environment-canada-tornado-tweets-stalled-by-language-
laws-1.2688958 (accessed August 4, 2014).
MacGillivray, Ernie. The Communications Complaint. June 19,

2013. www.ptsc-online.ca/blogs/crisisemergencycommunications/
thecommunicationscomplaint (accessed August 5, 2014).
Munn-Venn, Trefor, and Andrew Archibald. A Resilient Canada:

Governance for National Security and Public Safety. Ottawa:
The Conference Board of Canada, 2007.
Northern Alberta Development Council (NADC). Wisdom Gained: The

Town of Slave Lake Shares Its Reflections on Recovery From the 2011
Wildfire. Peace River, AB: NADC, 2012. www.nadc.gov.ab.ca/Docs/
Wisdom-Gained.pdf (accessed August 5, 2014).
Oliveira, Michael. Canadians Social Media Use Plateauing, Mobile

Usage Surging: Poll. GlobalNews.ca, May 15, 2014. globalnews.ca/
news/1333759/canadians-social-media-use-plateauing-mobile-usage-
surging-poll/ (accessed August 5, 2014).
Public Safety Canada. Communications Interoperability Strategy for

Canada. Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2011.
. National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure. Ottawa: Public Safety

Canada, 2009.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police. 911 and the Trouble With Technology.
December 18, 2012. www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/pubs/ccaps-spcca/tech-eng.
htm (accessed August 5, 2014).
U.K. Department of Transport. Investigation Into the Kings Cross

Underground Fire. London: The Stationery Office, 1988.
Vroegop, Ruben. Forewarned and Forearmed: The Calgary Emergency

Management Agency and the 2013 Flood. Ottawa: The Conference
Board of Canada, 2014.

Appendix B | The Conference Board of Canada
Wood, James. Province Boosts Cost of Alberta Floods to $6 Billion.

Calgary Herald, September 24, 2013. www.calgaryherald.com/news/provi
nce+boosts+cost+alberta+floods+billion/8952392/story.html

The More
Enlightened Way
to Make Business
Decisions.
If your organization, program, or project requires expertise in economic
or organizational performance or public policy, talk to us first. Youll
find the expertise and knowledge you need to make more enlightened
decisions with The Conference Board of Canada.
Services
Executive Networks Custom Research
Exchange ideas and make new contacts Tap into our research expertise to address
on strategic issues your specific issues
e-Library Customized Solutions

Access to in-depth insights Help your organization meet challenges
when you need them most and sustain performance
The Niagara Institute e-Data

Develop leaders of the future through interactive and Stay on top of major economic trends
engaging leadership development programs
Conferences, Seminars,
The Directors College Webinars, and Workshops
Canadas university-accredited corporate director Learn from best-practice
development program organizations and industry experts
conferenceboard.ca
About The Conference Board of Canada

We are:
The foremost independent, not-for-profit, applied research organization

in Canada.
Objective and non-partisan. We do not lobby for specific interests.
Funded exclusively through the fees we charge for services to the
private and public sectors.
Experts in running conferences but also at conducting, publishing,
and disseminating research; helping people network; developing individual
leadership skills; and building organizational capacity.
Specialists in economic trends, as well as organizational performance and
public policy issues.
Not a government department or agency, although we are often hired to provide
services for all levels of government.
Independent from, but affiliated with, The Conference Board, Inc. of New York,
which serves nearly 2,000 companies in 60 nations and has offices in Brussels
and Hong Kong.
Insights. Understanding. Impact.
Communication and Transparency for the Governance

of Crisis Response
Nicole Tishler
To cite this briefing: Tishler, Nicole. Communication and Transparency for the Governance of Crisis Response.
Ottawa: The Conference Board of Canada, 2014.
2014 The Conference Board of Canada*

Published in Canada | All rights reserved | Agreement No. 40063028 | *Incorporated as AERIC Inc.
An accessible version of this document for the visually impaired is available upon request.
Accessibility Officer, The Conference Board of Canada
Tel.: 613-526-3280 or 1-866-711-2262 E-mail: accessibility@conferenceboard.ca
The Conference Board of Canada and the torch logo are registered trademarks of The Conference Board, Inc. Forecasts
and research often involve numerous assumptions and data sources, and are subject to inherent risks and uncertainties.
This information is not intended as specific investment, accounting, legal, or tax advice.
255 Smyth Road, Ottawa ON

K1H 8M7 Canada
Tel. 613-526-3280
Fax 613-526-4857
Inquiries 1-866-711-2262
conferenceboard.ca
PUBLICATION 6446
E-copy: Complimentary

6446-Communication and Transparency For The Governance of Crisis Response-Br

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

6446-Communication and Transparency For The Governance of Crisis Response-Br

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Communication and

Transparency for the

Flows of information across levels of government during a

Social media has radically altered the playing field in crisis

The quality of communications during a crisis can either magnify

BRIEFING AUGUST 2014

Communication and Transparency for the Governance of Crisis Response

Prominent themes in this briefing include:

the role of the private sector in crisis communications;

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 6

The Conference Board of Canada

This briefings key findings are illustrated in a case study comparison of

Since effective communications are expected to be frequent, clear,

1 Munn-Venn and Archibald, A Resilient Canada, 4.

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 7

Communication and Transparency for the Governance of Crisis Response

employed by relevant actors. As defined in the original Conference

The research presented here received Government of Canada funding,

Principles of Effective Response

Leadership and Accountability: Leadership and accountability must be clearly

Cooperation and Coordination: Organizations responding to a disaster must be

Mandate and Resources: Organizations and individuals require clearly defined

Communication and Transparency: This principle has several elements, but

Fairness: When responding to an emergency, it is essential to treat all

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 8

The Conference Board of Canada

Continuous Learning: Observations about what went wrong in response to a

Source: Munn-Venn, Trefor, and Andrew Archibald. A Resilient Canada:

The communications governance principle is relevant for a wide variety

In Canada, many emergency managers aim to take an all-hazards

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 9

Communication and Transparency for the Governance of Crisis Response

Methodology and Approach

Information Flows Within and Across

3 Emergency telecommunicationsthat is, the requirement that communications

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 10

The Conference Board of Canada

one considers that crisis response often involves multiple jurisdictions

The Three Levels of Government

4 The technological requirements for communications, as exemplified in Canadas

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 11

Communication and Transparency for the Governance of Crisis Response

7 Government of Canada, Federal Emergency Response Plan, 25.

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 12

The Conference Board of Canada

Manager of Emergency Management and Agency Planning8 that have

The Private Sector

Annual meetings bringing together representatives from each sector

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 13

Communication and Transparency for the Governance of Crisis Response

network vulnerabilities, which could lead to financial losses. Some

General Challenges to Information Flows Across

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 14

The Conference Board of Canada

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 15

Communication and Transparency for the Governance of Crisis Response

With a worldwide shortage of the vaccine, jurisdictional confusion made

Public Communications and Media Engagement

11 Government of Canada, Federal Emergency Response Plan, 1.

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 16

The Conference Board of Canada

Even when emergency response is effective, weak public

Find this and other Conference Board research at www.e-library.ca 17