| Title |
Selective versus comprehensive emergency management in Korea
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2193-1801-3-602 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kyoo-Man Ha, Hyeon-Mun Oh |
| Abstract |
In spite of Korean governments' efforts, many emergency management practitioners wonder whether what is actually being practiced is selective or comprehensive management. Using a qualitative content analysis and experiences in practice, the article analyzes the barriers to selective emergency management and the paths to comprehensive emergency management via the same three management elements: stakeholders, phases of the emergency management lifecycle, and hazards and impacts. Four analytical levels are considered: central government level, industry level, community level, and household level. Korea, despite its self-praise, has to transform its selective emergency management into comprehensive emergency management in time. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lecturer | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 20% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 33% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 October 2014.
All research outputs
#20,241,019
of 22,768,097 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,461
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,469
of 255,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#82
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,768,097 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 255,779 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.