"...1,000 euros per year is too expensive..."
We discussed budgets, and according to him a price tag around 1,000 euros per year is too expensive (for about 3,000 inhabitants).
I realised, that the readiness to invest into such a system is often not linked to the real cost of deploying and maintaining the solution, but depending on the perception of the politicians of what THEY are ready to pay for such a multi-modal notification tool.
I asked him, if he already had evaluated what a flood in his municipality would cost. His answer was very clear: in June 2009, 300 households were affected, and people had to be evacuated via helicopter. Added to material damage, the total cost of this hazard amounted to 25 million euros.
So why is 1,000 euros too expensive for this mayor? Well, the 25 million were all paid either by insurance companies, or by the house owners themselves, or the state in case of the evacuations.
Hence, why should the mayor take the responsibility to finance 1,000 euros to reduce this huge cost risk?
"...communication during a crisis does not end with sending an SMS..."
The problem is there are too few dedicated products and systems really offering integrated and multi-modal alert management adapted to emergency situations. So it is not that easy to “fix” a proper price tag on such a solution, and potential buyers (enterprises, local authorities, governments) have few possibilities to really compare products and prices.Furthermore, for non-specialists in emergency management, or telecom and IT, as is often the case for politicians, the perception of today’s communication technology capabilities is totally blurred. Many people do not realise, that communication during a crisis does not end with sending an SMS.
There are so many communication companies offering multi-modal messaging and communication services with a business model based on communication volumes, i.e. based on a tarriff by message sent. Is this model suitable for emergency communication?
"...they want to sell subscriptions, traffic and cell phones..."
This pricing model can only be viable (for the supplier!), if
- there are many messages sent
(so we need a flood every week)
- the supplier offers its messaging platform as a teaser to sell other services or products
(ever wondered why Google via its Google agenda offers sms notifications for free?)
The above model cannot be taken seriously by any emergency manager, who wants to implement a fast and reliable multi-modal notification system.
This is also the explanation why, if in need of an emergency communication tool, you should never approach your mobile telecom provider for solving your problem. He is the exact candidate, that fits into the 2 categories above (they want to sell subscriptions, traffic and cell phones).
Real specialists in providing emergency communication solutions are de facto eliminated by local authorities, because their business model is based on 2 major principles:
1) messaging only to be used in emergency situations, ideally NEVER
2) rapid messaging adapted to emergency situations is their core business, nothing else to “sell”
Communication costs become irrelevant in their price offer, the emphasis lies in high availability, performance and messaging speed of the platform.
"...I should not forget, that they will vote for me (or NOT)..."
Now let’s imagine I am the mayor of this small French town, I want to implement an efficient population alert management system, what should I be ready to budget for it?
I know already, that last year’s flood caused damages for 25 mio euros (300 households directly affected, in a town of 3,000 inhabitants). This will happen again, either in 1 year, or in 10, so I have to do something. The next flood will cost the community at least the same. Thank God, there were no injuries, but I should ask myself what a human life is worth (there are specialists, actuaries, more skilled than myself for this calculation). I am a busy man, with plenty of other priorities in my municipality, but the safety of my citizen is important to me. By law in France, I am directly responsible for the safety of my citizens. My population can turn against me, if I do not prove I have done everything to prevent a disaster to happen. Also I should not forget, that they will vote for me (or NOT).
"...for 1 dollar spent on mitigating a hazard, there will be savings of between 3 and 5 dollars on disaster recovery..."
Edward Burns, emergency manager at UCLA, USA, gave me an interesting piece of information yesterday. The U.S. based FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) estimates the cost of mitigating a hazard at between 3:1 and 5:1 – meaning that for 1 dollar spent on mitigating a hazard, there will be savings of between 3 and 5 dollars on disaster recovery.
Imagining I can adapt this to my situation, and I am a pessimistic nature, I will take the ratio 3:1 for my flood example in my town. So investing 7,5 mio euros in safety and mitigation measures should reduce my damage costs by 22,5 mio euros, a reduction of 90% compared to last year’s disaster.
Now that I know my budget target I will invest in 3 major areas:
- Physical Protection (elevating homes, building a dam, flood drainage,…)
- Preparedness (prevention, education, communication)
- Early warning and rapid multi-modal notification system (sensors, sirens, email, sms, voice messages, instant messaging, radio, TV)
I will allocate 60% to protection, 20% to preparedness, 20% to early warning and alert.
So I have 1,5 mio euros I can plan on investing to improve my communication internally and towards my citizens, in order to warn them rapidly in case of a threat.
As a mayor my discussion around 1,000 euros per year being too expensive has a completely different taste now. I know what a notification tool SHOULD be worth to me.
My problem remains: in case of a disaster, the 25 mio euros have not been paid by the municipality. So who will finance the 7.5 mio euros to mitigate my risk? This will be the topic of another article.
Posts
