The Organizational Structure of Emergency Management System in China

合集下载

Organizational Structure

Housekeeping
maintenance
sale
Departments of a limited servi full-service hotel (under 500 rooms)
General manager
Rooms
-Reservation -Front Office -Housekeeping -Laundry -Security -Engineering -PBX
Top manager Middle manager First-line manager
oversees the work of the supervisors and line employee
[Excise]
1.A customer notifies the front desk that a table in her room has broken leg and that when she set her room service tray on it, it tipped over and scattered the food on the floor. List the departments to which this information needs to he conveyed and the action they must take. 2.If you are the reservation staff, please list your path to career advancement .
•
Structure must be more flexible when environmental change is rapid. – Usually need to decentralize authority.

政府行政管理理论的双语

政府行政管理理论的双语Government administration management theory导论Introduction政府行政管理理论是指研究政府行政管理的一系列原则、观点和概念的理论体系，旨在指导政府行政管理实践，提高政府行政管理效率和效果。

政府行政管理理论的形成和发展离不开政治、经济、社会和文化等方面的影响，同时也受到了国际上行政管理经验的影响。

在全球化的今天，政府行政管理理论的研究和实践愈发重要，不仅对于提高政府行政管理效能有着重要意义，也对于推动国家治理体系和治理能力现代化具有重要意义。

Government administration management theory refers to the theoretical system of studying the principles, viewpoints, and concepts of government administration management, aiming to guide the practice of government administration management and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government administration management. The formation and development of government administration management theory cannot be separated from the influences of politics, economy, society, and culture, and it has also been influenced by international administrative management experience. In today's globalization, the research and practice of government administration management theory are becoming more important, not only for improving the efficiency of government administration management but also for promoting the modernization of national governance system and governance capacity.伴随着政府职能的拓展与转变，政府行政管理理论也在不断发展变革，在这一进程中，许多理论和观点不断涌现。

学生版 Ch03 organization structure(3)

Suppliers, Customers, Competitors, Government regulatory agencies, public pressure groups
组织环境组织之外的机构或力量体，它们能够影响组织绩效。
15–24
Environment
Why should an organization’s structure be affected by its environment? 为什么组织结构受环境影响？
Environment
Three key dimensions to any organization’s environment:
– Capacity 环境容量 – Volatility 环境的易变性 – Complexity 环境的复杂性
15–26
Environment
abundant capacity: excess resources room for mistakes 丰富容量：充分资源，允许犯错 scarce capacity: scarce resources little room for errors 希缺容量：缺乏资源，不允许犯错
Mechanistic: (efficiency ＆ stability) tight control; extensive work specialization, high formalization, high centralization
Mechanistic and Organic: mix of loose with tight properties; tight controls over current activities; looser controls for new undertakings

Organizational structure

Disadvantages
Serving needs of all products - When the range of products or services that a company produces increases, the various functions can have difficulty efficiently serving the needs of the wide range of products. Coordination - As organizations attract customer with different needs, they may find it hard to service these different needs by using a single set of functions
Advantages Of A Divisional Structure
Quality products and customer service - This narrow focus helps a division to create high-quality products and provide high-quality customer service. Customized management and problem solving - A geographic structure puts managers closer to the scene of operations and well positioned to be responsive to local situations Identification with division - employees' close identification with their division can increase their commitment, loyalty, and job satisfaction.

(高级管理学讨论资料)Evolution and revolution as organizations grow

Mainiero, L. and Tromley, C. Developing Managerial Skills in Organizational Behavior: Exercises, Cases, and Readings (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall) (2d ed. 1994), pp. 322-329.Evolution and Revolution as Organizations GrowLarry E. GreinerA small research company chooses too complicated and formalized an organization structure for its young age and limited size. It flounders in rigidity and bureaucracy for several years and is finally acquired by a larger company.Key executives of a retail store chain hold on to an organization structure long after it has served its purpose, because their power is derived from this structure. The company eventually goes into bankruptcy.A large bank disciplines a "rebellious" manager who is blamed for current control problems, when the underlying cause is centralized procedures that are holding back expansion into new markets. Many younger managers subsequently leave the bank, competition moves in, and profits are still declining.The problems of these companies, like those of many others, are rooted more in past decisions than in present events or outside market dynamics. Historical forces do indeed shape the future growth of organizations. Yet management, in its haste to grow, often overlooks such critical developmental questions as: Where has our organization been? Where is it now? And what do the answers to these questions mean for where we are going? Instead, its gaze is fixed outward toward the environment and the future--as if more precise market projections will provide a new organizational identity.Companies fail to see that many clues to their future success lie within their own organizations and their evolving states of development. Moreover, the inability of management to understand its organization development problems can result in a company becoming "frozen" in its present stage of evolution or, ultimately, in failure, regardless of market opportunities.My position in this article is that the future of an organization may be less determined by outside forces than it is by the organization's history. In stressing the force of history on an organization, I have drawn from the legacies of European psychologists (their thesis being that individual behavior is determined primarily by previous events and experiences, not by what lies ahead). Extending this analogy of individual development to the problems of organization development, I shall discuss a series of developmental phases through which growing companies tend to pass. But, first, let me provide two definitions:1. The term evolution is used to describeprolonged periods of growth where nomajor upheaval occurs in organizationpractices.2. The term revolution is used to describethose periods of substantial turmoil inorganization life.As a company progresses through developmental phases, each evolutionary period creates its own revolution. For instance, centralized practices eventually lead to demands for decentralization. Moreover, the nature of management's solution to each revolutionary period determines whether a company will move forward into its next stage of evolutionary growth. As I shall show later, there are at least five phases of organizationdevelopment, each characterized by both an evolution and a revolution.KEY FORCES IN DEVELOPMENTDuring the past few years a small amount of research knowledge about the phases of organization development has been building. Some of this research is very quantitative, such as time-series analyses that reveal patterns of economic performance over time.1 The majority of studies, however, are case-oriented and use company records and interviews to reconstruct a rich picture of corporate development.2 Yet both types of research tend to be heavily empirical without attempting more generalized statements about the overall process of development.A notable exception is the historical work of Alfred D. Chandler, Jr., in his book Strategy and Structure.3 This study depicts four very broad and general phases in the lives of four large U.S. companies. It proposes that outside market opportunities determine a company's strategy, which in turn determines the company's organization structure. This thesis has a valid ring for the four companies examined by Chandler, largely because they developed in a time of explosive markets and technological advances. But more recent evidence suggests that organization structure may be less malleable than Chandler assumed; in fact, structure can play a critical role in 1 See, for example, William H. Starbuck, "Organizational Metamorphosis," in Promising Research Directions, edited by R. W. Millman and M. P. Hottenstein (Tempe, Arizona, Academy of Management, 1968), p. 113.2 See, for example, the Grangesberg case series, prepared by C. Roland Christensen and Bruce R. Scott, Case Clearing House, Harvard Business School.3Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise (Cambridge, Massachusetts, The M.I.T. Press, 1962).influencing corporate strategy. It is this reverse emphasis on how organization structure affects future growth which is highlighted in the model presented in this article.From an analysis of recent studies,4five key dimensions emerge as essential for building a model of organization development:1. Age of the organization.2. Size of the organization.3. Stages of evolution.4. Stages of revolution.5. Growth rate of the industry.I shall describe each of these elements separately, but first note their combined effect as illustrated in Exhibit I.Note especially how each dimension influences the other over time; when all five elements begin to interact, a more complete and dynamic picture of organizational growth emerges.After describing these dimensions and their interconnections, I shall discuss each evolutionary/revolutionary phase of development and show (a) how each stage of evolution breeds its own revolution, and (b) how management solutions to each revolution determine the next state of evolution.Age of the OrganizationThe most obvious and essential dimension for any model of development is 4 I have drawn on many sources for evidence: (a) numerous cases collected at the Harvard Business School; (b) Organization Growth and Development, edited by William H. Starbuck (Middlesex, England, Penguin Books, Ltd., 1971), where several studies are cited; and (c) articles published in journals, such as Lawrence E. Fouraker and John M. Stopford, "Organization Structure and the Multinational Strategy," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 1, 1968, p. 47; and Malcolm S. Salter, "Management Appraisal and Reward Systems," Journal of Business Policy, Vol. 1, No. 4, 1971.the life span of an organization (represented as the horizontal axis in Exhibit I).All historical studies gather data from various points in time and then make comparisons. From these observations, it is evident that the same organization practices are not maintained throughout a long time span. This makes a most basic point management problems and principles are rooted in time. The concept of decentralization, for example, can have meaning for describing corporate practices at one time period but loses its descriptive power at another.The passage of time also contributes to the institutionalization of managerial attitudes. As a result, employee behavior becomes not only more predictable but also more difficult to change when attitudes are outdated.Size of the OrganizationThis dimension is depicted as the vertical axis in Exhibit I. A company's problems and solutions tend to change markedly as the number of employees and sales volume increase. Thus time is not the only determinant of structure; in fact, organizations that do not grow in size can retain many of the same management issues and practices over lengthy periods. In addition to increased size, however, problems of coordination and communication magnify, new functions emerge, levels in the management hierarchy multiply, and jobs become more interrelated.Stages of EvolutionAs both age and size increase, another phenomenon becomes evident: the prolonged growth that I have termed the evolutionary period. Most growing organizations do not expand for two years and then retreat for one year; rather, those that survive a crisis usually enjoy four to eight years of continuous growth without a major economic setback or severe internal disruption. The term evolution seems appropriate for describing these quieter periods because only modest adjustments appear necessary for maintaining growth under the same overall pattern of management.Stages of RevolutionSmooth evolution is not inevitable; it cannot be assumed that organization growth is linear. Fortune's "500"list, for example, has had significant turnover during the last 50 years. Thus we find evidence from numerous case histories which reveals periods of substantial turbulence spaced between smoother periods of evolution.I have termed these turbulent times the periods of revolution because they typically exhibit a serious upheaval of management practices. Traditional management practices, which were appropriate for a smaller size and earlier time, are brought under scrutiny by frustrated top managers and disillusioned lower-level managers. During such periods of crisis, a number of companies fail--those unable to abandon past practices and effect major organization changes are likely either to fold or to level off in their growth rates.The critical task for management in each revolutionary period is to find a new set of organization practices that will become the basis for managing the next period of evolutionary growth. Interestingly enough, these new practices eventually sow their own seeds of decay and lead to another period of revolution. Companies therefore experience the irony of seeing a major solution in one time period become a major problem at a later date.Growth Rate of the IndustryThe speed at which an organization experiences phases of evolution and revolution is closely related to the market environment of its industry. For example, a company in a rapidly expanding market will have to add employees rapidly; hence, the need for new organization structures to accommodate large staff increases is accelerated. While evolutionary periods tend to be relatively short in fast-growing industries, much longer evolutionary periods occur in mature or slowly growing industries.Evolution can also be prolonged, and revolutions delayed when profits come easily. For instance, companies that make grievous errors in a rewarding industry can still look good on their profit and loss statements; thus they can avoid a change in management practices for a longer period. The aerospace industry in its infancy is an example. Yet revolutionary periods still occur, as one did in aerospace when profit opportunities began to dry up. Revolutions seem to be much more severe and difficult to resolve when the market environment is poor.PHASES OF GROWTHWith the foregoing framework in mind, let us now examine in depth the five specific phases of evolution and revolution. As shown in Exhibit II, each evolutionary period is characterized by the dominant management style used to achieve growth, while each revolutionary period is characterized by the dominant management problem that must be solved before growth can continue. The patterns presented in Exhibit II seem to be typical for companies in industries with moderate growth over a long time period: companies in faster growing industries tend to experience all five phases more rapidly, while those in slower growing industries encounter only two or three phases over many years.It is important to note that each phase is both an effect of the previous phase and a cause for the next phase. For example, the evolutionary management style in Phase 3 of the exhibit is "delegation," which grows out of, and becomes the solution to, demands for greater "autonomy" in the preceding Phase 2 revolution. The style of delegation used in Phase 3, however, eventually provokes a major revolutionary crisis that is characterized by attempts to regain control over the diversity created through increased delegation.The principal implication of each phase is that management actions are narrowly prescribed if growth is to occur. For example, a company experiencing an autonomy crisis in Phase 2 cannot return to directive management for a solution--it must adopt a new style of delegation in order to move ahead.Phase 1: Creativity . . .In the birth stage of an organization, the emphasis is on creating both a product and a market. Here are the characteristics of the period of creative evolution:• The company's founders are usually technically or entrepreneuriallyoriented, and they disdain managementactivities; their physical and mentalenergies are absorbed entirely inmaking and selling a new product.• Communication among employees is frequent and informal.• Long hours of work are rewarded by modest salaries and the promise ofownership benefits.• Control of activities comes from immediate marketplace feedback: themanagement acts as the customersreact.. . . & the leadership crisis: All of the foregoing individualistic and creative activities are essential for the company to get off the ground. But therein lies the problem. As the company grows, larger production runs require knowledge about the efficiencies of manufacturing. Increased numbers of employees cannot be managed exclusively through informal communication; new employees are not motivated by an intense dedication to the product or organization. Additional capital must be secured, and new accounting procedures are needed for financial control.Thus the founders find themselves burdened with unwanted management responsibilities. So they long for the "good old days"' still trying to act as they did in the past. And conflicts between the harried leaders grow more intense.At this point a crisis of leadership occurs, which is the onset of the first revolution. Who is to lead the company out of confusion and solve the managerial problems confronting it? Quite obviously, a strong manager is needed who has the necessary knowledge and skill to introduce new business techniques. But this is easier said than done. The founders often hate to step aside even though they are probably temperamentally unsuited to be managers. So here is the first critical development choice--to locate and install a strong business manager who is acceptable to the founders and who can pull the organization together.Phase 2: Direction . . .Those companies that survive the first phase by installing a capable business manager usually embark on a period of sustained growth under able and directive leadership. Here are the characteristics of this evolutionary period:• A functional organization structure is introduced to separate manufacturingfrom marketing activities, and jobassignments become more specialized.• Accounting systems for inventory and purchasing, are introduced.• Incentives, budgets, and workstandards are adopted.• Communication becomes more formal and impersonal as a hierarchy of titlesand positions builds• The new manager and his keysupervisors take most of theresponsibility for instituting direction,while lower-level supervisors aretreated more as functional specialiststhan as autonomous decision-makingmanagers,. . . & the autonomy crisis. Although the new directive techniques channel employee energy more efficiently into growth, they eventually become inappropriate for controlling a larger, more diverse and complex organization. Lower-level employees find themselves restricted by a cumbersome and centralized hierarchy. They have come to possess more direct knowledge about markets and machinery than do the leaders at the top; consequently, they feel torn between following procedures and taking initiative on their own.Thus the second revolution is imminent as a crisis develops from demands for greater autonomy on the part of lower-level managers. The solution adopted by most companies is to move toward greater delegation. Yet it is difficult for managers who were previously successful at being directive to give upresponsibility. Moreover, lower-level managers are not accustomed to making decisions for themselves. As a result, numerous companies flounder during this revolutionary period, adhering to centralized methods while lower-level employees grow more disenchanted and leave the organization.Phase 3: Delegation . . .The next era of growth evolves from the successful application of a decentralized organization structure. It exhibits these characteristics:• Much greater responsibility is given to the managers of plants and marketterritories.• Profit centers and bonuses are used to stimulate motivation.• The top executives at headquarters restrain themselves to managing byexception, based on periodic reportsfrom the field.• Management often concentrates on making new acquisitions which can belined up beside other decentralizedunits.• Communication from the top is infrequent, usually by correspondence,telephone, or brief visits to fieldlocations.The delegation stage proves useful for gaining expansion through heightened motivation at lower levels. Decentralized managers with greater authority and incentive are able to penetrate larger markets, respond faster to customers, and develop new products.. . . & the control crisis: A serious problem eventually evolves. however, as top executives sense that they are losing control over a highly diversified field operation. Autonomous field managers prefer to run their own shows without coordinating plans, money. technology, and manpower with the rest of the organization. Freedom breeds a parochial attitude.Hence, the Phase 3 revolution is under way when top management seeks to regain control over the total company. Some top managements attempt a return to centralized management, which usually fails because of the vast scope of operations. Those companies that move ahead find a new solution in the use of special coordination techniques.Phase 4: Coordination . . .During this phase, the evolutionary period is characterized by the rise of formal systems for achieving greater coordination and by top executives taking responsibility for the initiation and administration of these new systems. For example:• Decentralized units are merged into product groups.• Formal planning, procedures are established and intensively reviewed.• Numerous staff personnel are hired and located at headquarters to initiatecompanywide programs of control andreview for line managers.• Capital expenditures are carefully weighed and parceled out across theorganization.• Each product group is treated as an investment center where return oninvested capital is an importantcriterion used in allocating funds.• Certain technical functions, such as data processing, are centralized atheadquarters, while daily operatingdecisions remain decentralized.• Stock options and company-wide profit sharing are used to encourage identitywith the firm as a whole.All of these new coordination systems prove useful for achieving growth through more efficient allocation of a company's limited resources. They prompt field managers to look beyond the needs of their local units. While these managers still have much decisionmaking responsibility, they learn to justify their actions more carefully to a "watchdog" audience at headquarters.. . . & the red tape crisis: But a lack of confidence gradually builds between line and staff, and between headquarters and the field. The proliferation of systems and programs begins to exceed its utility; a red-tape crisis is created. Line managers, for example, increasingly resent heavy staff direction from those who are not familiar with local conditions. Staff people, on the other hand, complain about uncooperative and uninformed line managers. Together both groups criticize the bureaucratic paper system that has evolved. Procedures take precedence over problem solving, and innovation is dampened. In short, the organization has become too large and complex to be managed through formal programs and rigid systems. The Phase 4 revolution is underway.Phase 5: Collaboration . . .The last observable phase in previous studies emphasizes strong interpersonal collaboration in an attempt to overcome the red-tape crisis. Where Phase 4 was managed more through formal systems and procedures, Phase 5 emphasizes greater spontaneity in management action through teams and the skillful confrontation of interpersonal differences. Social control and self-discipline take over from formal control. This transition is especially difficult for those experts who created the old systems as well as for those line managers who relied on formal methods for answers.The Phase 5 evolution, then, builds around a more flexible and behavioral approach to management. Here are its characteristics:• The focus is on solving problemsquickly through team action.• Teams are combined across functions for task-group activity.• Headquarters staff experts are reduced in number, reassigned, and combinedin interdisciplinary teams to consultwith, not to direct, field units.• A matrix-type structure is frequently used to assemble the right teams for theappropriate problems.• Previous formal systems are simplified and combined into single multipurposesystems.• Conferences of key managers are held frequently to focus on major problemissues.• Educational programs are utilized to train managers in behavioral skills forachieving better teamwork and conflictresolution.• Real-time information systems are integrated into daily decision making.• Economic rewards are geared more to team performance than to individualachievement.• Experiments in new practices are encouraged throughout theorganization.. . . & the ? crisis: What will be the revolution in response to this stage of evolution? Many large U.S. companies are now in the Phase 5 evolutionary stage, so the answers are critical. While there is little clear evidence, I imagine the revolution will center around the "psychological saturation" of employees who grow emotionally and physically exhausted by the intensity of teamwork and the heavy pressure for innovative solutions.My hunch is that the Phase 5 revolution will be solved through new structure and programs that allow employees to periodically rest, reflect, and revitalize themselves. We may even see companies with dual organization structures: a "habit " structure for getting the daily work done, and a "reflective" structure for stimulating perspective and personal enrichment. Employees could then move back and forth between the two structures as their energies are dissipated and refueled.One European organization has implemented just such a structure. Five reflective groups have been established outside the regular structure for the purpose of continuously evaluating five task activities basic to the organization. They report directly to the managing director, although their reports are made public throughout the organization. Membership in each group includes all levels and functions, and employees are rotated through these groups on a six-month basis.Other concrete examples now in practice include providing sabbaticals for employees, moving managers in and out of "hot spot " jobs, establishing a four-day workweek, assuring job security, building physical facilities for relaxation during the working day, making jobs more interchangeable, creating an extra team on the assembly line so that one team is always off for reeducation, and switching into longer vacations and more flexible working hours.The Chinese practice of requiring executives to spend time periodically on lower-level jobs may also be worth a nonideological evaluation. For too long U.S. management has assumed that career progress should be equated with an upward path toward title, salary, and power. Could it be that some vice presidents of marketing might just long for, and even benefit from, temporary duty in the field sales organization? IMPLICATIONS OF HISTORYLet me now summarize some important implications for practicing managers. First, the main features of this discussion are depicted in Exhibit III,which shows the specific management actions that characterize each growth phase. These actions are also the solutions which ended each preceding revolutionary period.In one sense, I hope that many readers will react to my model by calling it obvious and natural for depicting the growth of an organization. To me this type of reaction is a useful test of the model's validity.But at a more reflective level I imagine some of these reactions are more hindsight than foresight. Those experienced managers who have been through a developmental sequence can empathize with it now, but how did they react when in the middle of a stage ofevolution or revolution? They can probably recall the limits of their own developmental understanding at that time. Perhaps they resisted desirable changes or were even swept emotionally into a revolution without being able to propose constructive solutions. So let me offer some explicit guidelines for managers of growing organizations to keep in mind.Know where you are in the developmental sequence.Every organization and its component parts are at different stages of development. The task of top management is to be aware of these stages; otherwise. it may not recognize when the time for change has come, or it may act to impose the wrong solution.Top leaders should be ready to work with the flow of the tide rather than against it; yet they should be cautious, since it is tempting to skip phases out of impatience. Each phase results in certain strengths and learning experiences in the organization that will be essential for success in subsequent phases. A child prodigy, for example, may be able to read like a teenager, but he cannot behave like one until he ages through a sequence of experiences.I also doubt that managers can or should act to avoid revolutions. Rather, these periods of tension provide the pressure, ideas, and awareness that afford a platform for change and the introduction of new practices.Recognize the limited range of solutions.In each revolutionary stage it becomes evident that this stage can be ended only by certain specific solutions; moreover, these solutions are different from those which were applied to the problems of the preceding revolution. Too often it is tempting to choose solutions that were tried before, which makes it impossible for a new phase of growth to evolve.Management must be prepared to dismantle current structures before the revolutionary stage becomes too turbulent. Top managers, realizing that their own managerial styles are no longer appropriate, may even have to take themselves out of leadership positions. A good Phase 2 manager facing Phase 3 might be wise to find another Phase 2 organization that better fits his talents, either outside the company or with one of its newer subsidiaries.Finally, evolution is not an automatic affair; it is a contest for survival. To move ahead, companies must consciously introduce planned structure that not only are solutions to a current crisis but also are fitted to the next phase of growth. This requires considerable self-awareness on the part of top management, as well as great interpersonal skill in persuading other managers that change is needed.Realize that solutions breed new problems.Managers often fail to realize that organizational solutions create problems for the future (i.e., a decision to delegate eventually causes a problem of control). Historical actions are very much determinants of what happens to the company at a much later date.An awareness of this effect should help managers to evaluate company problems with greater historical understanding instead of "pinning the blame" on a current development. Better yet, managers should be in a position to predict future problems, and thereby to prepare solutions and coping strategies before a revolution gets out of hand.。

Function model

Function modelA function model or functional model in systems engineering andsoftware engineering is a structured representation of the functions (activities ,actions ,processes ,operations )within the modeled system or sub-ject area.[1]Example of a function model of the process of “Maintain Repara-ble Spares”in IDEF0notation.A function model,similar with the activity model or process model ,is a graphical representation of an enterprise 's function within a deﬁned scope.The pur-poses of the function model are to describe the functions and processes,assist with discovery of information needs,help identify opportunities,and establish a basis for de-termining product and service costs.[2]1HistoryThe function model in the ﬁeld of systems engineeringand software engineering originates in the 1950s and1960s,but the origin of functional modelling of organi-zational activity goes back to the late 19th century.In the late 19th century the ﬁrst diagrams appeared that pictured business activities,actions,processes,or oper-ations,and in the ﬁrst half of the 20th century the ﬁrststructured methods for documenting business process ac-tivities emerged.One of those methods was the ﬂow pro-cess chart ,introduced by Frank Gilbreth to members of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)in1921with the presentation,entitled “Process Charts—First Steps in Finding the One Best Way”.[3]Gilbreth’s tools quickly found their way into industrial engineering curricula.The emerge of the ﬁeld of systems engineering can be traced back to Bell Telephone Laboratories in the 1940s.[4]The need to identify and manipulate the prop-erties of a system as a whole,which in complex en-gineering projects may greatly diﬀer from the sum of the parts’properties,motivated various industries to ap-ply the discipline.[5]One of the ﬁrst to deﬁne the func-tion model in this ﬁeld was the British engineer William Gosling .In his book The design of engineering systems (1962,p.25)he stated:A functional model must thus achieve two aims in order to be of use.It must furnish a through-put description mechanics capable of completely deﬁning the ﬁrst and last throughput states,and perhaps some of the intervening states.It must also oﬀer some means by which any input,cor-rectly described in terms of this mechanics,can be used to generate an output which is an equally correct description of the output which the ac-tual system would have given for the input con-cerned.It may also be noted that there are two other things which a functional model may do,but which are not necessary to all functional models.Thus such a system may,but need not,describe the system throughputs other than at the input and output,and it may also contain a de-scription of the operation which each element carries out on the throughput,but once again this is not.[6]One of the ﬁrst well deﬁned function models,was the Functional Flow Block Diagram (FFBD)developed by the defense-related TRW Incorporated in the 1950s.[7]In the 1960s it was exploited by the NASA to visualizethe time sequence of events in a space systems and ﬂightmissions.[8]It is further widely used in classical systemsengineering to show the order of execution of systemfunctions.[9]2Functional modeling topics 2.1Functional perspectiveIn systems engineering and software engineering a func-tion model is created with a functional modeling perspec-tive .The functional perspective is one of the perspec-tives possible in business process modelling ,other per-123FUNCTIONAL MODELING METHODSspectives are for example behavioural,organisational or informational.[10]A functional modeling perspective concentrates on de-scribing the dynamic process .The main concept in this modeling perspective is the process,this could be a func-tion,transformation,activity,action,task etc.A well-known example of a modeling language employing this perspective is data ﬂow diagrams .The perspective uses four symbols to describe a process,these being:•Process:Illustrates transformation from input tooutput.•Store:Data-collection or some sort of material.•Flow:Movement of data or material in the process.•External Entity:External to the modeled system,but interacts with it.Now,with these symbols,a process can be represented as a network of these symbols.This decomposed process is a DFD,data ﬂowdiagram.Example of functional decomposition in a systems analysis.In Dynamic Enterprise Modeling a division is made in the Control model ,Function Model,Process model andOrganizational model .2.2Functional decompositionFunctional decomposition refers broadly to the process of resolving a functional relationship into its constituent parts in such a way that the original function can be re-constructed from those parts by function composition .In general,this process of decomposition is undertaken ei-ther for the purpose of gaining insight into the identity of the constituent components,or for the purpose of obtain-ing a compressed representation of the global function,atask which is feasible only when the constituent processes possess a certain level of modularity .Functional decomposition has a prominent role in computer programming ,where a major goal is to modu-larize processes to the greatest extent possible.For exam-ple,a library management system may be broken up intoan inventory module,a patron information module,and afee assessment module.In the early decades of computerprogramming,this was manifested as the “art of subrou-tining,”as it was called by some prominent practitioners.Functional decomposition of engineering systems is a method for analyzing engineered systems.The basic idea is to try to divide a system in such a way that each block of the block diagram can be described without an “and”or “or”in the description.This exercise forces each part of the system to have a pure function .When a system is composed of pure functions,they can be reused,or replaced.A usual side eﬀect is that the interfaces between blocks become simple and generic.Since the interfaces usually become simple,it is easier to replace a pure function with a related,similar function.3Functional modeling methodsThe functional approach is extended in multiple diagram-mic techniques and modeling notations.This section gives an overview of the important techniques in chrono-logical order.3.1Function blockdiagramFunctional block diagram of the attitude control and maneuver-ing electronics system of the Gemini spacecraft .June 1962.A functional block diagram is a block diagram ,that de-scribes the functions and interrelationships of a system .The functional block diagram can picture:[11]3.3HIPO and IPO3•Functions of a system pictured by blocks•Input and output elements of a block pictured with lines,and•Relationships between the functions •Functional sequences and paths for matter and or signals[12]The block diagram can use additional schematic symbols to show particular properties.Speciﬁc function block diagram are the classic Functional Flow Block Diagram,and the Function Block Diagram (FBD)used in the design of programmable logic con-trollers.3.2Functional Flow Block DiagramFunctional Flow Block Diagram Format.[13]The Functionalﬂow block diagram(FFBD)is a multi-tier,time-sequenced,step-by-stepﬂow diagram of the system’s functionalﬂow.[14]The diagram is developed in the1950s and widely used in classical systems engineer-ing.The Functional Flow Block Diagram is also referred to as Functional Flow Diagram,functional block diagram, and functionalﬂow.[15]Functional Flow Block Diagrams(FFBD)usually de-ﬁne the detailed,step-by-step operational and support se-quences for systems,but they are also used eﬀectively to deﬁne processes in developing and producing systems. The software development processes also use FFBDs ex-tensively.In the system context,the functionalﬂow steps may include combinations of hardware,software, personnel,facilities,and/or procedures.In the FFBD method,the functions are organized and de-picted by their logical order of execution.Each function is shown with respect to its logical relationship to the ex-ecution and completion of other functions.A node la-beled with the function name depicts each function.Ar-rows from left to right show the order of execution of the functions.Logic symbols represent sequential or parallel execution of functions.[16]3.3HIPO and IPOAn expanded IPO Model.HIPO for hierarchical input process output is a popu-lar1970s systems analysis design aid and documentation technique[17]for representing the modules of a system as a hierarchy and for documenting each module.[18]It was used to develop requirements,construct the de-sign,and support implementation of an expert system to demonstrate automated rendezvous.Veriﬁcation was then conducted systematically because of the method of design and implementation.[19]The overall design of the system is documented using HIPO charts or structure charts.The structure chart is similar in appearance to an organizational chart,but has been modiﬁed to show additional detail.Structure charts can be usedto display several types of information,but are used most commonly to diagram either data structures or code structures.[18]3.4N2ChartThe N2Chart is a diagram in the shape of a matrix,repre-senting functional or physical interfaces between system elements.It is used to systematically identify,deﬁne,tab-ulate,design,and analyze functional and physical inter-faces.It applies to system interfaces and hardware and/or software interfaces.[14]The N2diagram has been used extensively to develop data interfaces,primarily in the software areas.However, it can also be used to develop hardware interfaces.The basic N2chart is shown in Figure2.The system functions are placed on the diagonal;the remainder of the squares in the N x N matrix represent the interface inputs and outputs.[20]3.5Structured Analysis and Design Tech-niqueStructured Analysis and Design Technique(SADT)is a43FUNCTIONAL MODELINGMETHODSFigure2.N2chart deﬁnition.[20]SADT basis element.software engineering methodology for describing systems as a hierarchy of functions,a diagrammatic notation for constructing a sketch for a software application.It oﬀers building blocks to represent entities and activities,and a variety of arrows to relate boxes.These boxes and arrows have an associated informal semantics.[21]SADT can be used as a functional analysis tool of a given process,us-ing successive levels of details.The SADT method al-lows to deﬁne user needs for IT developments,which is used in industrial Information Systems,but also to explain and to present an activity’s manufacturing pro-cesses,procedures.[22]The SADT supplies a speciﬁc functional view of any en-terprise by describing the functions and their relation-ships in a company.These functions fulﬁll the objec-tives of a company,such as sales,order planning,product design,part manufacturing,and human resource man-agement.The SADT can depict simple functional rela-tionships and can reﬂect data and controlﬂow relation-ships between diﬀerent functions.The IDEF0formal-ism is based on SADT,developed by Douglas T.Ross in 1985.[23]3.6IDEF0IDEF0Diagram ExampleIDEF0is a function modeling methodology for de-scribing manufacturing functions,which oﬀers a func-tional modeling language for the analysis,development, re-engineering,and integration of information systems; business processes;or software engineering analysis.[24] It is part of the IDEF family of modeling languages in theﬁeld of software engineering,and is built on the func-tional modeling language building SADT.The IDEF0Functional Modeling method is designed to model the decisions,actions,and activities of an orga-nization or system.[25]It was derived from the estab-lished graphic modeling language Structured Analysis and Design Technique(SADT)developed by Douglas T. Ross and SofTech,Inc..In its original form,IDEF0in-cludes both a deﬁnition of a graphical modeling language (syntax and semantics)and a description of a comprehen-sive methodology for developing models.[1]The US Air Force commissioned the SADT developers to develop a function model method for analyzing and communicat-ing the functional perspective of a system.IDEF0should assist in organizing system analysis and promote eﬀec-tive communication between the analyst and the customer through simpliﬁed graphical devices.[25]3.7Axiomatic DesignAxiomatic design is a top down hierarchical functional decomposition process used as a solution synthesis frame-work for the analysis,development,re-engineering,and integration of products,information systems,business processes or software engineering solutions.[26]Its struc-ture is suited mathematically to analyze coupling between4.3Business reference model5functions in order to optimize the architectural robustness of potential functional solution models.4Related types of modelsIn theﬁeld of systems and software engineering numerous speciﬁc function and functional models and close related models have been deﬁned.Here only a few general types will be explained.4.1Business function modelA Business Function Model(BFM)is a general description or category of operations performed routinely to carry out an organization’s mission.They“provide a concep-tual structure for the identiﬁcation of general business functions”.[27]It can show the critical business processes in the context of the business area functions.The pro-cesses in the business function model must be consistent with the processes in the value chain models.Processes are a group of related business activities performed to produce an end product or to provide a service.Un-like business functions that are performed on a continual basis,processes are characterized by the fact that they have a speciﬁc beginning and an end point marked by the delivery of a desired output.Theﬁgure on the right depicts the relationship between the business processes, business functions,and the business area’s business ref-erence model.[28]4.2Business Process Model and NotationBusiness Process Modeling Notation Example.Business Process Model and Notation(BPMN)is a graphical representation for specifying business processes in a workﬂow.BPMN was developed by Business Process Management Initiative(BPMI),and is currently main-tained by the Object Management Group since the two organizations merged in2005.The current version of BPMN is2.0.[29]The Business Process Model and Notation(BPMN) speciﬁcation provides a graphical notation for specify-ing business processes in a Business Process Diagram (BPD).[30]The objective of BPMN is to supportbusi-ness process management for both technical users and business users by providing a notation that is intuitive to business users yet able to represent complex process se-mantics.The BPMN speciﬁcation also provides a map-ping between the graphics of the notation to the un-derlying constructs of execution languages,particularly BPEL4WS.[31]4.3Business reference modelThis FEA Business reference model depicts the relationship be-tween the business processes,business functions,and the business area’s business reference model.A Business reference model is a reference model,con-centrating on the functional and organizational aspects of the core business of an enterprise,service organization or government agency.In enterprise engineering a busi-ness reference model is part of an Enterprise Architec-ture Framework or Architecture Framework,which de-ﬁnes how to organize the structure and views associated with an Enterprise Architecture.A reference model in general is a model of something that embodies the basic goal or idea of something and can then be looked at as a reference for various purposes.A business reference model is a means to describe the business operations of an organization,independent of the organizational structure that perform them.Other types of business reference model can also depict the re-lationship between the business processes,business func-tions,and the business area’s business reference model. These reference model can be constructed in layers,and oﬀer a foundation for the analysis of service components, technology,data,and performance.4.4Operator function modelThe Operator Function Model(OFM)is proposed as an alternative to traditional task analysis techniques used by human factors engineers.An operator function model attempts to represent in mathematical form how an op-erator might decompose a complex system into simpler parts and coordinate control actions and system conﬁgu-66REFERENCESrations so that acceptable overall system performance is achieved.The model represents basic issues of knowl-edge representation,informationﬂow,and decision mak-ing in complex ler(1985)suggests that the network structure can be thought of as a possible repre-sentation of an operator’s internal model of the system plus a control structure which speciﬁes how the model is used to solve the decision problems that comprise opera-tor control functions.[32]>5See also•Bus Functional Model•Business process modeling•Data model•Enterprise modeling•Functional Software Architecture •Polynomial function model•Rational function model•Scientiﬁc modeling•Uniﬁed Modeling Language•View model6ReferencesThis article incorporates public domain material from websites or documents of the National Institute of Stan-dards and Technology.[1]FIPS Publication183released of IDEFØDecember1993by the Computer Systems Laboratory of the National In-stitute of Standards and Technology(NIST).[2]Reader’s Guide to IDEF0Function Models.Accessed27Nov2008.[3]Ben B.Graham(2002).Detail Process Charting.p.2.[4]Schlager,J.(July1956).“Systems engineering:key tomodern development”.IRE Transactions EM–3(3):64–66.doi:10.1109/IRET-EM.1956.5007383.[5]Arthur D.Hall(1962).A Methodology for Systems Engi-neering.Van Nostrand Reinhold.ISBN0-442-03046-0.[6]William Gosling(1962)The design of engineering systems.p.23[7]Tim Weilkiens(2008).Systems Engineering withSysML/UML:Modeling,Analysis,Design.Page287. [8]Harold Chestnut(1967).Systems Engineering Methods.Page254.[9]Thomas Dufresne&James Martin(2003).“ProcessModeling for E-Business”.INFS770Methods for Infor-mation Systems Engineering:Knowledge Management and E-Business.Spring2003[10]Process perspectives.In:Metamodeling and method engi-neering,Minna Koskinen,2000.[11]James Perozzo(1994)The complete guide to electronicstroubleshooting.p.72[12]William H.Von Alven(1964)Reliability engineering ex-plains:“Functional block diagrams show functional se-quences and signal paths,and items which are wired in parallel are drawn in parallel”(p.286)[13]Systems Engineering Fundamentals.Defense AcquisitionUniversity Press,2001[14]Theﬁrst version of this article is completely based on theNAS SYSTEM ENGINEERING MANUAL SECTION4.4VERSION3.106/06/06.[15]Task Analysis Tools Used Throughout Development.FAA2008.Retrieved25Sept2008.[16]FAA(2006).NAS SYSTEM ENGINEERING MAN-UAL SECTION4.4VERSION3.106/06/06.[17]IBM Corporation(1974).HIPO—A Design Aid and Doc-umentation Technique,Publication Number GC20-1851, IBM Corporation,White Plains,NY,1974.[18]Sandia National Laboratories(1992).Sandia SoftwareGuidelines Volume5Tools,Techniques,and Methodolo-gies SANDIA REPORTS85–2348qUC–32[19]Mary Ann Goodwin and Charles C.Robertson(1986).EXPERT SYSTEM VERIFICATION CONCERNS IN AN OPERATIONS ENVIRONMENT.NASA paper N88-17234.[20]NASA(1995).“Techniques of Functional Analysis”.In:NASA Systems Engineering Handbook June1995.p.142.[21]John Mylopoulos(2004).Conceptual Modelling III.Structured Analysis and Design Technique(SADT).Re-trieved21Sep2008.[22]SADT at .Retrieved21Sep2008.[23]Gavriel Salvendy(2001).Handbook of Industrial Engi-neering:Technology and Operations Management..p.508.[24]Systems Engineering Fundamentals.Defense AcquisitionUniversity Press,2001.[25]Varun Grover,William J.Kettinger(2000).ProcessThink:Winning Perspectives for Business Change in the Information Age.p.168.[26]Suh(2001).Axiomatic Design:Advances and Applica-tions,Oxford University Press,2001,ISBN0-19-513466-4[27]Paul Grefen(2010)Mastering e-Business.p.5-10[28]US Department of Interior(2000-08)Analyze the Businessand Deﬁne the Target Business Environment.Accessed27 Nov2008.7[29]“BPMN Information”.Retrieved2008-11-02.[30]Richard C.Simpson(2004).An XML Representation forCrew Procedures.Final Report NASA Faculty FellowshipProgram-2004.Johnson Space Center.[31]S.A.White,“Business Process Modeling Notation(BPMN),”In:Business Process Management Initiative(BPMI)3May2004.[32]Operator Function Model(OFM).Accessed27Nov2008.87TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES,CONTRIBUTORS,AND LICENSES 7Text and image sources,contributors,and licenses7.1Text•Function model Source:/wiki/Function%20model?oldid=632229658Contributors:TeunSpaans,Bender235,Mdd, Woohookitty,Vegaswikian,RussBot,Grafen,AGK,CmdrObot,Lamiot,Hazmat2,Mr pand,Pallaverm,EagleFan,R'n'B,Commons-Delinker,M-le-mot-dit,LittleHow,Banana Concoction,Rayhennessey,Niceguyedc,SchreiberBike,WikHead,Dekart,Jncraton,Yobot, J04n,Mark Renier,Topﬁx,Cpt2slow,John of Reading,Architectchao, ,ClueBot NG,Helpful Pixie Bot,KLBot2,Chatkan Bunnag, Mrt3366,Mogism,U2fanboi,Juca92and Anonymous:137.2Images•File:BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.svg Source:/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/ BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.svg License:Public domain Contributors:BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg<a href='///wiki/File:BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg'class='image'><img alt='BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg'src='///wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/36/BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg/50px-BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg'width='50'height='28'srcset='///wikipedia/commons/thumb/ 3/36/BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg/75px-BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg 1.5x,///wikipedia/ commons/thumb/3/36/BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg/100px-BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg2x'data-ﬁle-width='556' data-ﬁle-height='306'/></a>Original artist:BPMN-AProcesswithNormalFlow.jpg:Tttt1234•File:Commons-logo.svg Source:/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg License:?Contributors:?Original artist:?•File:FEA_BRM_Hierachy.JPG Source:/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/FEA_BRM_Hierachy.JPG License: Public domain Contributors:Analyze the Business and Deﬁne the Target Business Environment Original artist:•File:Fo2ufg823rhf832hfdorfg.JPG Source:/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/Fo2ufg823rhf832hfdorfg.JPG Li-cense:Public domain Contributors:Own work Original artist:DFD guru•File:Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg Source:/wikipedia/en/4/48/Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg License:Cc-by-sa-3.0Contributors:?Original artist:?•File:Functional_Flow_Block_Diagram_Format.jpg Source:/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/Functional_Flow_ Block_Diagram_Format.jpg License:Public domain Contributors:Transferred from en.wikipedia Original artist:Original uploader was Mdd at en.wikipedia•File:Functional_block_diagram_of_the_attitude_control_and_maneuvering_electronics_system.jpg Source:http: ///wikipedia/commons/6/65/Functional_block_diagram_of_the_attitude_control_and_maneuvering_electronics_ system.jpg License:Public domain Contributors:/SP-4002/images/fig18.jpg,see also Project Gemini Concept and Design January1962through December1962Original artist:McDonnell,“Project Gemini Familiarization Charts,”•File:IDEF_Diagram_Example.jpg Source:/wikipedia/commons/3/31/IDEF_Diagram_Example.jpg Li-cense:Public domain Contributors:<a data-x-rel='nofollow'class='external text'href='/pubs/pdf/SEFGuide%2001-01.pdf'>Systems Engineering Fundamentals.</a>Defense Acquisition University Press,2001Original artist:Defense Acquisition University •File:IPO-S_Model.gif Source:/wikipedia/en/8/80/IPO-S_Model.gif License:PD Contributors: Own workOriginal artist:Dante Xavier Bari based on the work of others.•File:N2_chart_definition.JPG Source:/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/N2_chart_definition.JPG License:Public domain Contributors:NASA(1995).“Techniques of Functional Analysis”.In:NASA Systems Engineering Handbook June1995.p.142.Original artist:NASA•File:SADT.svg Source:/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/SADT.svg License:Public domain Contributors:Own work Original artist:UlrichAAB7.3Content license•Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike3.0。

研究生英语读写教程提高级unit5

研究生英语读写教程提高级unit5The graduate-level English reading and writing course is designed to equip students with advanced skills in comprehending complex academic texts and effectively communicating their ideas through well-structured written assignments. Unit 5 of this course delves into the intricacies of research-based writing and the effective integration of sources to support one's arguments.At the core of this unit lies the understanding that academic writing at the graduate level demands a deeper level of critical analysis and the ability to synthesize information from multiple sources. Students are expected to move beyond mere summarization and instead develop a nuanced perspective on the topic at hand by engaging with scholarly literature, evaluating the validity and reliability of sources, and constructing a cohesive and well-substantiated argument.One of the key aspects of this unit is the emphasis on source integration. Students learn to skillfully incorporate relevant quotes, paraphrases, and summaries from academic sources to strengthentheir claims and provide evidence for their reasoning. This requires a thorough understanding of citation styles, such as APA or MLA, and the proper techniques for seamlessly integrating external information into the flow of the written work.Moreover, unit 5 delves into the importance of developing a clear and coherent organizational structure for research-based essays. Students are guided through the process of crafting an effective thesis statement that serves as the foundation for the entire paper. They also learn strategies for organizing their ideas in a logical manner, using transitional phrases and topic sentences to create a smooth and cohesive narrative.Another crucial component of this unit is the emphasis on critical thinking and analysis. Students are challenged to move beyond simply summarizing the existing literature and instead engage in a deeper level of critique. This involves identifying the strengths and limitations of the sources they consult, recognizing potential biases or gaps in the research, and formulating their own unique perspectives on the topic.In addition to the technical aspects of research-based writing, unit 5 also addresses the importance of effective language use and style. Students learn to refine their academic voice, employ precise and concise language, and maintain a formal and objective tonethroughout their written work. They also explore strategies for achieving clarity and coherence, such as using parallel structure, avoiding unnecessary jargon, and ensuring smooth transitions between ideas.One of the primary assignments in this unit is the research-based essay, which requires students to delve into a specific topic within their field of study and construct a well-supported argument. This exercise not only enhances their research and writing skills but also fosters their ability to think critically and engage with the scholarly discourse in their respective disciplines.As students navigate this unit, they are encouraged to actively participate in peer review activities, where they provide constructive feedback on each other's work. This collaborative approach not only helps students refine their own writing but also develops their ability to critically evaluate the work of others, a crucial skill for success in the academic and professional realms.Furthermore, unit 5 emphasizes the importance of effective time management and the development of a structured writing process. Students learn strategies for conducting efficient literature reviews, organizing their research materials, and drafting and revising their essays in a systematic manner. This helps them cultivate the self-discipline and organizational skills necessary for successful graduate-level writing.Throughout this unit, students are also exposed to various resources and tools that can support their research and writing endeavors. These include online databases, citation management software, and writing workshops or tutoring services provided by the institution. By familiarizing themselves with these resources, students are empowered to navigate the complexities of graduate-level writing with greater confidence and efficiency.In conclusion, unit 5 of the graduate-level English reading and writing course is a crucial component in the development of advanced academic writing skills. By focusing on research-based writing, source integration, critical analysis, and effective language use, this unit prepares students to engage with the rigorous demands of graduate-level scholarship and to contribute meaningfully to the scholarly discourse within their respective fields. Through a combination of instruction, practice, and collaborative learning, students emerge from this unit equipped with the necessary tools and strategies to succeed in their academic and professional pursuits.。

时间是本质：对迈克尔曼《社会权力来源》的一个评论

Time is of the Essence:Remarks on Michael Mann’s The Sources of Social PowerI would like to begin this commentary on Michael Mann’s (b.1942) work by focusing upon his critical engagement with Theda Skocpol in the second volume of The Sources of Social Power, his magnum opus and one of the most ambitiously conceived sociological treatises of the last few decades. The object of this engagement is post-revolutionary France. In Mann’s view, while it is indisputable that French revolutionaries modernized and bureaucratized state administration, this does not mean that the size or scope of total administration increased at all. Also, the performance of the revolutionary state was far from the image of efficiency it projected of itself. For instance, its fiscal record was pathetic; it was unable to collect more than 10% of the taxes it demanded. For most of the nineteenth century, France had not one administration but several ministries, in which personal discretion prevailed over the abstractness and universality one associates with modern bureaucracy. Mann writes: ‘So the French Revolution, like the American, promised more bureaucracy than it delivered. (…) Skocpol and Tilly emphasize bureaucratization and state power; I emphasize their limits’’ (Mann 1993, p. 463).Enlightening as this critical remark certainly is about Michael Mann’s relative positioning within the sub-field of historical-comparative sociology, it tells us little about his position within social theory more generally. For that, which is the aim of this paper, the relevant comparison is not with Skocpol, Tilly, or the later Giddens, who can all be said to illustrate the recent empirical turn in social theory, but with Talcott Parsons, the single most influential post-war American sociologist whose structural-functionalism reigned supreme practically until the early-1970s.Mann’s lifelong aim has been to produce a theory with a degree of abstractness and generality equivalent to Parsons’s structural functionalism. Unlike Parsons, however, Mann rejects a conception of human societies as social systems founded upon on shared beliefs and expectations. Mann’s alternative consists in claiming that society is not a totality, neither is it a system. Instead, he offers us an analytical point of entry to deal with the ‘impure’ and ‘promiscuous’’ (1993, p. 10) complexity of social life in the form of a model of the overlapping and intersecting networks of power that constitute society. Mann distinguishes four sources of social power: ideological, economic, military, and political power (IEMP). Unlike Parsons’s AGIL model, Mann’s IEMP model does not refer to an abstract social system divided into sub-systems or dimensions. Rather, it is a formalization of the major social networks present in concrete human societies from the beginning of historical records to the present. Let us now see in further detail how Mann conceptualizes the sources of social power and their institutional forms. This will be followed by a brief analysis of two books in which he applies this ‘developmental account of an abstraction, power’ (Mann 1986, p. 538), to concrete historical phenomena such as fascism and ethnic cleansing. I conclude with a brief discussion of some of the questions raised by Mann’s studies of the key category of events.The starting assumption of Mann’s IEMP model is that social life can best be conceived of as a drama in which social actors struggle, sometimes to the death, to control ideological, economic, military, and political power organizations. The exercise of general power over a territory is made through a combination of four specific types of power. ‘Ideological power’ refers to the social power that the control of an ideology brings to those groups and individuals who monopolize it. Mann has This text builds upon and expands the discussion of Michael Mann’s work in Baert & Silva, 2010: 170-181.two distinct examples in mind here; religions and secular ideologies such as liberalism, socialism, and nationalism. The importance of these meaning-producing movements lies in their ability to control a crucial human need, namely to find meaning in life, be it in a religious ritual or in a political rally. ‘Economic power’ is particularly important as it concerns the need to produce in order to subsist. No human society can survive for very long without extracting, transforming, distributing, and consuming natural resources. The struggle for the control of economic power is thus a crucial feature of social life. Going beyond Marx, Mann argues that the organizational forms of economic power include not only social classes, but also social sections and segments. For instance, any given social class is composed of several sections (say, a skilled trade), whereas a segment is here used as a group whose members are drawn from several classes (say, the social segment‘patron-client’ includes members of at least two different social classes). Mann’s analysis is thus more fine-grained than conventional social class analysis, dealing better with the multi-causal and multi-level character of most social phenomena.‘Military power’ refers to how the modern nation-state has a monopoly of violence. This source of social power is relatively recent. Until the nineteenth century, armies were often controlled by noblemen as in the Middle Ages), or had substantial autonomy from the political power. So general power is exercised through a combination of all four types, which enjoy relative autonomy from each other. The last type, ‘political power’, refers to the power exerted by the state (on his theory of the state, see also Mann 1988). The regulation of the nation-state's territory by a central administrative bureaucracy has proved to be an essential ingredient in modern human history.Mann labels his theory of the state as ‘institutional statism’, a part of his more general ‘organizational materialism’ (Mann 1993, p. 52). His theory of the state comes in two stages. First, Mann tries to provide an institutional definition of the state. In order to do so, he reinterprets Weber’s conception of the state from a neo-institutionalist perspective. He is thus able to identify several organized actors in domestic and foreign policy, the two main areas of state intervention. Second, by resorting to a functionalist analysis, he seeks to counter the tendency of institutionalist analysis to proliferate organizational complexity. He does this by developing a polymorphous theory of ‘higher-level state crystallizations’’ (Mann 1993, p. 54). What does this mean? The idea is that every state is polymorphous, i.e., it is composed of multiple institutions. Over time, these institutions tend to crystallize. Thus realist scholars tend to claim that modern states have crystallized into security-pursuing states, whereas Marxists usually argue that they have crystallized as capitalist states. Mann’s approach offers a synthesis of these perspectives. In his view, there are four basic ‘higher-level crystallizations’ –‘capitalist, militarist, representative, and national’ (Mann 1993, p. 81) – none of which has ever enjoyed hegemonic status.Mann has recently applied this social theoretical framework to the analysis of concrete historical phenomena. In the 2004 Fascists, the book whose translation into Portuguese has brought us here together today, Mann offers an exemplary combination of historical in-depth research and general social-scientific analysis. He comes very close to actually bridging the gap between history and sociology. First, he engages in a comparison of the trajectories of fascist movements in Germany, Italy, Spain, Austria, Hungary, and Romania. Second, he provides insightful single country inter-regional comparisons. Third, he combines these with analyses of the successive phases of the developmental process of each fascist movement (Mann 2004, pp. 1-30). Mann is thus able to make a relevant contribution to the literature on authoritarian regimes. He shows that in all six cases there is a prevalent core fascist constituency, i.e., a social basis of support that made it possible for fascist regimes toemerge and consolidate. Rather than being supported by the lower middle class, as it is usually assumed, Mann demonstrates that a heterogeneous social set comprising soldiers, veterans, civil servants, teachers, and members of an ethnic majority living in a disputed territory provided fascism with its social basis of support. Furthermore, Mann shows that in Nazi Germany a segment of civil society (namely, small-town, Protestant, middle-class associations) provided key support to Hitler’s regime. (Mann 2004, pp. 177-206). This finding seems to confirm Jeffrey Alexander’s thesis in Real Civil Societies on the ambivalent character of civil society, while crucially questioning the pervasive assumption in so many neo-Tocquevillian empirical political science studies of ‘trust’ and ‘social capital’, according to which civic participation is necessarily connecte d with liberal democracy. What Mann’s Fascists shows us is that it is not. Civic participation does not necessarily promote liberal democracy; it can, and often does, promote authoritarianism.Another application of his social theory is The Dark Side of Democracy, a monumental study of ethnic cleansing first published in 2005. Oddly enough, however, Mann’s analysis of ethnic cleansing is not limited to democratic regimes, either in formation or established. Most of the book is not about democracies at all. Mann discusses at length the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust, the communist cleansing, the former Yugoslavia, and Rwanda. Contrary to what is suggested by the title, ethnic cleansing emerges not as the dark side of democracy but of nationalism. This incongruity, however, should not discourage readers. The Dark Side of Democracy is, beyond doubt, the single best work by a historical sociologist on ethnic cleansing available today. Mann begins by identifying a set of necessary conditions for ethnic cleansing to occur (Mann 2005, pp. 1-33). These include: 1) a divided elite from which a segment becomes radicalized; 2) a core constituency composed chiefly of young males, which is mobilized in support of the radical segment of the elite; 3) several ethnic groups, with competing claims on territory and the state; 4) a crisis situation that dramatically enhances a sense of insecurity amongst the elite. Generalizing from several case studies, Mann suggests that typically ethnic cleansing occurs when three factors come together: there is a radicalized segment of the elite, it is in control of the state, and it mobilizes its social support to carry out the killings in response to the intensification of the crisis situation. Mann is thus rejecting two established explanations of ethnic cleansing, that it requires massive social support and that is a state-planned endeavour. On the contrary, he claims, murderous ethnic cleansing, a distinctively modern phenomenon, has been the work of a relative few and it is far from being a carefully implemented state policy planned long in advance.What these works demonstrate is Mann’s singular ability to move back and forth between the explanation of particular historical events, and the explanation of macro-historical units of analysis such as societies or civilizations. To a large extent, this ability stems from what William Sewell has aptly described as Mann’s: ‘eventful conception of temporality’ (2005, p. 121). There are three reasons for this. First, Mann’s analyses clearly e mphasize the interconnectedness of social temporalities and social space. In other words, his sensitivity to historical events goes hand-in-hand with a conception of social space as constituted by multiple, overlapping networks, rather than social systems. Second, by adopting a long-term perspective, he is able to reconfigure the very notion of event. Events are no longer confined to episodic, short-term changes – processes that mark decisive breaks with history and bring about deep and irreversible structural transformations. Even if these processes lasted for centuries, they are nevertheless to be understood as events. Third, his eventful sociology forces us to reconsider the directionality of historical change. In particular, I find especially relevant the way Mann is able to undercut the dichotomy between evolutionary teleology and the all-too common denial that historical directionality is an issue at all. He does so by emphasizing the interconnectedness of individual agentsand structural patterns of change. In their ‘attempt to control the world and increase their rewards within it by setting up power organizations of varying but patterned types and strengths’, Mann tells us in his characteristic style, ‘real men and women impose patterns’. These ‘power struggles are the principal patternings of history, but their outcomes have often been close-up’ (1986, p. 532). Mann undercuts the dichotomy between evolutionary teleology and the denial of historical directionality by reconciling historical development(indeed, one of Mann’s central questions relates to how power resources develop), with an appreciation of the role of historical contingency.Despite the criticisms that have been levelled at Michael Mann’s work in and beyond sociology departments over the years, I confess that I am very much taken by this kind of approach. Why? Because we seldom find anyone so seriously engaged in reconnecting social scientific explanation, the sacrosanct aim of 'numbers-and-maths' social scientists, and macro-history, commonly thought to be the natural turf of humanist-inclined historians. Time and again, Mann has shown that this separation is not a necessity, but a choice. For this reason alone, if no other, Michael Mann’s historically-minded macro-sociology has much to commend it.Filipe Carreira da SilvaCambridge, EnglandJune 2, 2012ReferencesBaert, P. & F.C. Silva. 2010. Social Theory in the Twentieth Century and Beyond. Cambridge: Polity.Mann, M. 1986. The Sources of Social Power. Volume I. A History of Power from the Beginning to A.D. 1760. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Mann, M. 1988. States, War and Capitalism. Oxford: Blackwell.Mann, M. 1993. The Sources of Social Power. Volume II. The Rise of Classes and Nation-states, 1760-1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Mann, M. 2004. Fascists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Mann, M. 2005. The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Sewell, W. 2005. The Logics of History. Social Theory and Social Transformation. Chicago: Chicago University Press.。

1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。

The Organizational Structure of Emergency Management System in China Kaibin Zhong; Xiaoli LuFor Crisis Response Journal volume 9 issue 1We have provided a general introduction about the Chinese emergency management system in the previous issue. As presented in the previous article, one of the major initiatives in the Chinese emergency management system over the past decade has been the establishment of a preliminary organizational structure nationwide (see Figure 1). This article will describe the role of the State Council, the Emergency Management Office, the inter-agency coordination committees, and the military played in the newly established structure.The State CouncilThe State Council (namely the Central People's Government), China’s Cabinet, is the chief administrative authority of China both in normal times and during a disaster. The State Council is chaired by the Premier and currently includes the premier, four vice premiers, five state councilors (of whom two still head ministries), and 25 ministers and chairs of major agencies. According to the Emergency Response Law of the People’s Republic of China, which became effective as of November 1, 2007, the premier is responsible for managing an especially serious emergency situation. Vice premiers and state councilors usually serve as commanders leading the response to a single type emergency.1Based on disaster impacts, the State Council held the power to form a temporary national command to cope with large-scale emergencies; and when necessary, may send a task group to guide or even take over local response. For example, during the 2002-2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) crisis, which finally infected more than 5300 people and killed 349 in China before it was brought under control in June 2003, the State Council formed a command center on April 23, 2003, with the female Vice-Premier Wu Yi as the chief commander.The national-level command headquarters will only be activated when catastrophic disasters hit, while most disasters are mainly handled by ministries or bureaus based on the type of disaster agent. For example, the China Earthquake Administration is responsible for dealing with earthquakes, the China Meteorological Administration is responsible for managing meteorological related disasters, Ministry of Civil Affairs is responsible for natural disaster relief, Ministry of Water Resources is responsible for coping with floods, typhoons, and droughts, State Administration of Work Safety is responsible for handling industrial accidents, Ministry of Health is responsible for dealing with epidemic diseases or public health-related accidents, and Ministry of 1The Emergency Response Law has divided emergencies into four major types: natural disasters, industrial disasters, public health incidents, and societal safety incidents.Public Security is responsible for managing terrorist threats and social unrests. These ministries and agencies will facilitate, at the national level, coordination among supporting ministries or bureaus, as well as supervise provincial governments in their response to disasters. At the provincial, prefectural and county governments, there are similar coordinating organizations responsible for emergency management (as shown in Figure 1).Figure 1 The Organizational Structure of Emergency Management System in ChinaThe Emergency Management OfficeThe ill preparedness to the SARS crisis in the early 2003 prompted the Chinese government to reconsider its traditional ad-hoc and reactive approach to emergency management and prioritize the development of a permanent emergency management bureau. Article 9 of the Emergency Response Law has formalized the role of the Emergency Management Office (EMO). The Chinese government began to establish or restructure two types of EMOs: one is the comprehensive EMOs, which are supposed to support the Chief Executive at each level of government, such as the premier, governors, mayors and county heads, in managing emergencies in their jurisdictions comprehensively; the other is specialized EMOs, which are designed to support ministers or department heads at the national level and departments or bureaus in local governments to cope with those four categorized emergencies respectively.In December 2005, a national EMO was officially established. This office is supposed to provide a framework for a comprehensive emergency management program that directs planning, preparation, response and recovery. The EMO has been designed to serve as an inter-agency liaison for all emergency management and national security program activities through the State Council, ensuring the integrity of an emergency management program is attained through the integration of all programs, systems, assets, capabilities, training, and response mechanisms. However, it did not achieve the ambitious goals, but only serves as an information hub for premiers in the State Council. Afterwards, comprehensive EMOs have flourished at the provincial, prefectural and county governments. By the end of 2012, all the provincial governments, 96.1 percent of the prefecture-level governments and 80.8 percent of the county-level governments, have set up comprehensive EMOs.2The ministries either restructured their existing EMOs or established new ones to coordinate their response to the four categorized crises. In the organizational restructure process, these specialized EMOs were given positions to hire professional staff and budgets for purchasing technically advanced facilities. All those specialized EMOs in ministries are connected to the national comprehensive EMO. In line with the central government, local governments set up their own specialized EMOs with close connections with ones in their higher level department or ministries and the comprehensive EMO in their local government. For example, in managing public health crises, 27 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities in China had created their specialized EMOs by the end of 2005.The Specialized Interagency CommitteesSpecialized interagency committee (namely advisory and coordinating organs under the State Council), which approximate what U.S. Government bureaucrats call “Interagency Working Groups”, is one unique category of the administrative 2 Hong Yi (ed.). China Emergency Management Report (2012). Beijing: Chinese Academy of Governance Press, 2012, pp.5-11.agencies of the State Council in China.3 The main function of the interagency committees is to coordinate important affairs across administrative agencies of the State Council, and stipulate interim administrative measures under special or urgent circumstances. According to the Regulations on Administration of the Establishment and Staffing of the Administrative Agencies of the State Council, which was promulgated by the State Council on 3 August 1997, “The organization and coordination of the important work across administrative agencies of the State Council shall be undertaken by the advisory and coordination agencies of the State Council [Article 6].” Each interagency committee is stationed in a specific ministry or commission and has an affiliated office to handle daily affairs.Table 1 A list of the national level specialized inter-agency committees foremergency managementName AbbreviationYear(establishment)Ministries(resident in)FunctionsFood Safety Committee of the State Council FSCSC 2010China Food and DrugAdministrationFood safetyNational Forest Fire Prevention Headquarter NFFPH 2006State ForestryAdministrationForest firesNational Flood Control and Drought Relief Headquarter NFCDRH 1950Ministry of WaterResourcesFloods, typhoons anddroughtsEarthquake ReliefHeadquarters of the State Council ERHSC 2000China EarthquakeAdministrationEarthquakeNational Committee forDisaster ReductionNCDR 1989 Ministry of Civil Affairs Natural disaster reliefWork Safety Committee of the State Council WSCSC 2003State Administration ofWork SafetyIndustrial accidentsUnder the state council, there are currently six specialized interagency committees or headquarters (as shown in Figure 1),which are responsible for coordination between bureaucratic stovepipes in times of crisis. These interagency committees or headquarters are led by the premier, a vice-premier or state councilor with their daily work respectively undertaken by one specific ministry or agency (as shown in Table 1). The supporting staff of these committees or headquarters come from specialized State Council level entities, such as the National Disaster Reduction Center of the Ministry of Civil Affairs, the National Workplace Emergency Management Center of the State Administration of Work Safety, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention of the Ministry of Health, and the Command Center of the Ministry of 3Frank Miller and Andrew Scobell, “‘Decision-making Under Stress’ or ‘Crisis Management’?in Lieu of a Conclusion. ” In Andrew Scobell and Larry M. Wortzel, eds., Chinese National Security Decision Making Under Stress. Carlisle, PA, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College, September 2005, pp. 229-248.Public Security.Specialized interagency committees have been established at local government levels as well, with efforts to achieve “unified leadership combining vertical and horizontal agencies.”4-5One notable difference between inter-agencies at the central and local government is that, besides those specialized interagency committees responsible for only one single type of emergency, some provincial, prefectural, or county governments have set up Emergency Management Committees (EMC) responsible for all-hazard responses, while such kind of EMC has not yet been established at the national level. At EMC, the chief executive officer at each level of governments – governors, mayors and county heads – will act as the chairperson of the committee, with comprehensive EMO of the corresponding level of governments to work as its daily working office. By the end of 2012, all the provincial governments, 97.8 percent of the prefecture-level governments and 89.6 percent of the county-level governments, have established their EMCs.The Military SectorDifferent with most western democracies, the Chinese military sector has long been active in disaster and emergency response, often performing heroic deeds against very unfavorable odds. According to the Emergency Response Law, “The People’s Liberation Army of China (PLA), People’s Armed Police Force and militia organizations shall participate in the emergency response rescue and operations in accordance with the provisions of this Law and other relevant laws, administrative regulations and military regulations as well as orders of the State Council and the Central Military Commission [Article 14].” Regulation on the Army's Participation in Disaster Rescue released in 2005 further defined the role of military in emergency response. The EMO under the General Staff Department of the PLA was set up after the Wenchuan earthquake in 2008, which is directly connected to the EMO of the State Council.In recent years, the military increased its professionalization, became more important in the specialized inter-agency committee and institutionalized its assistance to emergency response. Following the responding to catastrophes in the past few years,6 the Chinese military reviewed its crisis management capabilities in the context of “military operations other than war” (MOOTW), and formed in May, 2009, eight specialized emergency response units with 50,000 professional soldiers to assist the civil response to emergencies, such as floods, earthquakes, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents, major transportation accidents, and 4Richard P. Suttmeier, “China’s Management of Environmental Crises: Risks, Recreancy, and Response.” In Jae Ho Chung (ed.). China's Crisis Management. London. Routledge, 2011.5Lan Xue and Kaibin Zhong, “Turning Danger to Opportunities: Reconstructing China's National System for Emergency Management After 2003.” In Howard Kunreuther and Michael Useem eds. Learning from Catastrophes: Strategies for Reaction and Response. Wharton School Publishing, 2009, pp. 190-210.6Over 130 thousand military forces have been mobilized to respond to the Wenchuan Earthquake in 2008.international disaster response and peacekeeping assignments. In the recent adjustment of specialized inter-agency committee members in the spring of 2013, the Deputy Chief of staff of PLA has become the vice commander of the Earthquake Relief Headquarters of the State Council and the National Flood Control and Drought Relief Headquarters. In order to buffer the coordination between different hierarchies from the military and local governments, temporary Party committees were set up widely at the county and township levels to make joint decisions during the response to the recent 2013 Lushan Earthquake.An illustrative case: the National Emergency Command Structure responding to the 2008 Wenchuan EarthquakeWhen the deadly earthquake that measured at 8.0 Ms hit Sichuan on May 12, 2008, causing large number of death and enormous damages, the state council decided to set up a nation-level Wenchuan Earthquake Rescue and Relief Headquarters (WERRH) a few hours after the shock. Meanwhile, frontline command centers and its sub-frontline centers were established right on spot of the disaster areas. The establishment of WERRH was consistent with the National Earthquake Contingency Plan, which specified that Earthquake Relief Headquarters of the State Council would be set up to coordinate and lead the national disaster response if the earthquake was graded as especially serious.7 With then Premier Wen Jiabao as the chief head, WERRH was responsible for coordinating national efforts of disaster rescue and relief, and consisted of eight working groups.8 As shown in Table 2, each working group was assigned emergency supporting functions and headed by a leading ministry and supported by several other ministries and agencies. The General Office of the State Council, the mother agency of the national EMO, became an information hub of disaster response, which coordinated and communicated with working groups to implement decisions made by the headquarters, and organized WERRH conferences. On May 21, an expert committee consisting of thirty experts from different disciplines was set up to advise the national policies of disaster response and recovery.Table 2 Nine supporting work groups and their functions at WERRHName Emergency supporting functionLeading agency Supporting agenciesDisaster search and rescue group Debris removal, search and rescue, life-saving assistanceHeadquarters of the GeneralStaff of PLAMinistry of Public Security,State Administration of Work Safety (National Command of Emergency Rescue for Work Safety), China Earthquake7 The plan specified that earthquakes are graded into four categories according to their disaster impacts: ordinary, large, serious, and especially serious (impacts from low to high). 8 There was one more group to add in the headquarters on May 15 to cope with the threats caused by reservoirs, or rivers, and resume drinking water supply in disaster impacted areas.Administration, People’s ArmedPolice Force, PLA ChengduMilitary CommandDisaster aid group Planning emergency assistance and resource support and supply; disaster housing; disaster survivors service; donation managementMinistry of Civil Affairs Ministry of Foreign Affairs, National Development andReform Commission, Ministryof Finance, Ministry of Housingand Urban-Rural Development,Ministry of Agriculture,Ministry of Commerce ， TheRed Cross Society of ChinaDisaster forecast and monitoring group Monitor and prevent secondary disasters; water quality monitor and hazardous materials response China Earthquake Administration Ministry of Science and Technology ， Ministry of Land and Resources, Ministry of Environmental Protection, ChinaMeteorological Administration,State Administration of Science,Technology and Industry forNational DefenceMedical and health group Public health and medical service; disease prevention; food security and safety Ministry of Health National Development and Reform Commission, Ministryof Agriculture, GeneralAdministration of QualitySupervision, Inspection andQuarantine, State Food and DrugAdministration, GeneralLogistics Department of PLA,People’s Armed Police ForcePublic security group Public facility and resource security; Public safety and security support; Preventing crimes; Ministry of Public Security Ministry of Education, Ministry of Justice, People's Bank ofChina, China BankingRegulatory Commission, ChinaSecurities RegulatoryCommission, National TourismAdministration, State Bureau forLetters and Calls, People’sArmed Police ForcePublic relation group Emergency information release; organizing media reports; coordinating emergency Propaganda Department of the CPC Central Committee Ministry of Foreign Affairs, State Administration of Radio,Film and Television, TaiwanAffairs Office of the StateCouncil, Hong Kong and MacaoAffairs Office of the Stateinformation release to Hongkong, Macao, Taiwan, and foreigncountries anddistricts; publicopinion analysisand guidanceCouncil, Information Office of the State Council, China Earthquake AdministrationThe group for critical infrastructure protection and restoration, and disaster reconstruction Critical infrastructure protection and restoration, life-saving and life-sustaining resource purchase and transportation National Development and Reform Commission Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Ministry of Civil Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, Ministry of Transport, Ministry of Railways,Ministry of Agriculture,State-owned Assets Supervisionand Administration Commissionof the State Council, StateAdministration of Radio, Filmand Television, StateAdministration of Work Safety,China Banking RegulatoryCommission, State ElectricityRegulatory Commission, StatePost Bureau, Civil AviationAdministration of China, StateGrid Corporation of ChinaGroup of production resumption Disaster impact assessment; planning national support and assistance for production resumption Ministry of Industry and Information Technology National Development and Reform Commission, Ministry of Finance, Ministry ofCommerce ，Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, Ministry of Agriculture, State-owned Assets Supervisionand Administration Commissionof the State Council, StateAdministration of Work Safety,China Insurance RegulatoryCommission, StateAdministration of Science,Technology and Industry forNational DefenceWater Cope with the Ministry of National Development andmanagement group threats caused byreservoirs, orrivers; resumedrinking watersupply in disasterimpacted areas.WaterResources,Reform Commission, Ministryof Finance, Ministry of Land andResources, Ministry ofEnvironmental Protection,Ministry of Housing andUrban-Rural Development,Ministry of Health, Ministry ofAgriculture, China EarthquakeAdministration, ChinaMeteorological Administration,State Electricity RegulatoryCommission, CombatDepartment at theHeadquarters of the GeneralStaff of PLAAuthor informationKaibin Zhong is Associate Professor, National Institute of Emergency Management, Chinese Academy of Governance, and Xiaoli Lu is Founding Co-ordinator, China Crisis Management Website (). Both authors are Guest Research Fellows, Center for Crisis Management Research, School of Public Policy & Management, Tsinghua University, China.This research was supported by grants from the CNSF (91224009) and the Ministry of Education of PRC (20115000317).。