Cross-Agency Risk Assessment And Planning: Gaps And Implications For UK Resilience

Abstract

Purpose: This paper looks at the conceptualisation and operationalisation of risk assessment and planning by the Category 1 responders in the United Kingdom, and how the cross-agency gaps impact integration in the United Kingdom before responding to an emergency.

Design/methodology/approach: A qualitative design was followed, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight senior professionals working in key emergency response organisations. NVivo was used to analyse data on the thematic level and compare cross-agency practices and find patterns of alignment and divergence.

Findings: sThe results demonstrate that, although domain knowledge is strong, risk assessment and planning are influenced by institutional priorities, resulting in a lack of coherent integration and inconsistencies in risk interpretation. While Local Resilience Forums contribute to coordination, the underlying epistemic differences are not adequately addressed, leading to procedural rather than substantive integration.

Originality: The paper presents the Cross-Agency Risk Integration Gap Framework (CARIGF) as a framework that has identified perception, translation, and integration gaps as the main causes of misalignment.

Practical implications: To improve resilience, one needs to have a common understanding of risks, cohesive knowledge systems, and enhanced cross-agency learning mechanisms.

Limitations: Results are derived using a qualitative sample, which was small, but can be generalized to the multi-agency emergency management setting.