Structural Mismatches between Prescribed Governmental Response Routines and Actual Hurricane Response Collaboration Networks: Implications for Disaster Management Policy

Crisis response collaboration is critical for timely and effective emergency management. While formal guidelines such as the Incident Command System (ICS) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)'s Mission Assignments program provide a standardized procedure for response, they may not be suitable for major crises that require non-routine tasks. Mismatches between routine response guidelines and actual response collaborations can lead to poor coordination and information sharing, delaying assistance to affected populations. This study examines the types and extent of mismatches between prescribed routines and actual response collaborations during the response to four major U.S. hurricanes. We compared collaboration networks constructed from formal response guidelines and actual response structures extracted from FEMA's Mission Assignments, Statements of Work, and daily Situational Reports. We found minimal similarity between the prescribed governmental response routines and actual response collaboration networks at both the egocentric and whole-network levels. Similarity is present only between the federal routine response guidelines and the actual response networks at the egocentric level (Jaccard NodeSim: 0.2%-3%, Jaccard EdgeSim: 0.001%-0.7%) and between the local formal response guidelines and statement-of-work response networks at the whole-network level (exhibiting scale-free topologies). Our findings have implications for response policy planning and suggest the need to refine response plans in order to align with actual crisis response structures.