Table 4 Analysis results of key activities
Activity | Subject | Instruments | Environments (i.e., Community, Division of labor, Rule) | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Contradictions to be resolved | (Later became B.O.) | |||
Transformation of cross-border governance structure (2001–2004) | Initial partners of VIKING Alliance | Project meetings (physical) | Dutch side: The Province of Gelderland and some regional agencies (e.g., fire depts., water boards, etc.) | New governance structure of VIKING Alliance (2004, February) |
Lobbying | ||||
→Participation and resources to perform all expected collaboration activities | German side: The Region of Düsseldorf. | →Expanded & mandated participation | ||
→Authority to mobilized all stakeholders | The Province of Gelderland coordinates other Dutch partners, while Region of Düsseldorf represents Water Mgmt. and (non-member) German agencies in the region. | →Symmetric distribution of authority and control across the border | ||
The roles of Police, municipalities, and ambulance services cannot be covered by the initial partners. | ||||
Agencies in one country must be controlled by a higher authority in the same country, but there was no clear hierarchy set for the Alliance. | ||||
Development of IS for DM collaboration (2005, May-November) | Transformed VIKING Alliance (esp. steering committee) | Project meetings (physical) with the end-user groups and key stakeholders | An expanded set of alliance partners with incompatible IS. | FLIWAS (version 1 was first released in November 2005) |
→Exceedingly fragmented ISs | Decentralized/unorganized info sharing | All partners in one country are now under the leadership of a single program manager in that country. | -First possibility of cross-boundary information sharing | |
→Need to support agencies in two countries/languages | EU Funding secured by the transparent governance structure | -Awareness of the potential of DMIS for effective flood management | ||
→The deployment, access, and use of the IS must be easy for the large number of partners | ISD feasibility study | -VIKING Cockpit (first online release in June 2006) | ||
Development of IS for ISD Collaboration | ” | ” | Increasing number of alliance partners (e.g., the Dutch National Ministry of Internal Affairs) | →Efficient cross-border info sharing, knowledge/project management for collaborative ISD |
(2006, January-June) | + | Prospect of extended funding by the European commission | Easy access to & evaluation of DM IS (FLIWAS online version) | |
→Inadequacy of physical project meetings for the large stakeholders | Advanced knowledge/project management technologies | |||
→Inadequacy of decentralized information sharing among the large stakeholders | Existing Internet infrastructure | |||
→Need easier access to FLIWAS | FLIWAS (web-invoked light version) | |||
Institutionalization of regular field exercises (November 2005-May 2009) | ” | ” | Increasing number of alliance partners & other stakeholders (spectators, potential partners/adopters/investors) | Cross-border DM |
→Need to evaluate the performance of cross-border DM collaboration, information sharing, and DMIS | + | Prospect of commercialization (consultation and software delivery) to other countries in Europe | Exercises (HAGAR exercises in 2005, HELGA exercises in 2006 ROAR exercises in 2008) | |
Need to demonstrate and promote the program for continued support | FLIWAS | →Demonstration of the successful progress & justification of the collaboration program | ||
VIKING Cockpit | →Empirical test and improvement of collaborative DM IS (FLIWAS) & DM performance | |||
Performance metrics | →Stronger sense of community/partnership | |||
Independent consultants | ||||
Academic researchers | ||||
Exercise planning, advertisement, promotion |