Revealing the Differences in Regional Potential Emergency Capability and Emergency Performance

A Comparative Analysis of Statistical Methods and Case Studies

Dados Bibliográficos

ID7158904
AutoresRan Yi (0000-0003-1858-3358, Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing China), Shouhao Zhang (0009-0004-1003-9109, Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing China), An Chen (0000-0002-6275-759X, Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing China, autor correspondente)
Ano2026
Volume34
Fascículo1
Data de publicação2026-03-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoJournal of Contingencies and Crisis Management (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0966-0879 • E-ISSN: 1468-5973
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/1468-5973.70119
OpenAlexW7127308479
IdiomaEN
Referências citadas56

Frequent and severe emergencies have significantly hindered the region's sustainable development. Existing research based on statistical methods essentially measures a region's potential emergency capability (PEC), defined as the expected capability under static resources and institutions. However, emergency performance (EP), namely the dynamic performance exhibited during emergency management processes, ultimately determines outcomes. Measuring regional EP and understanding discrepancies between EP and PEC are essential for enhancing regional resilience. This study collected the five most severe emergencies and their corresponding emergency management processes in each Chinese province from 2016 to 2023 to construct an emergency case library (1240 cases in total). Using the preparation–response–rescue–recovery framework, the Delphi method was applied to assess the EP through case library analysis. Based on the same framework, PEC was evaluated by replicating the mainstream statistical methods employed in existing research. Subsequently, differences between EP and PEC were examined by constructing a continuous differential index with confidence intervals. The results show that: (1) China's EP presented a fluctuating upward trend but remained low overall, with significant regional differences (eastern > western > central > northeast). (2) PEC demonstrated an upward trend but exhibited weaknesses in preparation and response capacities. (3) EP in Hainan, Xinjiang, and Xizang was significantly higher than PEC, while EP in Hunan and Shandong was significantly lower than PEC. The magnitude of the EP–PEC discrepancy across dimensions followed the order: preparation > rescue > response > recovery. (4) The disparity in resource conversion efficiency constituted the fundamental source of differences between EP and PEC and was shaped by resource availability, organizational learning ability, environmental support ability, and resource integration ability. This study advocates assessing emergency level through actual emergency management processes, emphasizing the importance of dynamic and situational factors

Delphi method · Emergency management · Emergency response · Statistical analysis · Sustainable development · Disaster Management and Resilience · Facility Location and Emergency Management · Flood Risk Assessment and Management