Document Type : Research articles


1 Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 1- Research Center for Emergency and Disaster Resilience, Red Crescent Society of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Tehran, Iran. 2- Iran-Helal Institute of Applied-Science and Technology, Red Crescent Society of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Tehran, Iran.


Background: A conceptual model is always a suitable way to show the relationship between the different components of a process or among different processes. In the field of incident management, there are several models. However, there is almost no simple, natural, conceptual model to show the relationship between disaster risk management.
Methods: Because of the need for the development of a simple model that can quickly and at a glance relate the overall steps and components of the risk management process and various phases of disaster management, this model has been invented based on the evaluation of previous studies and reviewing current literature as well as refining the research and innovation done by the authors.
Results: In this article, a new model, which is called the Egg model, including the shell, the white (albumen) and the yellow (yolk) parts, is introduced. In which, risk management includes three steps. The first step is the assignment of a body, either a person, team or organization, as responsible (the resembling the shell). In the second step, the body does the assessment of the risk (resembling the white part). Risk assessment, on its own, includes risk identification, risk analysis, and risk evaluation. Finally, (resembling the yellow part), treatment of the risk(s) is begun which includes, prevention and mitigation, and preparedness before the disaster and, response and recovery after the disaster occurrence. Obviously, without an intact shell, the whole egg (albumen and yolk) will decay and all resources will be lost. Also without assessment of the risks, proper and effective management of the disaster is almost impossible. The third step of the risk management, the risk treatment, is in fact the disaster management.
Conclusion: This simple model shows the relationship between risk management and risk treatment. Although this model may have oversimplified the process of Risk Management, it helps to create a unique overview and understanding for almost everyone


  1. Kelly C. Simplifying disasters: developing a model for complex non-linear events. Austral J Emerg Manag. 1999;14(1):25-7.
  2. Heath RL, O'Hair HD. Handbook of risk and crisis communication. London: Routledge; 2010.
  3. Cimellaro GP, Fumo C, Reinhorn AM, Bruneau M. Quantification of disaster resilience of health care facilities. Buffalo, NY: MCEER; 2009.
  4. Asghar S, Alahakoon D, Churilov L. A comprehensive conceptual model for disaster management. J Humanit Assistance. 2006;1360(0222):1-5.
  5. Harrison SE, Johnson PA. Crowdsourcing the disaster management cycle. Int J Inform Syst Cris Resp Manag. 2016;8(4):17-40. doi: 10.4018/IJISCRAM.2016100102.
  6. Valadbeigi B, Poorheidari G. Disaster planning. Tehran: Iranian Scientific Association for Disaster Management; 2015.
  7. Poorheidari G, Valadbeigi B. Textbook of Integrated and Comprehensive Disaster Management. Tehran: Iranian Scientific Association for Disaster Management; 2012.
  8. Boin A, Stern E, Sundelius B. The politics of crisis management: Public leadership under pressure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2016.
  9. Poorheidari G, Valadbeigi B. A Guide to site emergency planning. Tehran: Iranian Scientific Association for Disaster Management; 2014.
  10. Sutton J, Tierney K. Disaster preparedness: concepts, guidance, and research. Colorado: University of Colorado; 2006. P. 1-41.
  11. Cyganik KA. Disaster preparedness in Virginia Hospital Center-Arlington after Sept 11, 2001. Disaster Manag Response. 2003;
    1(3):80-6. doi: 10.1016/s1540-2487(03)00048-8. [PubMed: 12888746].
  12. Center Asian Disaster Preparedness. Building disaster risk reduction in Asia: a way forward: ADPC looks ahead to 2015. Bangkok, Thailand: Asian Disaster Preparedness Center; 2000.
  13. Pradhananga R, Mutlu F, Pokharel S, Holguín-Veras J, Seth D. An integrated resource allocation and distribution model for pre-disaster planning. Comp Ind Eng. 2016;91:229-38. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2015.11.010.
  14. Albtoush R, Dobrescu R, Ionescou F. A hierarchical model for emergency management systems. Univ Politehnica Bucharest Sci Bull Ser C. 2011;73(2):53-62.
  15. Sahebjamnia N, Torabi SA, Mansouri SA. Integrated business continuity and disaster recovery planning: towards organizational resilience. Eur J Operat Res. 2015;242(1):261-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.09.055.
  16. Zhai Y, Chen S, Ouyang Q. GIS-based seismic hazard prediction system for urban earthquake disaster prevention planning. Sustainability. 2019;11(9):2620. doi: 10.3390/su11092620.
  17. Cole MA, Elliott RJ, Okubo T, Strobl E. Pre-disaster planning and post-disaster aid: examining the impact of the Great East Japan earthquake. Int J Disaster Risk Red. 2017;21:291-302. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.12.015.
  18. Wang L, Yang L, Gao Z, Li S, Zhou X. Evacuation planning for disaster responses: a stochastic programming framework. Transp Res part C Emerg Technol. 2016;69:150-72. doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2016.05.022.
  19. Ahmadi A, Bazargan-Hejazi S. 2017 Kermanshah earthquake; lessons learned. J Inj Violence Res. 2018;10(1):1-2. doi: 10.5249/jivr.v10i1.1049. [PubMed: 29374766].
  20. Mousavi G, Khorasani-Zavareh D, Ardalan A, Khankeh H, Ostadtaghizadeh A, Kamali M, et al. Continuous post-disaster physical rehabilitation: a qualitative study on barriers and opportunities in Iran. J Inj Violence Res. 2019;11(1):35-44. doi: 10.5249/jivr.v11i1.1036. [PubMed: 30635998].
  21. Marcus O. A conceptual framework for risk reduction. World Conference of Disaster Reduction, Kobe, Japan; 2005.
  22. Pupavac V. Global disaster management and therapeutic governance of communities. Dev Dialogue. 2012;58:81-97.
  23. Sinha DK. Natural disaster reduction: South East Asian realities, risk perception and global strategies. New York: Anthem Press; 2007.
  24. Comfort LK. Risk, security, and disaster management. Annu
    Rev Polit Sci
    . 2005;8:335-56. doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.
  25. Palttala P, Boano C, Lund R, Vos M. Communication gaps in disaster management: Perceptions by experts from governmental and non‐governmental organizations. J Conting Cris Manag. 2012;20(1):2-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5973.
    1. Mechler R, Bouwer LM, Linnerooth-Bayer J, Hochrainer-Stigler S, Aerts JC, Surminski S, et al. Managing unnatural disaster risk from climate extremes. Nature Climate Change. 2014;4(4):235-7. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2137.
    2. Tingsanchali T. Urban flood disaster management. Proc Eng. 2012;32:25-37. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2012.01.1233.
    3. Khan H, Vasilescu LG, Khan A. Disaster management cycle-a theoretical approach. J Manag Market. 2008;6(1):43-50.
    4. Coetzee C, Van Niekerk D. Tracking the evolution of the disaster management cycle: a general system theory approach. J Disaster Risk Stud. 2012;4(1):1-9. doi: 10.4102/jamba.v4i1.54