T.H. Schee

I recently participated in a local-level urban resilience exercise. On the surface, the terminology was cutting-edge, the slides were polished, and the leadership speeches were impeccable. However, if you strip away the outer veneer of “resilience” and “cross-domain coordination,” the skeletal structure underneath remains the same old departmental silos and administrative red tape we have been accustomed to for thirty years.

這次 CFE-DM 在 2026 年 4 月端出的這本《臺灣災害管理參考手冊》（Taiwan Disaster Management Reference Handbook）。這是一份非常少見、從美軍視角出發，把臺灣整個防災、民防到全社會韌性骨架一次拆解的參考手冊。筆者曾經接受此單位委託的學術研究人員針對若干事務進行訪談。這本參考手冊的付梓對台灣來說也是一件美事。

對於長期有關注數位政府、開放資料和防災事務的人來說，這本手冊很值得讀。我把它的核心結構和背後的「美方視角」幫大家快篩成幾大重點。

In disaster preparedness discussions, “civilian force utilization” （民力運用）is always a concept that sounds perfectly correct but easily becomes mere slogan. Recently, I saw the chart “All-round Enhancement of Civilian Response Capacity” from a fire technology seminar, and it prompted me to break it down from a more pragmatic — and somewhat critical — perspective.

最近又有人在談極端情境下的通訊整備，但通訊這件事情複雜萬分，絕非一兩條「解決方案」的路徑能滿足需求。過度吹噓功效者，可能跟賣藥並無二致。我們就針對這個話題來進一步討論。