Appendix 2: Methodology This report examines the impacts of the ash cloud and the response of stakeholders. It seeks to draw out the lessons from the Eyjafjallajökull eruption – a relatively ‘benign’ high-impact event – for other global threats such as pandemics, terrorist attacks, a radiological event or fuel crises. While different types of events do of course have unique characteristics, they share three fundamental aspects. First, they have the potential to disrupt the international economy and the ability of national governments to respond. Second, in preparing for and responding to these threats, governments, businesses and other stakeholders face significant scientific and other uncertainties. Third, the potential impacts are greatly amplified by the nature of our interdependent world. Additionally, in most instances worst-case scenarios can only be addressed through action at the transnational level, be it via governments or along critical supply chains.
Table A1: Methodological components Research component
Summary of research activity
Formal interviews
Interviews with high-level decision-makers in key stakeholder organizations and other informal discussions. This included regulators, civil servants, scientific bodies and businesses.
Survey of businesses
Over 40 organizations responded to our survey of the impacts, responses and lessons from the ash cloud. The survey was circulated to over 300 firms (see Appendix 2 for respondents).
Economic and social analysis
An assessment of the economic consequences of high-impact events – and specific economic analysis of the cost of the ash cloud to key sectors (see Appendix 4). A related piece of research considered the social impacts of the ash-cloud event.
Trade and supply chain analysis
Systematic review of EU trade data to identify goods that are largely air-freighted (and therefore vulnerable to a disruption to aviation) and goods that were severely affected in the ash-cloud event.
Institutions and decision-making mapping
Desk-based mapping of institutions, their linkages and decision-making processes (see Appendix 5). This was tested and refined following the interviews. This component also explored approaches to civil contingencies planning and risk management by governments and businesses.
Communications and public perception
Comprehensive mapping exercise to analyse the media and public response to the ash-cloud event, based on an assessment of public communications and the role of (social and traditional) media in shaping public perception and responses.
Risk governance and preparedness
Contest over science, uncertainty and legitimacy
Mapping the impacts
Battle for the airwaves
Research was conducted between June 2010 and April 2011. The research methodology is reflected in the four analytical chapters of the report: risk governance and preparedness; mapping the impacts of the event; the contest over science, certainty and legitimacy; and the battle for the airwaves. Each of these analytical dimensions was explored using four or five separate but overlapping research components, ensuring that information could be triangulated, cross-referenced and reinforced and discrepancies identified. Table A1 shows the links between the key research components and the analytical chapters. The methodology for the project combined desk-based research with interviews, a survey and systematic data analysis. The mapping of the key institutions at European and national level and their decision-making processes continued throughout the project, drawing on the interviews and the survey. High-level decision-makers from key organizations and institutions involved in the ash-cloud event were interviewed between August 2010 and January 2011. Questions covered scenario and contingency planning before the event; how the event unfolded; key institutional linkages; communications strategies; and priorities for the future. Semi-structured interviews were held with representatives of the UK Met Office, the UK Cabinet Office (Civil Contingencies Secretariat), the European Commission, the UK Civil Aviation Authority, Eurocontrol, the Confederation of British Industry and
33
a prominent global engine manufacturing company. Informal discussions were also held with a range of companies and other stakeholders throughout the project. Two major airlines and two national air traffic control agencies including UK NATS fed information to the project via our survey.
www.chathamhouse.org
33