Figures (6)  Tables (2)

    • Figure 1. 

      Management effect in the four stages of emergency management.

    • Figure 2. 

      The '4L-5S' analysis model of emergency management[13].

    • Figure 3. 

      The Risk Nine-Degree Model.

    • Figure 4. 

      The 'Seven-Component' and 'Six-Objective' frameworks.

    • Figure 5. 

      Intrinsic mechanism analysis of the '23·7' event based on the 4L-5S model.

    • Figure 6. 

      E-M-A-M emergency management methodology.

    • Stage Time Key events Responses Outcomes
      Incubation July 28 Typhoon Doksuri makes landfall, moisture northward, risk buildup Monitoring, early warnings Risk awareness improved
      Occurrence July 29–31 Extreme rainfall, floods, orographic effects Real-time monitoring, threshold analysis Severe damage, timely interventions
      Evolution July 31–August 1 Disaster expansion, landslides, debris flows Evacuation, dynamic assessments Lives saved, worsened property loss
      Decline August 1–2 Rainfall weakened, disaster stabilized Resource reallocation, intensified rescue Stabilized conditions, reduced risks
      Termination August 2–9 Recovery, reflections, improvement Infrastructure repair, emergency plan updates Long-term recovery, enhanced readiness

      Table 1. 

      Course of the '23·7' heavy rainfall in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region.

    • Aspect Intrinsic
      mechanism analysis      		 Management
      mechanism design
      Objective Reveal the inherent laws Design intervention measures
      Nature Objective and neutral Subjective and action-oriented
      Methodological features Scientific observation and modeling Strategic planning and institutional innovation
      Application stage Foundation for decision-making Implementation of decision-making
      Application domain Natural and scientific domains Social and policy domains
      Core question Explain 'why it happens' Solve 'what should be done'

      Table 2. 

      The distinction between the two 'M's