Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2022 Dec 1;17(12):e0276589. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276589

Research on measurement indexes and evaluation for the collaborative efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities of China

Zou Jiang 1, Huang Xing 2,*
Editor: Md Asaduzzaman3
PMCID: PMC9714706  PMID: 36454770

Abstract

Background

The paper established indexes of coordination efficiency, the theoretical framework and operation mechanism of emergency information sharing for coastal cities of China.

Method

First of all, we analyzed the operational relationship between the participants of emergency information sharing and information transmission, and based on the collaborative theory, constructed the emergency information sharing framework and operational mechanism suitable for the actual disaster prevention and reduction of coastal cities. Around the 3 dimensions of emergency information sharing mechanism construction, resource guarantee ability and collaborative driving force of emergency information sharing, the paper proposed the evaluation index system and the evaluation method.

Results

The empirical results showed that the efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities in China was generally low, and the contribution rate of the construction level of emergency information sharing mechanism is higher than that of the resource guarantee ability and the collaborative driving force of emergency information sharing, but the efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities in China was still at the bottom level.

Conclusion

The research results provided theoretical basis and methods for the emergency management departments of coastal cities in China.

Introduction

China’s coastal cities have a large population and rich marine resources. In recent years, natural disasters have occurred frequently due to many factors such as special geographical locations and complex weather systems, which have greatly affected the social and economic stability and development of China’s coastal cities [1]. At present, an emergency management department has been established to solve the problems of fragmentation and low coordination, which can greatly improve the coordination ability of coastal cities in disaster prevention and mitigation. Overall, China’s coastal cities have achieved great improvement in their ability to coordinate disaster prevention and mitigation, and a comprehensive coordination and joint prevention and control mechanism has been basically formed. Especially in the process of disaster prevention and reduction, some problems include untimely information sharing, unclear information tasks and unsatisfactory operation mechanism of confidence sharing, etc., which have greatly restricted the efficiency and effectiveness of disaster prevention and reduction in coastal cities of China. Therefore, how to build a scientific and reasonable emergency information sharing mechanism for disaster prevention and mitigation in coastal cities, and how to improve and innovate the traditional "command-control" emergency information supervision mode have become some urgent problems to be solved.

At present, emergency information sharing is a hotspot problem in emergency management. Scholars have carried out in-depth research on emergency information sharing collaborative, emergency information sharing mechanism and emergency collaborative governance. Research on emergency information sharing and collaboration mainly focuses on emergency information collaborative factors, collaborative framework and collaborative efficiency. Chen Yumei (2018) [1] believed that the five aspects of support within the organization, coordination between organizations, legal protection and supervision incentives and external environment are the key factors; Zhang Xinrui et al. (2022) [2] analyzed the function relationship between the information collaborative elements, distinguished the cause element and the result element; Based on the core blockchain technology distributed ledger technology, asymmetric encryption algorithms and smart contracts, Yin Yong (2021) [3] combined the needs of smart medical multi-information management, constructed health information alliance chain, personal health information data private chain, public opinion charity information public chain under public health emergencies; Zhang Guirong et al. (2022) [4], analyzed the subject, content, form and application of emergency information collaboration and constructed an emergency information with the power mechanism, operation mechanism and action mechanism as the core collaboration mechanism; Based on the characteristics of blockchain technology, Jiang Yun et al. (2021) [5] established an internal private chain, organizational alliance chain, and social public chain architecture according to the needs of emergency information resources, and analyzed the factors that improve the efficiency of information collaboration; Delone et al. (1992) [6] summarized the six dimensions of information system success: system quality, information quality, system use, personal impact, user satisfaction, and organizational impact, etc. At the research of emergency information sharing mechanism, the most studied are emergency information sharing decision-making and operation mechanism.

The research on the emergency information sharing mechanism mainly focus on the emergency information sharing decision-making and operation mechanism. Chen Yumei et al. (2017) [7] put forward policy recommendations to improve the efficiency of emergency information sharing around the legal system, shared concepts, information technology and supervision and incentives; based on the theory of tripartite evolutionary game, Zheng Wanbo et al. (2022) [8] used computer software to simulate the evolution process and results of behavior strategies of each participant under different constraints, and discussed the corresponding optimal information sharing strategy; Carminati et al. (2013) [9] provided a decision-making system for implementing timely and controlled information sharing in emergency situations; Zhang Ping et al. (2013) [10] analyzed and discussed the obstacles and corresponding countermeasures of emergency management information sharing. In terms of research on the operation mechanism of emergency information sharing, Meng Qingping et al. (2011) [11] designed and implemented a large-scale urban district-level integrated management system, and analyzed the overall structure, software functions, information sharing mechanism and business collaborative model; Zeng Yuhang et al. (2012) [12] started from the analysis of emergency management information processing process, and proposed an emergency information coordination mechanism model for the reasons for the difficulty of information coordination in emergency information management, and discussed the operation of emergency information coordination and sharing mechanism in the e-government environment; Du Jun et al. (2017) [13] analyzed the characteristics and specific paths of emergency information transmission to base on the organizational framework of emergency network, and finally studied the mechanism of emergency information sharing and the network model of emergency information sharing; Carminati B et al. (2016) [14] presented an emergency information sharing framework able to deal with both specified and unspecified emergencies; Dantas A A et al. (2007) [15] presented an information-sharing framework for road organizations, on the basis of a study of response and recovery activities, information needs were identified and a geographic information system-based information-sharing framework was created. In the research of emergency collaborative governance, Wang Ying et al. (2016) [16] conducted a SWOT analysis of multi-subject collaboration in urban emergency management by introducing the theoretical framework of collaborative governance, in order to realize the innovation of urban emergency management model; Based on the perspective of resource allocation system analysis, Liao Chuhui (2020) [17] used collaboration theory and binary nonlinear method to study the mechanism, implementation path, specific scheme of cross-departmental resource information integration and collaborative governance in public emergencies; Wang Yu (2020) [18] analyzed the problem of incompatibility between the coupling characteristics of environmental emergencies and the traditional emergency management model based on collaborative governance theory; Lin Zhen (2019) [19] studied the collaborative governance mechanism of online public opinion for emergencies composed of data, tools and business process reorganization, forming a multi-agent system governance.

The above literature mainly studies the management of emergency information sharing from management, although there have been many discussions on the synergy of emergency information sharing and its influencing factors, its organizational structure and its efficiency, but these results are more focused on the discussion of macro-decisions, and their shortcomings are reflected in: First, the existing achievements are lack of a set of systematic emergency information sharing mechanism from the micro perspective. The description of the supply and demand subjects of emergency information resources is not clear; Second, the mechanism of emergency information sharing in coastal cities has its own characteristics. Most of the information resources come from marine disasters. It is necessary to build a set of emergency information sharing mechanism in line with the specific disasters in coastal cities of China. The existing research is lack of this aspect; The third is the lack of a set of measurement index systems and methods that can effectively evaluate the efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities for disaster prevention and mitigation, making the emergency information sharing operation mechanism lacking evaluation basis. In view of this, this paper aims at the characteristics of coastal city disaster prevention and mitigation, from the perspective of synergy theory, by clarifying the relationship between the participants of emergency information sharing and information transmission, constructs an emergency information sharing framework and operation mechanism suitable for coastal city disaster prevention and reduction. On this basis, the measurement index system and evaluation method of emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency are further proposed, with a view to providing theoretical guidance and method support for the practice of disaster prevention and mitigation information management in coastal cities. The relationship between this paper and the previous research lies in: First, the index system of the existing research is optimized, and an effective evaluation index system is put forward from three dimensions, included the mechanism construction level of emergency information sharing, the resource support capability and the collaborative driving force. Secondly, the coupling theory in physics is used for reference to quantitatively evaluate the coordination efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities. Thirdly, referring to the existing emergency information organization structure, the paper puts forward the emergency information sharing framework of China’s coastal cities based on collaboration theory. The difference of this paper is that it proposes a coastal city emergency information sharing framework and operation mechanism based on the synergy theory, and proposes an index system and measurement method that affect the coastal city emergency information sharing collaboration efficiency.

Emergency information sharing framework based on collaboration theory

Connotation of collaboration theory

Collaboration theory was put forward by German physicist Herman Haken in 1976. Collaboration theory mainly studies how open systems far from equilibrium can spontaneously appear orderly structures in time, space and function through their own internal synergism when they have material or energy exchange with the outside world. The system is regarded as a complex open system composed of three elements: human, organization and environment in the collaboration theory. Each element is nested with multiple sub-elements, and its interior presents nonlinear characteristics. Although different subsystems have different attributes, there is a cooperative relationship between each subsystem. Whether the system can play a synergistic benefit is determined by the synergy of the subsystems within the system. To promote the synergy of each subsystem, the system must be open and able to communicate with the outside world. The exchange of energy and information ensures that the system is capable of development. Collaboration theory deals with complex systems from the perspective of systems view, and provides a theory and method for dealing with decentralized and disordered emergency management systems, making it a system of virtuous circles of coordination, cooperation and order.

Elements of the emergency information sharing framework of coastal cities

This paper builds a coastal city emergency information sharing framework based on collaboration theory. The coastal city emergency information sharing framework consists of four elements: emergency information participants, emergency information resources, emergency behavior, and emergency resource software and hardware resources. According to the collaborative rules, it can form an organic whole with the characteristics of subject coordination, sharing efficiency, and rapid response, which can maximize emergency efficiency and benefits. The relationship between the components of the emergency information sharing framework is interrelated and interdependent: emergency information participants and emergency information resources provide the basis for emergency behaviors, and emergency behaviors are supported by emergency software and hardware resources to achieve the goals of emergency information participants and emergency resources (Fig 1). The participants of coastal city emergency information are mainly composed of people and organizations that provide, process, analyze and use information, including: government, port and shipping, maritime, public security and fire protection, enterprises, social organizations, information management, medical care and other related institutions, as well as expert groups, rescue teams, the public, the military, media workers, technicians and other related personnel; Emergency information resources are composed of basic information resources, rescue information resources, and data streams. Basic information resources include five aspects: politics, economy, social development, resources and environment, and geographic information. Emergency information resources include disaster information, emergency plans, and emergency response. (Kou Youguan, 2005) [20]; Emergency behaviors include disaster reporting, determination of plans, material financing and deployment, disaster relief and recovery, etc.; hardware and software resources include facilities and equipment for storage, reception, processing, and transmission of emergency information, and decision-making systems and assistance to support emergency operations Platforms and management systems, etc. (Xiao Hua et al., 2015) [21].

Fig 1. The relationship between emergency information participants, emergency information resources, emergency behaviors, and hardware and software.

Fig 1

Coastal city emergency information sharing framework based on synergy theory [2225]

At present, China’s emergency response mode mainly adopts the two-level mode of emergency command center and emergency response department. The emergency command center is mainly responsible for emergency decision-making and command and coordination functions. It belongs to the coping mode of centralized management and decentralized implementation.

This two-level response model can effectively ensure the efficiency of information decision-making and the unified command of decision-making, but there are also many problems in the process of emergency information sharing. One is the smoothness of information communication channels and communication efficiency. It is prone to miscommunication between the emergency subject and the public, resulting in deviations in the information received by the emergency subject, and the emergency command agency has unclear needs for public information; the second is the problem of departmental coordination. It is not conducive to the coordination of the collection, processing and feedback mechanism of emergency information between departments; third, the emergency response department lacks the initiative of the main body. and feedback, etc. are inefficient. The idea of the synergy theory lies in the diversification of the main body and the synergy of the cooperation methods. Its purpose is to maximize the value of resource utilization and service quality by integrating multiple resources, which provides a theoretical basis for the synergy of emergency information sharing in coastal cities in China. In Fig 1 above, the three elements of emergency information participants, emergency information resources, and emergency software and hardware resources ultimately provide support for emergency behaviors, and achieve disaster prevention and mitigation goals through emergency behavior. However, the execution effect of emergency behaviors is affected by emergency information participants, emergency information resources, and hardware and software. Emergency information participants are the performers and decision makers of emergency behaviors.

The synergy of the two will affect the efficiency of emergency behaviors, and the efficiency of emergency behaviors is affected by the degree of information sharing, information coverage, information processing capabilities and decision effectiveness, only when they cooperate with each other and respond in a coordinated manner can the level of emergency information sharing be promoted. Therefore, the prerequisite for improving the level of emergency information sharing in coastal cities is to build a coordinated and effective information resource sharing network. Such a network should be composed of the main body of emergency response information generation, management and use, and information transmission channels, management platforms, software and hardware, etc. Co-participate in a shared collaborative system with networked, integrated, and digital features to achieve cross-platform, cross-department, and cross-regional information collaboration services. This article is based on the synergy theory and on the basis of reference four, proposes the emergency information sharing framework shown in Fig 2.

Fig 2. Coastal city disaster prevention and mitigation emergency information sharing framework based on collaboration theory.

Fig 2

Fig 2 improves the traditional response model of centralized management and decentralized implementation into an emergency information sharing model of centralized management, decentralized implementation, subject coordination, and joint participation. This new sharing model is beneficial to make up for the information islands, The lack of a single source of information and the inadequacy of the information supervision mechanism have effectively realized the co-construction and sharing and efficient collaboration of disaster prevention and mitigation emergency information in coastal cities.

Operating mechanism of emergency information sharing framework from a collaborative perspective

The main body of emergency information generation and use of emergency information in Fig 2 includes government agencies, non-governmental organizations, enterprises and institutions and expert groups, the public, rescue teams, media and other related organizations and individuals. The emergency information management center is the core organization for sharing emergency information in coastal cities. It is mainly responsible for the formulation of emergency information disposal standards, emergency information services, distribution and comprehensive management. The emergency information management center will provide the processed emergency information resources to the emergency information use subject, and the emergency information use subject will feed back the information to the emergency information management center according to the decision-making needs and execution needs. The available shared information is formed, and the emergency information management center sends the shared information to the media in a unified manner for all subjects and people to access. The entire operation process not only embodies centralized management and decentralized implementation, but also embodies the coordination and joint participation of the subjects.

Establish a coordinated and standardized platform for emergency information sharing

The function of the emergency information sharing collaborative standardization platform is to synthesize the information of different departments, different regional platforms and various types of users, and make emergency decisions based on the recommendations of expert groups. Through the emergency information sharing collaborative platform, users can conduct a one-stop search and can support each coastal city to provide emergency information sharing services to the user body. The standardized platform for emergency information sharing mainly integrates various local governments, maritime departments, port and shipping departments, public security and fire protection, enterprises, non-social organizations and other emergency information participants in coastal cities. Standardize information resources and information services through a standardized platform, including information resource management standards, information security technology standards, information conversion standards, system integration standards, system operation standards, and information service standards, etc. The purpose is to break the pattern of individualism.

Establish a collaborative communication model for emergency information

The collaborative communication of emergency information involves the entire emergency management area of the coastal city. It is different from the traditional single-media independent communication mode. It requires the close cooperation and joint efforts of the relevant departments of the entire coastal city. In terms of establishing inter-departmental coordination and cooperation, accomplish tasks that cannot be completed by a single coastal city. In order to establish an emergency information collaborative dissemination model, it is necessary to reform the traditional emergency information dissemination model, break the boundaries between departments, enter emergency information into meta data according to the sharing standard, and establish shared links between departments and websites. By establishing an emergency information collaborative communication model, the sharing of emergency information resources in coastal cities will be gradually realized.

Establish a collaborative management model for emergency information resources

The collaborative management mode of emergency information resources based on the collaboration theory mainly starts from establishing the emergency knowledge element link mode, and describes emergency information by means of knowledge elements. The coordination of emergency information resources can be reflected as the content coordination between emergency knowledge elements; Then, the constantly updated, massive, and constantly emerged emergency knowledge elements are built into the emergency knowledge meta-database, and then the emergency knowledge meta-database is embedded into various databases. Through this process, the emergencies knowledge database can embed the database and the emergency information between the platforms is related according to the content, forming an organic whole. On this basis, a hierarchical and modular approach is used to divide the emergency information resources into a multi-knowledge element and multi-level emergency information resource management system to realize the cross-domain of the emergency information resource collaborative management model based on the emergency knowledge element.

Coastal city emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency measurement

Measurement indexes of emergency collaborative efficiency of emergency information sharing

This paper proposed the basis for measuring the efficiency indexes of coastal city emergency information sharing collaboration as follows:

Based on existing research results

The research results of Hu Ping (2007) [26], Sharon S (1996) [27] and David L (2001) [28] were used in the proposed index for measuring the efficiency of emergency information sharing collaboration. These indexes include 3 primary indexes and 9 secondary indexes. The first fist-level index is the construction level of emergency information sharing mechanism, which has four secondary indexes, including emergency information reporting, emergency information security, and emergency information sharing incentives. The second first-level index is the resource support capability of emergency information sharing, which has two second-level indexes, including the unity of emergency information standards, and financial support. The third first-level index is the collaborative driving force of emergency information sharing, and it has three second-level indexes, including clear management functions, obstacles to emergency information sharing, and the integration ability of emergency management agencies. These indexes can scientifically evaluate the collaborative efficiency of information sharing in coastal cities.

Based on in-depth interviews with coastal city emergency management departments, port and shipping departments, and maritime departments

Through in-depth interviews with relevant departments in 6 coastal cities, including the Haikou Municipal Port and Shipping Bureau, the Shanghai Emergency Management Bureau, and the Fuzhou Maritime Safety Bureau, the commonality of emergency information sharing efficiency measurement indicators was summarized.

Principles of index selection

  1. Systematization principle. Indexes can reflect both direct and indirect effects, and ensure the comprehensiveness and credibility of comprehensive evaluation.

  2. Principle of indexes measurability. The meaning of indexes is clear, the data required for calculating indexes are easy to collect, and the calculation method is simple and easy to master.

  3. Principle of correlation between indexes and targets. The realization of indexes must make a substantial contribution to the realization of the goal, and it is forbidden to choose indexes unrelated to the goal.

Measurement indexes screening and weighting

1) Reliability test of measurement indexes. Bartlett’s spherical test and KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) test are performed on the measurement index to determine whether the data of the measurement index meet the conditions of factor analysis. Result suggests that the KMO value of the measurement index after the initial screening was 0.771 > 0.5, Sig. = 0 < 0.05, indicating that the measurement indicators after the initial screening meet the conditions of factor analysis.

2) Factor principal component analysis. Principal component analysis is performed on the initially determined measurement indexes, and the factor with a cumulative contribution rate of 85% is used as the final measurement indexes.

3) Measurement indexes weight. The expert assignment method is used to analyze the correlation between the measurement indexes and the evaluation object to provide data support for determining the weight of the measurement indexes. This paper uses Likert’s 5-level scale method to assign values to the measurement indexes: "strong correlation" = 5, "high correlation" = 4, "general" = 3, "weak correlation" = 2, "uncorrelated" = 1. Using the coefficient of variation method to determine the weight of the measurement indexes, the steps are as follows:

  • Step 1: After preprocessing the original data, calculate the mean and standard deviation of each measurement indexes.

  • Step 2: Calculate the coefficient of variation of each measurement indexes based on the mean and standard deviation according to formula (1).
    vi=ix¯i (1)
    Where vi is the coefficient of variation of the i-th measurement index, i is the standard deviation of the i-th measurement indexes, and x¯i is the average score of the i-th measurement indexes.
  • Step 3: Calculate the sum of coefficients of variation of each measurement index according to formula (2).
    A=i=1nvi,i=1,2,,n (2)
  • Step 4: Calculate the weight of each measurement index according to formula (3). The weight of each measurement index is equal to the ratio of the coefficient of variation of the measurement index and the coefficient of variation.
    wi=viA (3)

According to the above methods, the indicators and weights for the collaborative efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities were finally determined, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Coastal city emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency measurement indexes.
Dimension Impact factor
Construction level of emergency information sharing mechanism Emergency information collection and processingC11 (0.201)
Emergency information reportC12 (0.170)
Emergency information disclosureC13 (0.181)
Emergency information supervision and regulationC14 (0.132)
Emergency information securityC15 (0.135)
Emergency information sharing incentivesC16 (0.181)
Emergency information sharing resource support capability Emergency information technology and equipmentC21 (0.277)
Completeness of policies and regulationsC22 (0.264)
Uniformity of emergency information standardsC23 (0.281)
Capital guaranteeC24 (0.178)
Synergistic driving force for emergency information sharing Clear management function positioningC31 (0.257)
Emergency information service satisfactionC32 (0.167)
Barriers to emergency information sharingC33 (0.310)
Emergency management organization integration capabilitiesC34 (0.266)

4) Method of obtaining original data of indexes. As most of the measurement indexes are qualitative, it is difficult to obtain data through monitoring equipment, so the method of expert assignment value is adopted to obtain the original data, and five levels of quantity are adopted to assign values to each measurement indicator: good = 5, good = 4, fair = 3, poor = 2 and poor = 1.

Method for measuring collaborative efficiency of emergency information sharing [29]

This paper used the coupling theory in physics to quantitatively evaluate the collaborative efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities. Coupling theory advocates using the degree of coupling to measure the level of coordination among various factors within the system, which is similar to the coordination between various measurement indicators in the coastal city information sharing system. Therefore, this paper used the coupling degree in physics to evaluate the efficiency of emergency information sharing and collaboration in coastal cities.

Calculate the cooperation efficiency of each subsystem

The three dimensions in Table 1 were regarded as subsystems. Firstly, the contribution of each measurement index to the subsystem was determined, and Let the variable Ui(i = 1,2, …, n) be the sequence parameter for the measurement of the coordinated efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities, that was, the subsystem of “construction level of emergency information sharing mechanism”, the subsystem of “support capacity of emergency information sharing resources” "Emergency Information Sharing Collaborative Driving Force" subsystem, then the emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency function is:

Uij=Xijβijαijβij,UijispositiveefficiencyαijXijαijβij,Uijisnegativeefficiency,i=1,2,,n;j=1,2,,m (4)

In formula (4), Uij is the j-th measurement index of the i-th order parameter, and its value Xij, Xij reflects the satisfaction of each measurement index in each subsystem to achieve the target efficiency, ranging from 0 to 1, approaching 0 is the most dissatisfied, approaching 1 is the most satisfactory; αijβij is the upper and lower limits of the order parameters at the critical point of system stability.

The overall efficiency of each subsystem is calculated using the linear weighting method:

Ui=j=1mwijUij (5)

Among them, wij is the weight of the j-th measurement index in the i-th subsystem, Ui is the contribution of each subsystem to the order of the total system, and m is the number of measurement indexes in each subsystem.

The total efficiency of emergency information sharing and coordination in coastal cities

According to the coupling degree model in physics, the measurement function of the cooperative efficiency of the three subsystems is:

C=u1u2u3/u1+u2u2+u3u3+u23 (6)

In formula (6), the value of C is between 0 and 1. When C = 0, it indicates that the coordination efficiency between the subsystems is extremely small and is in an irrelevant state; when C = 1, it indicates high coordination efficiency between subsystems.

The total efficiency of formula (6) is of great significance for judging the efficiency intensity among the three subsystems, but the collaborative efficiency of formula (6) is difficult to reflect the contribution of all subsystems to the entire system, and relying solely on synergy efficiency to determine the magnitude of the synergy efficiency of the entire system may cause errors, because when the development level of the subsystem is low, its total synergy efficiency may be high. Therefore, we need to improve Eq (6) to reflect the true synergy efficiency of the subsystem to the entire system,

F=p1u1+p2u2+p3u3C=u1u2u3/u1+u2u2+u3u3+u23H=CF (7)

Among them, F is the comprehensive development index, considering the difference of the important level contributed by each subsystem, p1, p2, p3 are the weighting coefficients, and the general value is 0.333; H is the modified synergy efficiency value, which combines the total synergy efficiency level C and development index F.

In order to clarify the collaborative efficiency level of emergency information sharing in coastal cities, this paper refers to the hierarchical classification method proposed by Su Yi et al. (2018) [30] to divide the H value into 4 levels, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Emergency information sharing coordination efficiency level.
H [0,0.4) [0.4,0.6) [0.6,0.8] (0.8,1)
Efficiency class low medium high Extremely high

Empirical analysis

Data acquisition

In this paper, 13 disaster events in coastal cities in China in the past 20 years are selected as samples, as shown in Table 3. The reason for choosing these samples is that these samples represent almost all the characteristics of coastal cities in China, and they are all major marine disasters. These sample data are relatively complete and have been collected on. Because most of the measurement indexes are qualitative indicators, it is difficult to obtain data through monitoring equipment, so the method of expert assignment is used to obtain the original data, and the method of 5-level quantity is used to assign values to each measurement indicator: "Good" = 5, "Better" = 4. "General" = 3, "Poor" = 2, "Bad" = 1. 45 experts were invited, including 6 maritime department management personnel, 10 emergency management personnel, 6 port management personnel, and 23 experts and scholars. Cronbach’s α coefficient and Bartlett test were used to test the reliability and validity of the sample data. The results showed that the sample data assigned by experts can objectively reflect the attributes of 13 disaster events. The final score of each measurement index is counted according to the mode.

Table 3. 13 disaster events in coastal cities of China in the past 20 years.

Year Type of disaster Time of occurrence Disaster Covered City Disaster situation
2002 Red tide May 10 Ningbo Affected sea area 100km2
2020 typhoon August 1 Xiangshan Wind power level 12, 278.8 thousand acres of affected farmland, 3625 people were killed and 3825 people were injured
2020 typhoon September 3 Lianjiang Wind power level 10, 4.116 million mu of affected farmland, 134 deaths
2020 typhoon August 24 Putuo Wind power level 12, 1.007 million mu, 18 people killed and 55 injured
2003 Red tide May 11 East of Ningbo Nantian Island The affected sea area is about 2000km2
2004 Red tide June 1–5 The waters near the Yushan Islands Affected sea area is 1000km2
2006 Red tide June 7 Xiangshan near shore Affected sea area is 1000km2
2001 Heavy rain August 9–11 Zhanjiang, Maoming, Meizhou 1.165 million people were affected and 3665 houses collapsed
2010 Red tide June 9 Songlan Mountain to Tantou Mountain Affected sea area 1600km2
2020 Heavy rain May 7 Guangzhou 109 houses collapsed, 256,800 mu of farmland was submerged, 32,166 people were affected, 6 died, and the direct economic loss was 543.8 million yuan
2007 Storm surge October 11–12 Hebei Province, Tianjin City, Shandong Province Direct economic loss of 1.3 billion yuan, 200,000 people affected by the disaster
2007 Storm surge March 4 Weihai, Yantai, Weifang, Qingdao, Binzhou, Dongying Direct economic loss of 1.927 billion yuan, 3 deaths, 7 missing
2018 Storm surge September 19 Zhuhai, Zhongshan, Jiangmen, Yangjiang, Zhanjiang, Maoming 6.52 million people were affected, 26 people were killed and missing, 15,322 houses collapsed, and direct economic loss was 11.38 billion yuan

According to the synergy efficiency measurement method in Section 3.2, the contribution level of each subsystem’s order parameter, the comprehensive index F, the system’s total synergy efficiency C, and the modified system efficiency H are calculated in sequence. Since the three subsystems are equally important, the values of p1, p2, and p3 are 0.333, and the calculation results are shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Collaborative efficiency of emergency information sharing for 13 disaster events.

Serial number Emergency information sharing mechanism disaster reduction level U1 Emergency information sharing resource support capability U2 Emergency information sharing collaborative promotion capability U3 Comprehensive Development Index F Overall system coordination efficiency C Modified collaborative efficiency H
1 0.078 0.156 0.172 0.135 0.090 0.110
2 0.312 0.417 0.192 0.307 0.219 0.259
3 0.089 0.332 0.467 0.296 0.244 0.269
4 0.267 0.231 0.189 0.229 0.165 0.194
5 0.478 0.329 0.172 0.326 0.222 0.269
6 0.648 0.099 0.219 0.322 0.173 0.236
7 0.389 0.098 0.319 0.269 0.195 0.229
8 0.178 0.091 0.319 0.196 0.158 0.176
9 0.419 0.315 0.091 0.275 0.150 0.203
10 0.538 0.458 0.510 0.502 0.504 0.503
11 0.610 0.309 0.698 0.539 0.573 0.556
12 0.289 0.319 0.107 0.238 0.140 0.183
13 0.427 0.710 0.300 0.479 0.389 0.431

Results analysis and policy recommendations

The overall efficiency of China’s coastal cities’ emergency information sharing is low

The revised collaborative efficiency in Table 4 is classified according to the classification criteria in Table 2. The results show that the revised collaborative efficiency levels of Event 10, Event 11 and Event 13 are medium, and their revised collaborative efficiency values are 0.503, 0.556 and 0.431, respectively. The coordination efficiency of the remaining 11 disaster events is of low grade, with the highest revised coordination efficiency value of 0.269 and the lowest of 0.110, indicating that the collaborative efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities in China is generally of low to medium grade.

Although the contribution level of each subsystem has experienced twists and turns, it has generally increased

The 13 events in Table 4 are arranged in chronological order. The calculation results show that, on the whole, the contribution levels of the subsystems U1 = emergency information sharing mechanism construction level, U2 = emergency information sharing resource support capability and U3 = emergency information sharing collaborative driving force are obviously increasing, which indicates that with the improvement of disaster prevention and mitigation capability of coastal cities in China, the collaborative capability of emergency information sharing is also increasing year by year.

The contribution levels of the three subsystems are uneven

The average contribution level of the U1 subsystem among the three subsystems is 0.363 higher than the average contribution level of the U2 and U3 subsystems, indicating that the construction level of the emergency information sharing mechanism has increased significantly and plays a key role in the total contribution. The contribution level is still low, with an average contribution rate of only 0.316.

Policy suggestion: The above analysis results showed that the overall low efficiency of emergency information sharing collaboration in coastal cities in China is due to the low level of emergency information sharing mechanism construction, weak emergency information sharing resource support capabilities, and insufficient emergency information sharing synergy, the following recommendations are made:

Speed up the construction of emergency information sharing mechanism system in coastal cities

Focus on strengthening emergency information collection and processing, emergency information sharing incentives, emergency information disclosure and reporting mechanism construction, improve emergency information supervision and regulation capabilities, and strengthen emergency information security guarantee measures;

Enhancing the emergency shared resources guarantee capability of coastal cities of China

Accelerating the formulation of emergency information standards, improving relevant information management policies and regulations, and improving emergency information processing technology and hardware and software equipment;

Comprehensively accelerating the construction of a coordinated driving force for emergency information sharing in coastal cities

Accelerating to reduce the barriers to emergency information sharing, clarifying emergency information management functions, accelerating the integration of institutions across departments and cities, and increasing emergency information service satisfaction.

Conclusions

Aiming at the problem of emergency information sharing mechanism and collaborative efficiency measurement in the coordinated management of disaster prevention and mitigation in coastal cities of China, a theoretical framework and operation mechanism of emergency information sharing based on the collaborative theory were proposed, and It also proposed the measurement indexes system and measurement method of coastal city emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency around the construction of coastal city emergency information sharing mechanism, resource guarantee capability and emergency information sharing.

Established the theoretical framework and operation mechanism of emergency information sharing in coastal cities

Introduce the theory of synergetic into the construction of emergency information sharing framework, by clarifying the operational relationship between the participants of emergency information sharing and information transmission, construct an emergency information sharing framework and operation mechanism suitable for the actual disaster prevention and reduction of coastal cities. Put forward an index system for measuring the efficiency of collaborative emergency information sharing in coastal cities Based on the innovation communication theory, existing research results and extensive interviews, around the three dimensions of emergency information sharing mechanism construction, resource support capabilities and emergency information sharing synergy, through the selection of indicators. I propose that I can effectively evaluate emergency information index system for sharing collaborative efficiency.

Propose a method for measuring the collaborative efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities based on the coupling degree model

With the help of the coupling theory in physics, through the evaluation of the contribution level of each subsystem and the modified coordination efficiency of the entire system, it is found that the efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities in China is on the rise, and the contribution rate of the level of emergency information sharing mechanism construction is higher than the resource guarantee capability. Synergy with emergency information sharing. But overall, the efficiency of China’s coastal cities in emergency information sharing is still at a low to medium level.

To a certain extent, this paper enriches the research content of emergency management, but in order to avoid the difficulty of obtaining monitoring data, the method of expert assignment is used to obtain the data of measurement indicators, which to a certain extent affects the credibility of the evaluation results, which needs to be further studied.

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank experts and journal editors who reviewed this article. We also wish to thank all scholars who provided references.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper.

Funding Statement

This article is funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (72072020), China Central University Project(2021SYB10), Key Project of Sichuan Circular Economy Research Center (4XHJJ-2102, XHJJ-2101) and Key Project of Sichuan Information Management and Service Research Center (SCXX2020ZD02). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Yumei Chen. 2018, Analysis of key influencing factors of information sharing in emergency management collaboration under collaborative governance. Jinan Journal,239(12): 35–49. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Xinrui Zhang, Haitao Zhang, Yilin Li, et al. 2022, Research on the identification of key elements of information collaboration for emergent public health events. Information Studies: Theory & Application, 45(3): 141–148. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Yong Yin. 2021, Collaborative interaction of multiple information in the management of public health emergencies: based on blockchain technology. Chinese Journal of Medical Management, 11(2): 29–34. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Guirong Zhang, Yu Lei, Wei Feng, et al. 2022, Research on emergency information collaboration mechanism driven by big data. Journal of Intelligence, 41(4): 181–185,201. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Yun Jiang, Zhenbo Lu, Ruli Bai. 2021, Research on the mechanism of emergency information resource based on blockchain technology. New Century Library, (2): 62–66. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Delone W H, Mclean E R. 1992, Information system success: the quest for the dependent variables. Information Systems Research, 3(1): 60–95. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Yumei Chen, Yuexin Zeng. 2017, Problems and suggestions on information sharing of emergency collaboration in China. Science and Technology Management Research, (9): 191–195. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Wanbo Zheng, Huiming Chen, Yanqing Wu, et al. 2022, Simulation of information sharing strategy based on emergency rescue. Journal of Computer Applications, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.B. Carminati, E. Ferrari, M. Guglielmi. 2013, Share: Secure information sharing framework for emergency management. 2013 IEEE 29th International Conference on Data Engineering, 1336–1339.
  • 10.Zhang P, Luo W, Su M. 2013, Barriers and countermeasures of information sharing in emergency management. Proceedings of the 10th international conference on innovation and management, 728–731.
  • 11.Qingping Meng, Xia Zhao, Ganghua Huang. 2011, Application and practice of information sharing and collaboration pattern in city comprehensive management. Computer Applications and Software, 28(6): 208–210. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Yuhang Zeng, Xiaodong Xu. 2012, Research on emergency information synergy mechanism based on E-government platform. Journal of Intelligence, 31(8): 146–151,123. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Jun Du, Congdong Li. 2017, Research on emergency information sources, transfer and sharing mechanism in emergency network organization. Information Studies: Theory & Application, 40(9): 37–42. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Carminati B, Ferrari E, Guglielmi M. 2016, Detection of Unspecified Emergencies for Controlled Information Sharing. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 13(6):630–643. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Dantas A A, Sevile E and Gohil D. 2007, Information sharing during emergency response and recovery–A framework for road organizations, Transportation Research Record, 2022,21–28. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ying Wang, Yibao Wang. 2016, The innovation of urban emergency management mode based on the theory of cooperative governance. Theory and Modernization, (3): 121–125. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Chuhui Liao. 2020, Research on collaborative management of public emergency based on resource information integration. Soft Science, 34(9): 16–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Yu Wang. 2020, Cooperative governance of coupled environmental emergencies: Theoretical construction, practical dilemma and path exploration. Leadership Science, (6): 70–73. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Zhen Lin. 2019, Research on the collaborative governance mechanism of public opinion network for public emergencies. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Social Science Edition), (2): 38–44. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Youguan Kou. 2005, Actively integrate resources to speed up emergency response. Information construction, (6): 17–19. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Hua Xiao, Chunnian Liu, Xiaoli Yin. 2015, Emergency resource information modeling and data modeling: Methods and paradigms. Library Science Research, (2): 54–59. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Bangkun Zheng, Xianjing Lv. 2004, Based on the "one-stop" service model and supporting platform. Modern Library and Information Technology, (5): 52–54. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Ping Wang. 2014, Research on Co-construction and Sharing of Library Information Resources Based on Collaboration Theory. Modern Information, (4): 33–37. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Kwon T. H, Zmud R. W. 1987, Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation, critical Issues in Information Systems Research. New York: John Wiley: 135–142. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Grover Varun, Goslar Martin D. 1993, The initiation, adoption, and implementation of telecommunications technologies in U.S. organizations. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10(1): 141–163. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Ping Hu, Penggang Zhang, Jun Ye. 2007, An empirical study on the factors that affect the information sharing among local government departments. Information Science,25(4): 548–556. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Dawes Sharon S. 1996, Interagency Information Sharing: Expected Benefit, Manageable Risk. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 15(3): 377–394. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.David L, and George Wolken. 2001, Realizing the promise: Government information systems and the fourth generation of information technology. Public Administration Review, 61(2): 206–220. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Xing Huang, Junyi Song, Xing Li, et al. 2020, Evolutional model of synergy for disaster prevention and reduction in coastal cities. Natural Hazards, 100(3): 933–953. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Yi Su, Xiaoli An, Ying Sun, et al. 2018, Construction and empirical study on the measurement model of regional innovation system coupling degree. Journal of Systems Engineering, 33(3): 398–411. [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Emily Chenette

1 May 2022

PONE-D-21-09794Emergency Information Sharing Mechanism and Efficiency Measurement in Coastal Cities Based on the Perspective of Collaborative GovernancePLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Huang,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE; I sincerely apologize for the unusually delayed review timeframe. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please note that we have only been able to secure a single reviewer to assess your manuscript. We are issuing a decision on your manuscript at this point to prevent further delays in the evaluation of your manuscript. Please be aware that the editor who handles your revised manuscript might find it necessary to invite additional reviewers to assess this work once the revised manuscript is submitted. However, we will aim to proceed on the basis of this single review if possible.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jun 09 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Emily Chenette

Editor in Chief

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service. 

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services.  If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: "Initials of the authors who received each award Grant numbers awarded to each author"

At this time, please address the following queries:

a) Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution. 

b) State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c) If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

d) If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: "This article is funded by the National Social Science Foundation of China (18XGL016), thanks to the review experts and editors of this article, and to the Chinese Ministry of Natural Resources and other government agencies that provide data support for this article. All data, models, and code generated or used during the study appear in the submitted article."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. 

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: "Initials of the authors who received each award Grant numbers awarded to each author"

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

5. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

6. Please include a copy of Table 3 which you refer to in your text on page 11.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Overall Comments:

This paper constructs the framework and operation mechanism of emergency information sharing in Coastal Cities and proposes the evaluation index system of emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency. In general, the topic in this paper is interesting and fits well within the scope of this journal. However, there are still some details that need to be improved. Thus, the paper in its present form is not ready for publication. The following comments and feedback could hopefully assist the authors in future revisions.

Specific Comments:

1. Introduction: i) What are the emergency public emergencies? It is necessary to demonstrate the difference between coastal cities and inland cities. ii) How can the establishment of an institution (National Emergency Management Department) “completely” changed the pattern? iii) The lack of comparison between other countries' coastal cities in the same period, otherwise, it is not appropriate to directly say that China's low level. iv) Literature reviews should be classified based on research content. v) I don't think the existing research lacks research on the emergency mechanism of coastal cities, given that there are so many coastal cities in the world. Or what is special to the coastal city emergency management system.

2. Emergency Information Sharing Framework Based on Collaboration Theory: i) Are the four elements of the coastal city emergency information sharing framework original? The name of the “information participants” is not appropriate, and it contains too much content. ii) As previously written, “The emergency response department is mainly responsible for executing the emergency tasks and its responsibilities issued by the command center”. Information collection is not its responsibility. And how to conclude that “the emergency response department is not active, relying on the decision and instructions of the emergency command center, and the efficiency of information collection, disposal and feedback is low.”

3. Coastal city emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency measurement: Whether this Coastal city emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency measurement is common to coastal cities and inland cities?

4. Empirical analysis: “The overall efficiency of China's coastal cities' emergency information sharing is low”, This indicator is low in the world, and it is still relatively low compared to inland cities?

5. Editorial errors: i) “Basic information resources include five aspects: politics, economy, social development, resources, environment, and geographic information”, This statement is incorrect. ii) The words in the text box in Figure 2 should be left intact and a hyphen is required for line breaks. iii) In the “Policy suggestion”, at the end of the second suggestion is the fourth.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2022 Dec 1;17(12):e0276589. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276589.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


15 Jun 2022

Thank the reviewer for providing the direction for the author to improve the manuscript. According to the reviewer's suggestions, the author has made the modifications and explanations to the manuscript:

1. Introduction: i) What are the emergency public emergencies? It is necessary to demonstrate the difference between coastal cities and inland cities. ii) How can the establishment of an institution (National Emergency Management Department) “completely” change the pattern? iii) The lack of comparison between other countries' coastal cities in the same period, otherwise, it is not appropriate to directly say that China's low level. iv) Literature reviews should be classified based on research content. v) I don't think the existing research lacks research on the emergency mechanism of coastal cities, given that there are so many coastal cities in the world. Or what is special to the coastal city emergency management system.

Author response:

i) Public emergencies refer to negative events that occur unexpectedly under the domination of certain natural factors, cause serious harm, loss or impact to the society and need to be dealt with immediately. At the beginning of this paper, the special features of coastal cities and their special factors for disasters are proposed.

ii) In this paper, the "completely changing model" is changed to emphasize the improvement of emergency management capabilities.

iii) The gap between China's coastal cities and foreign countries can be seen from the literature review by foreign scholars on the emergency management capabilities of coastal cities.

iv) The literature review is organized from the aspects of emergency information sharing collaborative research, emergency information sharing mechanism research and emergency collaborative governance.

v) Firstly, the research of this paper is based on the theory of collaborative governance. Secondly, this paper proposes a framework and operation mechanism for coastal cities' emergency information sharing based on the collaborative theory, and proposes an index system and measurement method that affects the collaborative efficiency of coastal cities' emergency information sharing. This paper provided support for disaster prevention and mitigation information sharing decision-making.

2. Emergency Information Sharing Framework Based on Collaboration Theory: i) Are the four elements of the coastal city emergency information sharing framework original? The name of the “information participants” is not appropriate, and it contains too much content. ii) As previously written, “The emergency response department is mainly responsible for executing the emergency tasks and its responsibilities issued by the command center”. Information collection is not its responsibility. And how to conclude that “the emergency response department is not active, relying on the decision and instructions of the emergency command center, and the efficiency of information collection, disposal and feedback is low.”

Author response:

i) The four elements of the coastal city emergency information sharing framework are original. Emergency management information involves the coordination of various government departments. The research in this paper includes all relevant departments as much as possible.

ii) The main responsibility of the emergency response department is indeed not information collection, but before it orders tasks on its own, it needs to adjust its own response strategy in time based on the information collected. The conclusions drawn in this paper are based on the relevant literature and research results.

3. Coastal city emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency measurement: Whether this Coastal city emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency measurement is common to coastal cities and inland cities?

Author response: The collaborative efficiency measure of emergency information sharing in coastal cities is an influencing factor refined based on the characteristics of coastal cities and the theory of collaborative governance. Therefore, it is general for coastal cities, but not suitable for inland cities.

4. Empirical analysis: “The overall efficiency of China's coastal cities' emergency information sharing is low”, This indicator is low in the world, and it is still relatively low compared to inland cities?

Author response: This metric is lower worldwide, not just within China.

5. Editorial errors: i) “Basic information resources include five aspects: politics, economy, social development, resources, environment, and geographic information”, This statement is incorrect. ii) The words in the text box in Figure 2 should be left intact and a hyphen is required for line breaks. iii) In the “Policy suggestion”, at the end of the second suggestion is the fourth.

Author response:

i) Resources and environment are not two words, but one word reflecting two aspects, and the author has corrected the English translation.

ii) The author has adjusted the formativeness of the graph.

iii) The author changed (4) to (3)

In addition to making revisions based on the above suggestions, we have also improved the grammatical structure of the manuscript. We hope that reviewers can make further suggestions for revisions. Thank reviewer again!

Attachment

Submitted filename: Author response.docx

Decision Letter 1

Emily Chenette

8 Sep 2022

PONE-D-21-09794R1Influencing Factors and Efficiency Evaluation of Coastal Emergency Information SharingPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Huang,

Thank you for submitting your revised manuscript to PLOS ONE. Your manuscript has been assessed by two reviewers: the original reviewer, who is positive about the revisions, and one new reviewer. Although reviewer 1 is positive about the revisions, reviewer 2 raises some additional concerns that should be addressed as a prerequisite to further consideration of this work. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 23 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Emily Chenette

Editor in Chief

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: In this revision, all the reviewer's comments have been addressed. The reviewer does not have further comments.

Reviewer #2: This paper “Influencing Factors and Efficiency Evaluation of Coastal Emergency Information Sharing” constructs the framework of emergency information sharing in coastal cities and adopts coupling degree model to evaluate emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency. The perspective of this study is interesting, and the results provide support for improving the disaster prevention and mitigation capacity of coastal cities.

However, the authors provided relatively few conceptual details on the rationality of the selection of the evaluation indicators and the originality of the approach. This is probably the main flaw of this paper, preventing the publication of this article as it is. The suggestions for specific improvement are as follows.

Major reviews:

The first one regards Introduction and Discussion. The manuscript fails to address how the findings relate to previous research in this area. In addition, 22 of 28 references regard Chinese case studies. It seems that the proposed study regards only this specific geographic position. The authors should rewrite their Introduction and add Discussion to reference more related literature, especially recently published international work. The authors should also elaborate better the originality and novelty of their study, commenting a bit more on the representativeness and the generalizability of the study to broader socioeconomic contexts.

The second one regards Section 3: Coastal city emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency measurement. This study requires more conceptual details on the choice of the indicators and methods. The authors should include more information that clarifies and justifies their choice of methods. In addition, it is better to elaborate more on the meaning of the indicators, the gap and implication for the evaluation system taking the previous example for better understanding.

The third one regards Section 4: Empirical analysis. 13 disaster events that occurred in coastal cities in China in the past 20 years are selected as samples. On what basis the authors selected those events as samples and representativeness of these samples should be more elaborate. Additionally, it was mentioned in the paper that contributions of U1, U2 and U3 subsystem had risen steadily. However, the presented data result in Table 4 does not fully support the conclusion. The authors should check carefully and confirm that the conclusions are consistent with the research results, and the recommendations are corresponding to the conclusions.

Other minor reviews:

i) The statement in paragraph 1 of Section 1 and Section 2.3 should be justified by citations.

ii) Emergency information participants and emergency information resources are in a parallel relationship. The presentation of the relationship between them in Figure 1 seems to be an inclusive relationship, which is obviously inappropriate.

iii) Figure 3 is mentioned in Section 2.3 (1). However, there is no Figure 3 in the revised manuscript.

iv) Is it emergency efficiency or collaborative efficiency in the title of Section 3?

v) Please add the year information for the time of occurrence in Table 3.

vi) There are some typos and grammar mistakes in this manuscript. Please carefully check and correct these mistakes. Furthermore, moderate revisions are requested in order to polish the language usage (longer sentences and technicalities).

vii) Please make sure all dash, space, a hyphen, en dash, and capital words would be appropriate throughout the manuscript.

viii) Please ensure that the font size and capital letters are consistent in the table and figure.

All in all, I have the impression these revisions will improve substantially both quality and readability of the present manuscript. Thank you.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2022 Dec 1;17(12):e0276589. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276589.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


14 Sep 2022

Reviewer #2:

Question 1: Introduction and Discussion: The manuscript fails to address how the findings relate to previous research in this area. In addition, 22 of 28 references regard Chinese case studies. It seems that the proposed study regards only this specific geographic position. The authors should rewrite their “Introduction” and add “Discussion” to reference more related literature, especially recently published international work. The authors should also elaborate better the originality and novelty of their study, commenting a bit more on the representativeness and the generalizability of the study to broader socioeconomic contexts.

Author response: Author adds the following contents in the part of introduction to increase to increase foreign literatures : Carminati B et al(2016)[14] presented an emergency information sharing framework able to deal with both specified and unspecified emergencies; Dantas A A et al(2007)[15] presented an information-sharing framework for road organizations, on the basis of a study of response and recovery activities, information needs were identified and a geographic information system-based information-sharing framework was created.

Author adds the following contents in the part of introduction to increase to find relate to previous research in this area and to explain this innovation: The relationship between this paper and the previous research lies in: First, the index system of the existing research is optimized, and an effective evaluation index system is put forward from three dimensions, included the mechanism construction level of emergency information sharing, the resource support capability and the collaborative driving force. Secondly, the coupling theory in physics is used for reference to quantitatively evaluate the coordination efficiency of emergency information sharing in coastal cities. Thirdly, referring to the existing emergency information organization structure, the paper puts forward the emergency information sharing framework of China's coastal cities based on collaboration theory. The difference of this paper is that it proposes a coastal city emergency information sharing framework and operation mechanism based on the synergy theory, and proposes an index system and measurement method that affect the coastal city emergency information sharing collaboration efficiency.

Author also adds some references, as follows:

[14] Carminati B, Ferrari E, Guglielmi M, 2016, Detection of Unspecified Emergencies for Controlled Information Sharing. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 13(6):630-643.

[15] Dantas A A, Sevile E and Gohil D,2007, Information sharing during emergency response and recovery - A framework for road organizations, Transportation Research Record, 2022,21-28.

[24] Kwon T. H, Zmud R. W., 1987, Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation, critical Issues in Information Systems Research. New York: John Wiley: 135 -142.

[25] Varun Grover, Martin D. Goslar, 1993, The initiation, adoption, and implementation of telecommunications technologies in U.S. organizations. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10(1): 141-163.

Question 2: Section 3: Coastal city emergency information sharing collaborative efficiency measurement. This study requires more conceptual details on the choice of the indicators and methods. The authors should include more information that clarifies and justifies their choice of methods. In addition, it is better to elaborate more on the meaning of the indicators, the gap and implication for the evaluation system taking the previous example for better understanding.

Author response: Author adds some contents in the part of section 3, as follows:

(1) Principles of index selection

1)Systematization principle

Indexes can reflect both direct and indirect effects, and ensure the comprehensiveness and credibility of comprehensive evaluation.

2) Principle of index measurability

The meaning of indexes is clear, the data required for calculating indexes are easy to collect, and the calculation method is simple and easy to master.

3) Principle of correlation between indexes and targets

The realization of indexes must make a substantial contribution to the realization of the goal, and it is forbidden to choose indexes unrelated to the goal.

Author also adds some contents about obtaining original data of indexes, as follows:

4) Method of obtaining original data of indexes

As most of the measurement indexes are qualitative, it is difficult to obtain data through monitoring equipment, so the method of expert assignment value is adopted to obtain the original data, and five levels of quantity are adopted to assign values to each measurement indicator: good =5, good =4, fair =3, poor =2 and poor =1.

Question 3: Section 4: Empirical analysis. 13 disaster events that occurred in coastal cities in China in the past 20 years are selected as samples. On what basis the authors selected those events as samples and representativeness of these samples should be more elaborate. Additionally, it was mentioned in the paper that contributions of U1, U2 and U3 subsystem had risen steadily. However, the presented data result in Table 4 does not fully support the conclusion. The authors should check carefully and confirm that the conclusions are consistent with the research results, and the recommendations are corresponding to the conclusions.

Author response: Author adds some contents in the part “Empirical analysis”, as follows:

The reason for choosing these samples is that these samples represent almost all the characteristics of coastal cities in China, and they are all major marine disasters. These sample data are relatively complete and have been collected on.

The author modified some contents in order to keep Table 4 consistent with the conclusion, as follows:

(2)Although the contribution level of each subsystem has experienced twists and turns, it has generally increased.

The 13 events in Table 4 are arranged in chronological order. The calculation results show that, on the whole, the contribution levels of the subsystems U1= emergency information sharing mechanism construction level, U2= emergency information sharing resource support capability and U3= emergency information sharing collaborative driving force are obviously increasing, which indicates that with the improvement of disaster prevention and mitigation capability of coastal cities in China, the collaborative capability of emergency information sharing is also increasing year by year.

Other minor reviews:

i) The statement in paragraph 1 of Section 1 and Section 2.3 should be justified by citations.

Author response: The author has cited the literature according to the expert opinion.

iii) Figure 3 is mentioned in Section 2.3 (1). However, there is no Figure 3 in the revised manuscript.

Author response: The author has modified Figure 3 to Figure 2.

iv) Is it emergency efficiency or collaborative efficiency in the title of Section 3?

Author response: It is emergency collaborative efficiency. Author had modified the title.

v) Please add the year information for the time of occurrence in Table 3.

Author response: Author had increased the year in Table 3.

vi) There are some typos and grammar mistakes in this manuscript. Please carefully check and correct these mistakes. Furthermore, moderate revisions are requested in order to polish the language usage (longer sentences and technicalities).

Author response: Author had edited some typos and grammar mistakes to this manuscript again.

vii) Please make sure all dash, space, a hyphen, dash, and capital words would be appropriate throughout the manuscript.

Author response: The author proofread the whole manuscript again.

viii) Please ensure that the font size and capital letters are consistent in the table and figure.

Author response: Author proofread to the font size and capital letters in the table and figure.

Sincerely thank editors and peer experts for their sugge

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 2

Md Asaduzzaman

26 Sep 2022

PONE-D-21-09794R2Influencing Factors and Efficiency Evaluation of Coastal Emergency Information SharingPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Huang,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

 Although the authors addressed most of the points raised by the reviewers there are some minor grammatical errors which need to be revised. You will need to correct all the errors raised by the reviewer 2, which can be found in the attachment.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 10 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Md Asaduzzaman, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

Although reviewer 1 has accepted the current version reviewer 2 raised some crucial grammatical mistakes and textual errors. The reviewer also suggested elaborating by providing a detailed discussion of the reasons for choosing some existing results in the proposed index for measuring the efficiency of emergency information sharing collaboration. Therefore, we would like to invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript by correcting those errors and issues raised and also a detailed response to reviewer 2.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: All my comments have been addressed. This reviewer does not have further comments. This paper is recommended to be published.

Reviewer #2: Comments and Suggestions for Authors:

The authors have revised the manuscript according to reviewer’s comments, and the quality of the manuscript has been improved a lot. However, there are still minor problems raised by the reviewer that have not been solved.

The first one regards language usage and grammar. I think it is necessary to employ a professional scientific editor of language to thoroughly check this manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. There are still some mistakes in this revised version, which authors haven’t corrected. Some of the mistakes are marked in the attachment named Comments on the Revised Manuscript.

The second one regards references. References should not be cited on the title. The statement in Section 2.3 and Section 3.2 should be justified by citations. Instead of adding references to the title, the author should add references to the exact statement to demonstrate the rationality of the statement.

Please ensure that the capital letters are consistent in the table and figure.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Comments on the Revised Manuscript.docx

PLoS One. 2022 Dec 1;17(12):e0276589. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276589.r006

Author response to Decision Letter 2


28 Sep 2022

Response to Reviewers

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Author response: Author reviewed the reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct again.

Additional Editor Comments:

Although reviewer 1 has accepted the current version reviewer 2 raised some crucial grammatical mistakes and textual errors. The reviewer also suggested elaborating by providing a detailed discussion of the reasons for choosing some existing results in the proposed index for measuring the efficiency of emergency information sharing collaboration. Therefore, we would like to invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript by correcting those errors and issues raised and also a detailed response to reviewer 2.

Author response: Author invited scholars from English-speaking countries to update the grammatical errors and text errors of this manuscript again. The revised contents in the manuscript are marked in red.

Author added some contents in 3.1 section to provide a detailed discussion of the reasons for choosing some existing results, as followed:

These indexes include 3 primary indexes and 9 secondary indexes. The first fist-level index is the construction level of emergency information sharing mechanism, which has four secondary indexes, including emergency information reporting, emergency information security, and emergency information sharing incentives. The second first-level index is the resource support capability of emergency information sharing, which has two second-level indexes, including the unity of emergency information standards, and financial support. The third first-level index is the collaborative driving force of emergency information sharing, and it has three second-level indexes, including clear management functions, obstacles to emergency information sharing, and the integration ability of emergency management agencies. These indexes can scientifically evaluate the collaborative efficiency of information sharing in coastal cities.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 3

Md Asaduzzaman

11 Oct 2022

Research on Measurement Indexes and Evaluation for the Collaborative Efficiency of Emergency Information Sharing in Coastal Cities of China

PONE-D-21-09794R3

Dear Dr. Huang,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Md Asaduzzaman, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This reviewer does not have further comments, and recommends this manuscript to be published in this journal.

Reviewer #2: The authors have revised the manuscript according to reviewer’s comments, and the quality of the manuscript has been improved a lot. However, the authors must delete the references in the title of Section 2.3 and Section 3.2. References should not be cited on the title. Instead of adding references to the title, the author should add references to the exact statement to demonstrate the rationality of the statement.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Md Asaduzzaman

17 Nov 2022

PONE-D-21-09794R3

Research on Measurement Indexes and Evaluation for the Collaborative Efficiency of Emergency Information Sharing in Coastal Cities of China

Dear Dr. Xing:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Md Asaduzzaman

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Author response.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Comments on the Revised Manuscript.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES