PPA 573 – Emergency Management and Homeland Security

1. PPA 573 – Emergency Management and Homeland Security Lecture 4b – Mitigation and Hazard Management

2. Introduction • The estimated cumulative toll from two 1989 disasters, Hurricane Hugo and the Loma Prieta Earthquake, amounted to more than $10 billion. The cost of Hurricane Andrew exceeded $30 billion. The cost of the World Trade Center attacks is likely to exceed $90 billion. Costly response and recover efforts to these and other natural disasters and also to technological disasters such as Three Mile Island and Chernobyl have been well documented.

3. Introduction • But there have been few published accounts of averting disasters or minimizing their effects through foresighted and ultimately less expensive mitigation programs.

4. Benefits of Mitigation • Saving lives and reducing injuries. • Preventing or reducing property damage. • Reducing economic losses. • Minimizing social dislocation and stress. • Minimizing agricultural losses.

5. Benefits of Mitigation • Maintaining critical facilities in functioning order. • Protecting infrastructure from damage. • Protecting mental health. • Lessening legal liability of government and public officials. • Providing positive political consequences for government action.

6. Elements of Mitigation • Hazard. • Natural, technological, or civil threats to people, property, and the environment. • Risk. • The probability that a hazard will occur during a particular time period. • Vulnerability. • Susceptibility to injury or damage from hazards. • Disaster. • A hazard occurrence resulting in significant injury or damage.

7. Role of the Emergency Manager • Steps in implementing mitigation. • Analyze the hazards faced by the community. • Identify their associated risks. • Reduce vulnerability to the hazards. • Mitigate their potential disaster impact. • To do this well, emergency manager must manage both the political and technical sides. • Political – local advocate for good mitigation practice. • Technical – local expert on specialized terms, methodologies, and programs.

8. Local Hazard Mitigation Process • Identifying all local hazards: their characteristics; Locations; Probability of occurrence; And potential impact on people, property, and the environment; Also identifying appropriate actions to reduce structural and nonstructural damage.

9. Local Hazard Mitigation Process • Analyzing the probable risks of disaster occurrence and the vulnerability of people, property, and the environment to injury or damage. The analysis is based on inventories of structures and populations at risk, estimates of economic loss, studies of risk perception, and projections of mitigation costs and benefits.

10. Local Hazard Mitigation Process • Preparing, recommending, and maintaining a community mitigation strategy, including all of the technical and political, policy and program, plan and budget, and regulation and education aspects.

11. Hazard Identification • Hazard identifications means determining the full range of potential hazards faced by a community and grouping them according to characteristics, impacts, and potential mitigation actions. • Types of hazards. • Natural. • Technological. • Civil.

12. Hazard Identification • Functional characteristics. • Predictability. • Speed of onset. • Extent of impact. • Intensity. • Warning time. • Recurrence. • Controllability. • Destructive potential.

13. Hazard Identification • Emergency managers should group together disasters with similar functional characteristics to develop mitigation strategies that apply to more than one type of disaster. • Natural hazards. • The most common: hurricanes, tornadoes, riverine floods, earthquakes, expansive soils, landslides, severe winds, and tsunamis. • Given the current patterns of development disasters are likely to increase in the future.

14. Hazard Identification • Natural hazards. • Natural hazards having varying characteristics but generally follow a well-understood causal sequence. • Example: Hurricanes result when ocean water condenses, releasing latent heat. They generally occur in certain geographic areas at the same season each year and have a warning time of a few days, high intensity, but low probability of occurrence, and a very high destructive potential and no possibility of control.

15. Hazard Identification • Technological hazards. • Chemical emergencies and nuclear accidents constitute the major technological hazards. • Most mitigation must be done at the national level, but local governments can reroute hazardous cargo and enact zoning, monitoring, and disclosure requirements. • Accident: rapid onset, low predictability and warning time, high intensity and destructive potential. • Long-term exposure: gradual onset, low predictability and warning, varying intensity and destructive potential. • Both are under human control, because usually are caused by a human system failure.

16. Hazard Identification • Civil hazards. • The most common are famine and hostile attack. • Characterized by low predictability and warning and catastrophic intensity and destructiveness. • Uncontrollable at the local level. • Only preparedness possible.

17. Hazard Identification • Hazard impact groups. • Hazards can be grouped according to whether they primarily affect people, property, or both. • Highest priority is given to disasters that affect both. • Within those types of disasters, highest mitigation priority is given to protection of people and second priority protection of property. • Special priority is also given to protection of lifeline systems, essential public facilities vital to post-disaster response, and to facilities with a potential for significant loss.

18. Hazard Identification • Types of mitigation actions. • Structural – contain and strengthen. • Non-structural – use of government authority to limit exposure.

19. Hazard Analysis • Once potential hazards, their impacts, and possible mitigation actions have been identified, a hazard analysis can be conducted to provide information on the location and extent of risk and vulnerability, the roles played by different groups, the potential extent of losses, and the benefits that can be realized from mitigation.

20. Hazard Analysis • For each identified hazard, the hazard analysis should clearly state both the actual and perceived levels of risk and vulnerability. • The analysis, which will include engineering as well as economic components, should be prepared in both written and mapped form to specify the characteristics as well as the location of hazards.

21. Hazard Analysis • In the report, techniques for determining risk and vulnerability should be clearly documented, and findings and conclusions should be presented in a useful and understandable form for the public and decision-makers.

22. Risk and Vulnerability Mapping • Risk is the probability of a hazard occurrence and vulnerability is the susceptibility of people and property to injury or damage. • Risk and vulnerability mapping is simply a procedure for locating areas with different degrees of hazard probability and susceptibility.

23. Estimating Economic Losses • Estimating potential economic losses from a disaster in terms of dollars and cents is a powerful tool for alerting policymakers to the advantages of mitigation. • Pre-disaster estimates are based on vulnerability. • Post-disaster estimates are based on damage assessments and are used in extensively in recovery activities.

24. Assessing Risk Perception • How risks are perceived shapes the way people respond to them. • Decision makers can be surveyed to assess their perceptions of risk from natural and technological hazards and the importance they accord such hazards on the public agenda. • National surveys show that mitigating such risks is rarely at the top of local public policy priorities.

25. Assessing Risk Perception • Assessing the public’s risk perceptions is important for determining how people will behave during an actual disaster as well as how they understand and will act upon the need for mitigation. • Behavioral surveys most common technique for estimating evacuation percentages and shelter locations, understanding of hazard conditions.

26. Estimating Mitigation Costs and Benefits • Once the economic loss estimates are complete, emergency manager can estimate the benefits from mitigation. • Projecting reduced disaster-related losses anticipated in the absence of the program; • Projecting disaster-related losses under the mitigation program, less the costs of the program itself. • Comparing the projected loss without mitigation to the projected loss with mitigation.

27. Preparing Mitigation Strategies • Once hazard identification and analysis are done, the emergency manager can begin to create community awareness of and support for mitigation. • Preparing mitigation strategies, the third step, involves working with local planners, decision makers, and community leaders to build mitigation into both public policy actions and private development practice. • Involves working in the “shared governance” arena.

28. Preparing Mitigation Strategies • At this stage, the emergency manager: • Makes a tentative selection of the mitigation techniques that seem feasible; • Works with local planners to explore how these techniques can be integrated into comprehensive plans and development regulations; • Looks for linkages with other public and private efforts; and • Start to educate community leaders and the public on the importance of mitigation.

29. Preparing Mitigation Strategies • Natural hazard mitigation strategies: • Preserve and restore the innate mitigative features of the natural environment; • Strengthen exposed buildings and facilities to withstand hazard impacts; • Facilitate the evacuation and sheltering of exposed populations; • Relocate threatened development out of hazard areas; and • Limit future development in hazard areas.

30. Preparing Mitigation Strategies • Technological hazard mitigation: • Redirect movement of hazardous materials; • Neutralize hazardous material disposal areas; • Relocate away from population concentrations those facilities using or producing hazardous materials; • Strengthen containment systems for hazardous substances; and • Reduce hazard generation in manufacturing and industrial processes.

31. Mitigation Tools and Techniques • Plans • Emergency management plans lay the groundwork for emergency operations. • Should also work with the jurisdictions comprehensive or land use plans. • Plans are necessary but not sufficient. Must be continually updated, monitored, and evaluated. • Regulations • Zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes, and public health regulations (pp. 154-155).

32. Mitigation Tools and Techniques • Spending and taxing programs. • Relocation, public acquisition, and floodproofing are examples. • Preferential or use value taxes (rather than market value), revenue generation for mitigation. • Insurance. • Hazard insurance spreads the cost. • National Flood Insurance Program is the only federal hazard mitigation insurance program.

33. Mitigation Tools and Techniques • Hazard information systems. • Systems record, update, analyze, and display data about the location, intensity, and impact of hazards. • Used for evacuation plans, GIS systems.

35. Mitigation and Public Policy • Goal of mitigation is to save lives and dollars while preventing community fabric from being torn apart. • Mitigation is controversial. • Arguments. • Benefit/Cost ratio of mitigation. • Hazard mitigation is good business. • Not to reduce risk is irresponsible. • Mitigation often furthers other community goals. • Wise emergency manager will look for political allies.