Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Emergency Preparedness and Recovery <br />Even if encourZlged by more holistic state and fed- <br />eral policies, sustainable hazard mitigation will <br />never eliminate the need for plans to address the <br />destruction and human suffering imposed by dis- <br />asters. In fact, one way to progress toward sus- <br />tainable' ha/ard mitigation is by creating policies <br />for disaster preparedncss, response, and recovery <br />that support that goal. . . . A great deal of <br />research has focused on pre-disaster planning and <br />response since the 1975 aso:,eo:,o:,ment. Studies have <br />found that pre-disaster planning can o:,ave lives <br />and injuries, limit property damage, and minimizc <br />disruptions, enabling communities to recover <br />more quickly. . . . Recovery was once viewed as <br />a linear phcnomenon, with discrete stages and <br />end products. Today it is seen as a proceo:,s that <br />entails decision making and interaction among all <br />stakeholders-households, businesses, and the <br />community at laryt'. Re5earch has also shown that <br />recovery is most effective whcn community-based <br />organizations assume principal responsibility, sup- <br />plemented by outside technical and financial <br />assistance. An even further shift-away from an <br />exclusive focus on restoring damaged structures <br />toward effective decision making at all Icvcls- <br />may be needed. Outside technical Z1ssistance can <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />historically, have worked against action to reduce ha7.iirds. I-<'indll)~ the process will advance the idea that <br />each locality controls the character of its disasters, Forcing stakeholders to take responsibility for natural ha7- <br />ards and resources and realize that the decisions they make today \vill determine future losses. <br />Federal and state agencies Cl)lJld provide leadership in this process by sponsoring-through technical <br />and financial support-a few prototYVe net\vorks such as model comlllunities or regional projects. <br /> <br />ESTABLISH A HOLISTIC (;()VFIlNI\IE,"...O'r FIlAi\IEWOIlK. To facilitate sustainahle mitigation, all policies amI <br />programs related to ha7.ards and sustainahility should he integf.1ted and consistent. One possible approach <br />lov.,tud lhis gO<J1 is a conference or series of conferences that enahle federaL state, county, and city officials <br />to reexamine the statutory and regulatory fOlllllbtiotls of kuard mitigation and pn.'paredness, in light of the <br />principles of sustainahle mitigation. Potential changes include limiting the subsidization of risk, making bet- <br />ter use of incentives, setting a Federal policy for guiding bnd use, ,lnd fostering collaboration alTlong agen- <br />cies, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector. <br />Other efforts to roster a comprehensivc government framework could include a joint congressional com- <br />mittee hearing, a congressional report. a confercllcc hy the American Planning Association to rcview experi- <br />ences in sample communities, and a joint meeting of federal, state, and profcssional research organizations. <br /> <br />CONDUCT A NATION\VIDE IIi\ZARD AND RISK ASSESSMENT. Not enough is known about the changes in or <br />interactions among the physical. social. and constructed systems that :~rc reshaping the nation's h,--lIardolls <br />flllure. A n<.ltional risk assessment should meld information from those three systems so hal.ards can be esti- <br />mated interactively and comprehensively, to support local efforts on sustainahle mitigation. <br />Loc<ll planning will require multi-hazard, community-scale risk assessment maps that incorporate infor- <br />mation ranging from global physical processcs to local resources ami buildings. This informal ion is not now <br />available, and will require federal investment in research on risk~analysis tools and dissemination to local <br />governments. <br /> <br />I3l'ILD l'OATlOl\"AL DATABASES, 'I 'he nation must collect. analyze, (lIld store standardized data on losses <br />from past and current disasters. thereby estahlishing a baseline for comparison with futlHe losses. This data- <br />base should include information Oll the lypes or losses, their locations, their specific causes. and the actual <br />dollar amounts, taking into account problems of double-counting, comparisons with gross domestic producl, <br />and the distinction between regional and national impacts. ;\ second dat<loasc is nceded lo collate infOfrna~ <br />tion on mitigation efforts-what they are, where they occur. and how much they cost-to provide a baseline <br />for local cost-benefit analysis. These archives are fundamental to informed decision making and should be <br />accessible to the public. <br />i\ central repository for hazard-related social science data is also lacking. This third (.'eolral archive <br />would speed development of standards for collecting and analyzing information on the social aspects of haz- <br />ards and disasters. <br />