dissertation on disaster management

44-207-097-1871

Dissertation Writing Tools

1. Complete Dissertation Writing Guide - eBook
2. Dissertation Templates Pack
3. Research Methodology Handbook
4. Academic Writing Checklist
5. Citation Style Guide
6. Time Management for Dissertation Writing
7. Literature Review Toolkit
8. Grammar and Style Guide
9. Dissertation Proposal Template
10.Five Pre-written Full Dissertation Papers

33 Disaster Management Dissertation Topics Ideas

Disaster Management Dissertation Topics Disasters in their natural forms can prove to be quite harmful to the survival of human beings on Earth. Therefore, it is imperative to come up with new and innovative strategies to manage the damages due to natural disasters. Dissertation topics on disaster management cover all such strategies, policies, and plans. […]

Disaster Management Dissertation Topics

Disasters in their natural forms can prove to be quite harmful to the survival of human beings on Earth. Therefore, it is imperative to come up with new and innovative strategies to manage the damages due to natural disasters. Dissertation topics on disaster management cover all such strategies, policies, and plans. In addition to this, disaster management research topics also include assessing the disasters and their impacts on different populations in different ways. The risks that arise as a result of natural disasters are also included in the subject matter of this field. Check out more related posts on Marketing Management and Event Managemet .

Best Disaster Management Dissertation Topics ideas for college students

Given below is a list of some very interesting disaster management thesis topics. We are available for guidance and help if you like to prepare your thesis/dissertation on any of the given topics:

The role played by occupational therapists in the domain of disaster management: a systematic analysis.
Investigating the role of disaster management in maintaining resilience for victims of floods: a quantitative study.
Relationship of community-based organizations in dealing with local disaster management issues.
Comparative analysis of the Turkish and Chinese disaster management systems and recommendations.
Investigation of the role played by weather radar in disaster management practices: a descriptive approach.
Ethics in disaster management policies and practices: a comparative analysis.
Information technology and the disaster management domain: potential challenges and opportunities.
Effects of an integrated geospatial information service system on disaster management domain.
Cyclone disaster management system: issues and their potential solutions.
How disaster management is maintained through big data computing and social sensing? A qualitative approach.
Comparative analysis of the disaster management systems of developed and developing countries of the world.
The role played by social workers in the disaster management systems in X country.
Decision-making strategies in disaster management: how emergencies are tackled with?
Disaster management systems for disabled people: a descriptive approach.
The role played by drone applications in the disaster management systems: a review of the literature.
Hurricane Katrina: lessons for university disaster management degrees.
Globalization of disaster management systems: potential challenges and interventions.
The role played by IT in mitigation, preparedness, and responses to natural disasters: a correlational analysis.
Community-based disaster management: how communities can work together?
UAV-assisted disaster management strategies: potential opportunities for updating the services.
Medicine supplies in high earthquake risk areas: how disaster management strategies are developed?
The role played by media in forecasted natural disasters: a review of the literature.
Community planning, public participation, and disaster management: focus on the achievement of sustainable hazard mitigation.
The role played by financial resources and digitalization in keeping a disaster management organization operational: a systematic study.
Pre-disaster management strategies: potential challenges and interventions.
Importance of geospatial support in disaster management strategies: a descriptive approach.
Remote sensing technologies and disaster management strategies: a review of the literature.
The role played by NGOs in disaster management systems for developing countries of the world.
Disaster management and hazardous waste cleanup.
Importance of governance in disaster management systems.

Above is the best Disaster Management Dissertation Topics list if you are still looking for some topics fill out the form below and get the topic mini proposal on your requirement from experts. Click here to place an order for Disaster Management Dissertation at a 25% discount.

Paid Topic Mini Proposal (500 Words)

You will get the topics first and then the mini proposal which includes:

An explanation why we choose this topic.
2-3 research questions.
Key literature resources identification.
Suitable methodology including raw sample size and data collection method
View a Sample of Service

Note: After submiting your order please must check your email [inbox/spam] folders for order confirmation and login details.If email goes in spam please mark not as spam to avoid any communication gap between us.

Get An Expert Dissertation Writing Help To Achieve Good Grades

By placing an order with us, you can get;

Writer consultation before payment to ensure your work is in safe hands.
Free topic if you don't have one
Draft submissions to check the quality of the work as per supervisor's feedback
Free revisions
Complete privacy
Plagiarism Free work
Guaranteed 2:1 (With help of your supervisor's feedback)
2 Instalments plan
Special discounts

Facing Hazards and Disasters: Understanding Human Dimensions (2006)

Chapter: 4 research on disaster response and recovery, 4 research on disaster response and recovery.

T his chapter and the preceding one use the conceptual model presented in Chapter 1 (see Figure 1.1 ) as a guide to understanding societal response to hazards and disasters. As specified in that model, Chapter 3 discusses three sets of pre-disaster activities that have the potential to reduce disaster losses: hazard mitigation practices, emergency preparedness practices, and pre-disaster planning for post-disaster recovery. This chapter focuses on National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) contributions to social science knowledge concerning those dimensions of the model that are related to post-disaster response and recovery activities. As in Chapter 3 , discussions are organized around research findings regarding different units of analysis, including individuals, households, groups and organizations, social networks, and communities. The chapter also highlights trends, controversies, and issues that warrant further investigation. The contents of this chapter are linked to key themes discussed elsewhere in this report, including the conceptualization and measurement of societal vulnerability and resilience, the importance of taking diversity into account in understanding both response-related activities and recovery processes and outcomes, and linkages between hazard loss reduction and sustainability. Although this review centers primarily on research on natural disasters and to a lesser degree on technological disasters, research findings are also discussed in terms of their implications for understanding and managing emerging homeland security threats.

The discussions that follow seek to address several interrelated questions: What is currently known about post-disaster response and recovery,

and to what extent is that knowledge traceable to NEHRP-sponsored research activities? What gaps exist in that knowledge? What further research—both disciplinary and interdisciplinary—is needed to fill those gaps?

RESEARCH ON DISASTER RESPONSE

Emergency response encompasses a range of measures aimed at protecting life and property and coping with the social disruption that disasters produce. As noted in Chapter 3 , emergency response activities can be categorized usefully as expedient mitigation actions (e.g., clearing debris from channels when floods threaten, containing earthquake-induced fires and hazardous materials releases before they can cause additional harm) and population protection actions (e.g., warning, evacuation and other self-protective actions, search and rescue, the provision of emergency medical care and shelter; Tierney et al., 2001). Another common conceptual distinction in the literature on disaster response (Dynes et al., 1981) contrasts agent-generated demands , or the types of losses and forms of disruption that disasters create, and response-generated demands , such as the need for situation assessment, crisis communication and coordination, and response management. Paralleling preparedness measures, disaster response activities take place at various units of analysis, from individuals and households, to organizations, communities, and intergovernmental systems. This section does not attempt to deal exhaustively with the topic of emergency response activities, which is the most-studied of all phases of hazard and disaster management. Rather, it highlights key themes in the literature, with an emphasis on NEHRP-based findings that are especially relevant in light of newly recognized human-induced threats.

Public Response: Warning Response, Evacuation, and Other Self-Protective Actions

The decision processes and behaviors involved in public responses to disaster warnings are among the best-studied topics in the research literature. Over nearly three decades, NEHRP has been a major sponsor of this body of research. As noted in Chapter 3 , warning response research overlaps to some degree with more general risk communication research. For example, both literatures emphasize the importance of considering source, message, channel, and receiver effects on the warning process. While this discussion centers mainly on responses to official warning information, it should be noted that self-protective decision-making processes are also initiated in the absence of formal warnings—for example, in response to cues that people perceive as signaling impending danger and in disasters that occur without warning. Previous research suggests that the basic deci-

sion processes involved in self-protective action are similar across different types of disaster events, although the challenges posed and the problems that may develop can be agent specific.

As in other areas discussed here, empirical studies on warning response and self-protective behavior in different types of disasters and emergencies have led to the development of broadly generalizable explanatory models. One such model, the protective action decision model, developed by Perry, Lindell, and their colleagues (see, for example, Lindell and Perry, 2004), draws heavily on Turner and Killian’s (1987) emergent norm theory of collective behavior. According to that theory, groups faced with the potential need to act under conditions of uncertainty (or potential danger) engage in interaction in an attempt to develop a collective definition of the situation they face and a set of new norms that can guide their subsequent action. 1 Thus, when warnings and protective instructions are disseminated, those who receive warnings interact with one another in an effort to determine collectively whether the warning is authentic, whether it applies to them, whether they are indeed personally in danger, whether they can reduce their vulnerability through action, whether action is possible, and when they should act. These collective determinations are shaped in turn by such factors as (1) the characteristics of warning recipients , including their prior experience with the hazard in question or with similar emergencies, as well as their prior preparedness efforts; (2) situational factors , including the presence of perceptual cues signaling danger; and (3) the social contexts in which decisions are made—for example, contacts among family members, coworkers, neighborhood residents, or others present in the setting, as well as the strength of preexisting social ties. Through interaction and under the influence of these kinds of factors, individuals and groups develop new norms that serve as guidelines for action.

Conceptualizing warning response as a form of collective behavior that is guided by emergent norms brings several issues to the fore. One is that far from being automatic or governed by official orders, behavior undertaken in response to warnings is the product of interaction and deliberation among members of affected groups—activities that are typically accompanied by a search for additional confirmatory information. Circumstances that complicate the deliberation process, such as conflicting warning information that individuals and groups may receive, difficulties in getting in touch with others whose views are considered important for the decision-making process, or disagreements among group members about any aspect of the

threat situation, invariably lead to additional efforts to communicate and confirm the information and lengthen the period between when a warning is issued and when groups actually respond.

Another implication of the emergent norm approach to protective action decision making is the recognition that groups may collectively define an emergency situation in ways that are at variance from official views. This is essentially what occurs in the shadow evacuation phenomenon, which has been documented in several emergency situations, including the Three Mile Island nuclear plant accident (Zeigler et al., 1981). While authorities may not issue a warning for a particular geographic area or group of people, or may even tell them they are safe, groups may still collectively decide that they are at risk or that the situation is fluid and confusing enough that they should take self-protective action despite official pronouncements.

The behavior of occupants of the World Trade Center during the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack illustrates the importance of collectively developed definitions. Groups of people in Tower 2 of the World Trade Center decided that they should evacuate the building after seeing and hearing about what was happening in Tower 1 and after speaking with coworkers and loved ones, even when official announcements and other building occupants indicated that they should not do so. Others decided to remain in the tower or, perhaps more accurately, they decided to delay evacuating until receiving additional information clarifying the extent to which they were in danger. Journalistic accounts suggest that decisions were shaped in part by what people could see taking place in Tower 1, conversations with others outside the towers who had additional relevant information, and directives received from those in positions of authority in tenant firms. In that highly confusing and time-constrained situation, emergent norms guiding the behavior of occupants of the second tower meant the difference between life and death when the second plane struck (NIST, 2005).

The large body of research that exists regarding decision making under threat conditions points to the need to consider a wide range of individual, group, situational, and resource-related factors that facilitate and inhibit self-protective action. Qualitatively based decision-tree models developed by Gladwin et al. (2001) demonstrate the complexity of self-protective decisions. As illustrated by their work on hurricane evacuation, a number of different factors contribute to decisions on whether or not to evacuate. Such factors range from perceptions of risk and personal safety with respect to a threatened disaster, to the extent of knowledge about specific areas at risk, to constraining factors such as the presence of pets in the home that require care, lack of a suitable place to go, counterarguments by other family members, fears of looting (shown by the literature to be unjustified; see, for example, Fischer, 1998), and fear that the evacuation process may

be more dangerous than staying home and riding out a hurricane. Warning recipients may decide that they should wait before evacuating, ultimately missing the opportunity to escape, or they may decide to shelter in-place after concluding that their homes are strong enough to resist hurricane forces despite what they are told by authorities.

In their research on Hurricane Andrew, Gladwin and Peacock describe some of the many factors that complicate the evacuation process for endangered populations (1997:54):

Except under extreme circumstances, households cannot be compelled to evacuate or to remain where they are, much less to prepare themselves for the threat. Even under extraordinary conditions many households have to be individually located and assisted or forced to comply. Segments of a population may fail to receive, ignore, or discount official requests and orders. Still others may not have the resources or wherewithal to comply. Much will depend upon the source of the information, the consistency of the message received from multiple sources, the nature of the information conveyed, as well as the household’s ability to perceive the danger, make decisions, and act accordingly. Disputes, competition, and the lack of coordination among local, state, and federal governmental agencies and between those agencies and privately controlled media can add confusion. Businesses and governmental agencies that refuse to release their employees and suspend normal activities can add still further to the confusion and noncompliance.

The normalcy bias adds other complications to the warning response process. While popular notions of crisis response behaviors seem to assume that people react automatically to messages signaling impending danger—for example, by fleeing in panic—the reality is quite different. People typically “normalize” unusual situations and persist in their everyday activities even when urged to act differently. As noted earlier, people will not act on threat information unless they perceive a personal risk to themselves. Simply knowing that a threat exists—even if that threat is described as imminent—is insufficient to motivate self-protective action. Nor can people be expected to act if warning-related guidance is not specific enough to provide them with a blueprint for what to do or if they do not believe they have the resources required to follow the guidance. One practical implication of research on warnings is that rather than being concerned about panicking the public with warning information, or about communicating too much information, authorities should instead be seeking better ways to penetrate the normalcy bias, persuade people that they should be concerned about an impending danger, provide directives that are detailed enough to follow during an emergency, and encourage pre-disaster response planning so that people have thought through what to do prior to being required to act.

Other Important Findings Regarding the Evacuation Process

As noted earlier, evacuation behavior has long been recognized as the reflection of social-level factors and collective deliberation. Decades ago, Drabek (1983) established that households constitute the basic deliberative units for evacuation decision making in community-wide disasters and that the decisions that are ultimately made tend to be consistent with pre-disaster household authority patterns. For example, gender-related concerns often enter into evacuation decision making. Women tend to be more risk-averse and more inclined to want to follow evacuation orders, while males are less inclined to do so (for an extensive discussion of gender differences in vulnerability, risk perception, and responses to disasters, see Fothergill, 1998). In arriving at decisions regarding evacuation, households take official orders into account, but they weigh those orders in light of their own priorities, other information sources, and their past experiences. Information received from media sources and from family and friends, along with confirmatory data actively sought by those at risk, generally has a greater impact on evacuation decisions than information provided by public officials (Dow and Cutter, 1998, 2000).

Recent research also suggests that family evacuation patterns are undergoing change. For example, even though families decide together to evacuate and wish to stay together, they increasingly tend to use more than one vehicle to evacuate—perhaps because they want to take more of their possessions with them, make sure their valuable vehicles are protected, or return to their homes at different times (Dow and Cutter, 2002). Other social influences also play a role. Neighborhood residents may be more willing to evacuate or, conversely, more inclined to delay the decision to evacuate if they see their neighbors doing so. Rather than becoming more vigilant, communities that are struck repeatedly by disasters such as hurricanes and floods may develop “disaster subcultures,” such as groups that see no reason to heed evacuation orders since sheltering in-place has been effective in previous events.

NEHRP-sponsored research has shown that different racial, ethnic, income, and special needs groups respond in different ways to warning information and evacuation orders, in part because of the unique characteristics of these groups, the manner in which they receive information during crises, and their varying responses to different information sources. For example, members of some minority groups tend to have large extended families, making contacting family members and deliberating on alternative courses of action a more complicated process. Lower-income groups, inner-city residents, and elderly persons are more likely to have to rely on public transportation, rather than personal vehicles, in order to evacuate. Lower-income and minority populations, who tend to have larger families, may

also be reluctant to impose on friends and relatives for shelter. Lack of financial resources may leave less-well-off segments of the population less able to afford to take time off from work when disasters threaten, to travel long distances to avoid danger, or to pay for emergency lodging. Socially isolated individuals, such as elderly persons living alone, may lack the social support that is required to carry out self-protective actions. Members of minority groups may find majority spokespersons and official institutions less credible and believable than members of the white majority, turning instead to other sources, such as their informal social networks. Those who rely on non-English-speaking mass media for news may receive less complete warning information, or may receive warnings later than those who are tuned into mainstream media sources (Aguirre et al., 1991; Perry and Lindell, 1991; Lindell and Perry, 1992, 2004; Klinenberg, 2002; for more extensive discussions, see Tierney et al., 2001).

Hurricane Katrina vividly revealed the manner in which social factors such as those discussed above influence evacuation decisions and actions. In many respects, the Katrina experience validated what social science research had already shown with respect to evacuation behavior. Those who stayed behind did so for different reasons—all of which have been discussed in past research. Some at-risk residents lacked resources, such as automobiles and financial resources that would have enabled them to escape the city. Based on their past experiences with hurricanes like Betsey and Camille, others considered themselves not at risk and decided it was not necessary to evacuate. Still others, particularly elderly residents, felt so attached to their homes that they refused to leave even when transportation was offered.

This is not to imply that evacuation-related problems stemmed solely from individual decisions. Katrina also revealed the crucial significance of evacuation planning, effective warnings, and government leadership in facilitating evacuations. Planning efforts in New Orleans were rudimentary at best, clear evacuation orders were given too late, and the hurricane rendered evacuation resources useless once the city began to flood.

With respect to other patterns of evacuation behavior when they do evacuate, most people prefer to stay with relatives or friends, rather than using public shelters. Shelter use is generally limited to people who feel they have no other options—for example, those who have no close friends and relatives to take them in and cannot afford the price of lodging. Many people avoid public shelters or elect to stay in their homes because shelters do not allow pets. Following earthquakes, some victims, particularly Latinos in the United States who have experienced or learned about highly damaging earthquakes in their countries of origin, avoid indoor shelter of all types, preferring instead to sleep outdoors (Tierney, 1988; Phillips, 1993; Simile, 1995).

Disaster warnings involving “near misses,” as well as concerns about the possible impact of elevated color-coded homeland security warnings,

raise the question of whether warnings that do not materialize can induce a “cry-wolf” effect, resulting in lowered attention to and compliance with future warnings. The disaster literature shows little support for the cry-wolf hypothesis. For example, Dow and Cutter (1998) studied South Carolina residents who had been warned of impending hurricanes that ultimately struck North Carolina. Earlier false alarms did not influence residents’ decisions on whether to evacuate; that is, there was little behavioral evidence for a cry-wolf effect. However, false alarms did result in a decrease in confidence in official warning sources, as opposed to other sources of information on which people relied in making evacuation decisions—certainly not the outcome officials would have intended. Studies also suggest that it is advisable to clarify for the public why forecasts and warnings were uncertain or incorrect. Based on an extensive review of the warning literature, Sorensen (2000:121) concluded that “[t]he likelihood of people responding to a warning is not diminished by what has come to be labeled the ‘cry-wolf’ syndrome if the basis for the false alarm is understood [emphasis added].” Along those same lines, Atwood and Major (1998) argue that if officials explain reasons for false alarms, that information can increase public awareness and make people more likely to respond to subsequent hazard advisories.

PUBLIC RESPONSE

Dispelling myths about crisis-related behavior: panic and social breakdown.

Numerous individual studies and research syntheses have contrasted commonsense ideas about how people respond during crises with empirical data on actual behavior. Among the most important myths addressed in these analyses is the notion that panic and social disorganization are common responses to imminent threats and to actual disaster events (Quarantelli and Dynes, 1972; Johnson, 1987; Clarke, 2002). True panic, defined as highly individualistic flight behavior that is nonsocial in nature, undertaken without regard to social norms and relationships, is extremely rare prior to and during extreme events of all types. Panic takes place under specific conditions that are almost never present in disaster situations. Panic only occurs when individuals feel completely isolated and when both social bonds and measures to promote safety break down to such a degree that individuals feel totally on their own in seeking safety. Panic results from a breakdown in the ongoing social order—a breakdown that Clarke (2003:128) describes as having moral, network, and cognitive dimensions:

There is a moral failure, so that people pursue their self interest regardless

of rules of duty and obligation to others. There is a network failure, so that the resources that people can normally draw on in times of crisis are no longer there. There is a cognitive failure, in which someone’s understanding of how they are connected to others is cast aside.

Failures on this scale almost never occur during disasters. Panic reactions are rare in part because social bonds remain intact and extremely resilient even under conditions of severe danger (Johnson, 1987; Johnson et al., 1994; Feinberg and Johnson, 2001).

Panic persists in public and media discourses on disasters, in part because those discourses conflate a wide range of other behaviors with panic. Often, people are described as panicking because they experience feelings of intense fear, even though fright and panic are conceptually and behaviorally distinct. Another behavioral pattern that is sometimes labeled panic involves intensified rumors and information seeking, which are common patterns among publics attempting to make sense of confusing and potentially dangerous situations. Under conditions of uncertainty, people make more frequent use of both informal ties and official information sources, as they seek to collectively define threats and decide what actions to take. Such activities are a normal extension of everyday information-seeking practices (Turner, 1994). They are not indicators of panic.

The phenomenon of shadow evacuation, discussed earlier, is also frequently confused with panic. Such evacuations take place because people who are not defined by authorities as in danger nevertheless determine that they are—perhaps because they have received conflicting or confusing information or because they are geographically close to areas considered at risk (Tierney et al., 2001). Collective demands for antibiotics by those considered not at risk for anthrax, “runs” on stores to obtain self-protective items, and the so-called worried-well phenomenon are other forms of collective behavior that reflect the same sociobehavioral processes that drive shadow evacuations: emergent norms that define certain individuals and groups as in danger, even though authorities do not consider them at risk; confusion about the magnitude of the risk; a collectively defined need to act; and in some cases, an unwillingness to rely on official sources for self-protective advice. These types of behaviors, which constitute interesting subjects for research in their own right, are not examples of panic.

Research also indicates that panic and other problematic behaviors are linked in important ways to the manner in which institutions manage risk and disaster. Such behaviors are more likely to emerge when those who are in danger come to believe that crisis management measures are ineffective, suggesting that enhancing public understanding of and trust in preparedness measures and in organizations charged with managing disasters can lessen the likelihood of panic. With respect to homeland security threats, some researchers have argued that the best way to “vaccinate” the public

against the emergence of panic in situations involving weapons of mass destruction is to provide timely and accurate information about impending threats and to actively include the public in pre-crisis preparedness efforts (Glass and Shoch-Spana, 2002).

Blaming the public for panicking during emergencies serves to diffuse responsibility from professionals whose duty it is to protect the public, such as emergency managers, fire and public safety officials, and those responsible for the design, construction, and safe operation of buildings and other structures (Sime, 1999). The empirical record bears out the fact that to the extent panic does occur during emergencies, such behavior can be traced in large measure to environmental factors such as overcrowding, failure to provide adequate egress routes, and breakdowns in communications, rather than to some inherent human impulse to stampede with complete disregard for others. Any potential for panic and other problematic behaviors that may exist can, in other words, be mitigated through appropriate design, regulatory, management, and communications strategies.

As discussed elsewhere in this report, looting and violence are also exceedingly rare in disaster situations. Here again, empirical evidence of what people actually do during and following disasters contradicts what many officials and much of the public believe. Beliefs concerning looting are based not on evidence but rather on assumptions—for example, that social control breaks down during disasters and that lawlessness and violence inevitably result when the social order is disrupted. Such beliefs fail to take into account the fact that powerful norms emerge during disasters that foster prosocial behavior—so much so that lawless behavior actually declines in disaster situations. Signs erected following disasters saying, “We shoot to kill looters” are not so much evidence that looting is occurring as they are evidence that community consensus condemns looting.

The myth of disaster looting can be contrasted with the reality of looting during episodes of civil disorder such as the riots of the 1960s and the 1992 Los Angeles unrest. During episodes of civil unrest, looting is done publicly, in groups, quite often in plain sight of law enforcement officials. Taking goods and damaging businesses are the hallmarks of modern “commodity riots.” New norms also emerge during these types of crises, but unlike the prosocial norms that develop in disasters, norms governing behavior during civil unrest permit and actually encourage lawbreaking. Under these circumstances, otherwise law-abiding citizens allow themselves to take part in looting behavior (Dynes and Quarantelli, 1968; Quarantelli and Dynes, 1970).

Looting and damaging property can also become normative in situations that do not involve civil unrest—for example, in victory celebrations following sports events. Once again, in such cases, norms and traditions governing behavior in crowd celebrations encourage destructive activities

(Rosenfeld, 1997). The behavior of participants in these destructive crowd celebrations again bears no resemblance to that of disaster victims.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, social scientists had no problem understanding why episodes of looting might have been more widespread in that event than in the vast majority of U.S. disasters. Looting has occurred on a widespread basis following other disasters, although such cases have been rare. Residents of St. Croix engaged in extensive looting behavior following Hurricane Hugo, and this particular episode sheds light on why some Katrina victims might have felt justified in looting. Hurricane Hugo produced massive damage on St. Croix, and government agencies were rendered helpless. Essentially trapped on the island, residents had no idea when help would arrive. Instead, they felt entirely on their own following Hugo. The tourist-based St. Croix economy was characterized by stark social class differences, and crime and corruption had been high prior to the hurricane. Under these circumstances, looting for survival was seen as justified, and patterns of collective behavior developed that were not unlike those seen during episodes of civil unrest. Even law enforcement personnel joined in the looting (Quarantelli, 2006; Rodriguez et al., forthcoming).

Despite their similarities, the parallels between New Orleans and St. Croix should not be overstated. It is now clear that looting and violent behavior were far less common than initially reported and that rumors concerning shootings, rapes, and murders were groundless. The media employed the “looting frame” extensively while downplaying far more numerous examples of selflessness and altruism. In hindsight, it now appears that many reports involving looting and social breakdown were based on stereotyped images of poor minority community residents (Tierney et al., forthcoming).

Extensive research also indicates that despite longstanding evidence, beliefs about disaster-related looting and lawlessness remain quite common, and these beliefs can influence the behavior of both community residents and authorities. For example, those who are at risk may decide not to evacuate and instead stay in their homes to protect their property from looters (Fischer, 1998). Concern regarding looting and lawlessness may cause government officials to make highly questionable and even counterproductive decisions. Following Hurricane Katrina, for example, based largely on rumors and exaggerated media reports, rescue efforts were halted because of fears for the safety of rescue workers, and Louisiana’s governor issued a “shoot-to-kill” order to quash looting. These decisions likely resulted in additional loss of life and also interfered with citizen efforts to aid one another. Interestingly, recent historical accounts indicate that similar decisions were made following other large-scale disasters, such as the 1871 Chicago fire, the 1900 Galveston hurricane, and the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and firestorm. In all three cases, armed force was used to stop

looting, and immigrant groups and the poor were scapegoated for their putative “crimes” (Fradkin, 2005). Along with Katrina, these events caution against making decisions on the basis of mythical beliefs and rumors.

As is the case with the panic myth, attributing the causes of looting behavior to individual motivations and impulses serves to deflect attention from the ways in which institutional failures can create insurmountable problems for disaster victims. When disasters occur, communications, disaster management, and service delivery systems should remain sufficiently robust that victims will not feel isolated and afraid or conclude that needed assistance will never arrive. More to the point, victims of disasters should not be scapegoated when institutions show themselves to be entirely incapable of providing even rudimentary forms of assistance—which was exactly what occurred with respect to Hurricane Katrina.

Patterns of Collective Mobilization in Disaster-Stricken Areas: Prosocial and Helping Behavior

In contrast to the panicky and lawless behavior that is often attributed to disaster-stricken populations, public behavior during earthquakes and other major community emergencies is overwhelmingly adaptive, prosocial, and aimed at promoting the safety of others and the restoration of ongoing community life. The predominance of prosocial behavior (and, conversely, a decline in antisocial behavior) in disaster situations is one of the most longstanding and robust research findings in the disaster literature. Research conducted with NEHRP sponsorship has provided an even better understanding of the processes involved in adaptive collective mobilization during disasters.

Helping Behavior and Disaster Volunteers. Helping behavior in disasters takes various forms, ranging from spontaneous and informal efforts to provide assistance to more organized emergent group activity, and finally to more formalized organizational arrangements. With respect to spontaneously developing and informal helping networks, disaster victims are assisted first by others in the immediate vicinity and surrounding area and only later by official public safety personnel. In a discussion on search and rescue activities following earthquakes, for example, Noji observes (1997:162)

In Southern Italy in 1980, 90 percent of the survivors of an earthquake were extricated by untrained, uninjured survivors who used their bare hands and simple tools such as shovels and axes…. Following the 1976 Tangshan earthquake, about 200,000 to 300,000 entrapped people crawled out of the debris on their own and went on to rescue others…. They became the backbone of the rescue teams, and it was to their credit that more than 80 percent of those buried under the debris were rescued.

Thus, lifesaving efforts in a stricken community rely heavily on the capabilities of relatively uninjured survivors, including untrained volunteers, as well as those of local firefighters and other relevant personnel.

The spontaneous provision of assistance is facilitated by the fact that when crises occur, they take place in the context of ongoing community life and daily routines—that is, they affect not isolated individuals but rather people who are embedded in networks of social relationships. When a massive gasoline explosion destroyed a neighborhood in Guadalajara, Mexico, in 1992, for example, survivors searched for and rescued their loved ones and neighbors. Indeed, they were best suited to do so, because they were the ones who knew who lived in different households and where those individuals probably were at the time of the disaster (Aguirre et al., 1995). Similarly, crowds and gatherings of all types are typically comprised of smaller groupings—couples, families, groups of friends—that become a source of support and aid when emergencies occur.

As the emergency period following a disaster lengthens, unofficial helping behavior begins to take on a more structured form with the development of emergent groups—newly formed entities that become involved in crisis-related activities (Stallings and Quarantelli, 1985; Saunders and Kreps, 1987). Emergent groups perform many different types of activities in disasters, from sandbagging to prevent flooding, to searching for and rescuing victims and providing for other basic needs, to post-disaster cleanup and the informal provision of recovery assistance to victims. Such groupings form both because of the strength of altruistic norms that develop during disasters and because of emerging collective definitions that victims’ needs are not being met—whether official agencies share those views or not. While emergent groups are in many ways essential for the effectiveness of crisis response activities, their activities may be seen as unnecessary or even disruptive by formal crisis response agencies. In the aftermath of the attack on the World Trade Center, for example, numerous groups emerged to offer every conceivable type of assistance to victims and emergency responders. Some were incorporated into official crisis management activities, while others were labeled “rogue volunteers” by official agencies (Halford and Nolan, 2002; Kendra and Wachtendorf, 2002). 2

Disaster-related volunteering also takes place within more formalized organizational structures, both in existing organizations that mobilize in response to disasters and through organizations such as the Red Cross,

which has a federal mandate to respond in presidentially declared disasters and relies primarily on volunteers in its provision of disaster services. Some forms of volunteering have been institutionalized in the United States through the development of the National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (NVOAD) organization. NVOAD, a large federation of religious, public service, and other groups, has organizational affiliates in 49 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and U.S. territories. National-level NVOAD affiliates include organizations such as the Salvation Army, Church World Service, Church of the Brethren Disaster Response, and dozens of others that provide disaster services. Organizations such as the Red Cross and the NVOAD federation thus provide an infrastructure that can support very extensive volunteer mobilization. That infrastructure will likely form the basis for organized volunteering in future homeland security emergencies, just as it does in major disasters.

Helping behavior is very widespread after disasters, particularly large and damaging ones. For example, NEHRP-sponsored research indicates that in the three weeks following the 1985 earthquake in Mexico City, an estimated 1.7 to 2.1 million residents of that city were involved in providing volunteer aid. Activities in which volunteers engaged after that disaster included searching for and rescuing victims trapped under rubble, donating blood and supplies, inspecting building damage, collecting funds, providing medical care and psychological counseling, and providing food and shelter to victims (Wenger and James, 1994). In other research on post-earthquake volunteering, also funded by NEHRP, O’Brien and Mileti (1992) found that more than half of the population in San Francisco and Santa Cruz counties provided assistance to their fellow victims after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake—help that ranged from assisting with search and rescue and debris removal activities to offering food, water, and shelter to those in need. Thus, the volunteer sector responding to disasters typically constitutes a very large proportion of the population of affected regions, as well as volunteers converging from other locations.

Social science research, much of it conducted under NEHRP auspices, highlights a number of other points regarding post-disaster helping behavior. One such insight is that helping behavior in many ways mirrors roles and responsibilities people assume during nondisaster times. For example, when people provide assistance during disasters and other emergencies, their involvement is typically consistent with gender role expectations (Wenger and James, 1994; Feinberg and Johnson, 2001). Research also indicates that mass convergence of volunteers and donations can create significant management problems and undue burdens on disaster-stricken communities. In their eagerness to provide assistance, people may “overrespond” to disaster sites, creating congestion and putting themselves and others at risk or insisting on providing resources that are in fact not needed. After disas-

ters, communities typically experience major difficulties in dealing with unwanted and unneeded donations (Neal, 1990).

Research on public behavior during disasters has major implications for homeland security policies and practices. The research literature provides support for the inclusion of the voluntary sector and community-based organizations in preparedness and response efforts. Initiatives that aim at encouraging public involvement in homeland security efforts of all types are clearly needed. The literature also provides extensive evidence that members of the public are in fact the true “first responders” in major disasters. In using that term to refer to fire, police, and other public safety organizations, current homeland security discourse fails to recognize that community residents themselves constitute the front-line responders in any major emergency

One implication of this line of research is that planning and management models that fail to recognize the role of victims and volunteers in responding to all types of extreme events will leave responders unprepared for what will actually occur during disasters—for example, that, as research consistently shows, community residents will be the first to search for victims, provide emergency aid, and transport victims to health care facilities in emergencies of all types. 3 Such plans will also fail to take advantage of the public’s crucial skills, resources, and expertise. For this reason, experts on human-induced threats such as bioterrorism stress the value of public engagement and involvement in planning for homeland security emergencies (Working Group on “Governance Dilemmas” in Bioterrorism Response, 2004).

These research findings have significant policy implications. To date, Department of Homeland Security initiatives have focused almost exclusively on providing equipment and training for uniformed responders, as opposed to community residents. Recently, however, DHS has begun placing more emphasis on its Citizen Corps component, which is designed to mobilize the skills and talents of the public when disasters strike. Public involvement in Citizen Corps and Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) activities have expanded considerably since the terrorist attacks of

9/11—a sign that many community residents around the nation wish to play an active role in responding to future disasters. The need for community-based preparedness and response initiatives is more evident than ever follow-ing the Katrina disaster.

Organizational, Governmental, and Network Responses. The importance of observing disaster response operations while they are ongoing or as soon as possible after disaster impact has long been a hallmark of the disaster research field. The quick-response tradition in disaster research, which has been a part of the field since its inception, developed out of a recognition that data on disaster response activities are perishable and that information collected from organizations after the passage of time is likely to be distorted and incomplete (Quarantelli, 1987, 2002). NEHRP funds, provided through grant supplements, Small Grants for Exploratory Research (SGER) awards, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI) reconnaissance missions, earthquake center reconnaissance funding, and small grants such as those provided by the Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center, have supported the collection of perishable data and enabled social science researchers to mobilize rapidly following major earthquakes and other disasters.

NEHRP provided substantial support for the collection of data on organizational and community responses in a number of earthquake events, including the 1987 Whittier Narrows, 1989 Loma Prieta, and 1994 Northridge earthquakes (see, for example, Tierney, 1988, 1994; EERI, 1995), as well as major earthquakes outside the United States such as the 1985 Mexico City, 1986 San Salvador, and 1988 Armenia events. More recently, NEHRP funds were used to support rapid-response research on the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Many of those studies focused on organizational issues in both the public and private sectors. (For a compilation of NEHRP-sponsored quick-response findings on the events of September 11, see Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center, 2003).

In many cases, quick-response research on disaster impacts and organizational and governmental response has led to subsequent in-depth studies on response-related issues identified during the post-impact reconnaissance phase. Following major events such as Loma Prieta, Northridge, and Kobe, insights from initial reconnaissance studies have formed the basis for broader research initiatives. Recent efforts have focused on ways to better take advantage of reconnaissance opportunities and to identify topics for longer-term study. A new plan has been developed to better coordinate and integrate both reconnaissance and longer-term research activities carried out with NEHRP support. That planning activity, outlined in the report The Plan to Coordinate NEHRP Post-earthquake Investigations (Holzer et

al., 2003), encompasses both reconnaissance and more systematic research activities in the earth sciences, engineering, and social sciences.

Through both initial quick-response activities and longer-term studies, NEHRP research has added to the knowledge base on how organizations cope with crises. Studies have focused on a variety of topics. A partial list of those topics includes organizational and group activities associated with the post-disaster search and rescue process (Aguirre et al., 1995); intergovernmental coordination during the response period following major disaster events (Nigg, 1998); expected and improvised organizational forms that characterize the disaster response milieu (Kreps, 1985, 1989b); strategies used by local government organizations to enhance interorganizational coordination following disasters (Drabek, 2003); and response activities undertaken by specific types of organizations, such as those in the volunteer and nonprofit sector (Neal, 1990) and tourism-oriented enterprises (Drabek, 1994).

Focusing specifically at the interorganizational level of analysis, NEHRP research has also highlighted the significance and mix of planned and improvised networks in disaster response. It has long been recognized that post-disaster response activities involve the formation of new (or emergent) networks of organizations. Indeed, one distinguishing feature of major crisis events is the prominence and proliferation of network forms of organization during the response period. Emergent multiorganizational networks (EMON) constitute new organizational interrelationships that reflect collective efforts to manage crisis events. Such networks are typically heterogeneous, consisting of existing organizations with pre-designated crisis management responsibilities, other organizations that may not have been included in prior planning but become involved in crisis response activities because those involved believe they have some contribution to make, and emergent groups. EMONs tend to be very large in major disaster events, encompassing hundreds and even thousands of interacting entities. As crisis conditions change and additional resources converge, EMON structures evolve, new organizations join the network, and new relationships form. What is often incorrectly described as disaster-generated “chaos” is more accurately seen as the understandable confusion that results when mobilization takes place on such a massive scale and when organizations and groups that may be unfamiliar with one another attempt to communicate, negotiate, and coordinate their activities under extreme pressure. (For more detailed discussions on EMONs in disasters, including the 2001 World Trade Center attack, see Drabek, 1985, 2003; Tierney, 2003; Tierney and Trainor, 2004.)

This is not to say that response activities always go smoothly. The disaster literature, organizational after-action reports, and official investigations contain numerous examples of problems that develop as inter-

organizational and intergovernmental networks attempt to address disaster-related challenges. Such problems include the following: failure to recognize the magnitude and seriousness of an event; delayed and insufficient responses; confusion regarding authorities and responsibilities, often resulting in major “turf battles;” resource shortages and misdirection of existing resources; poor organizational, interorganizational, and public communications; failures in intergovernmental coordination; failures in leadership and vision; inequities in the provision of disaster assistance; and organizational practices and cultures that permit and even encourage risky behavior. Hurricane Katrina became a national scandal because of the sheer scale on which these organizational pathologies manifested. However, Katrina was by no means atypical. In one form or another and at varying levels of severity, such pathologies are ever-present in the landscape of disaster response (for examples, see U.S. President’s Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island, 1979; Perrow, 1984; Shrivastava, 1987; Sagan, 1993; National Academy of Public Administration, 1993; Vaughan, 1996, 1999; Peacock et al., 1997; Klinenberg, 2002; Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparations for and Response to Hurricane Katrina, 2006; White House, 2006).

Management Considerations in Disaster Response

U.S. disaster researchers have identified two contrasting approaches to disaster response management, commonly termed the “command-and-control” and the “emergent human resources,” or “problem-solving,” models. The command-and-control model equates preparedness and response activities with military exercises. It assumes that (1) government agencies and other responders must be prepared to take over management and control in disaster situations, both because they are uniquely qualified to do so and because members of the public will be overwhelmed and will likely engage in various types of problematic behavior, such as panic; (2) disaster response activities are best carried out through centralized direction, control, and decision making; and (3) for response activities to be effective, a single person is ideally in charge, and relations among responding entities are arranged hierarchically.

In contrast, the emergent human resources, or problem-solving, model is based on the assumption that communities and societies are resilient and resourceful and that even in areas that are very hard hit by disasters, considerable local response capacity is likely to remain. Another underlying assumption is that preparedness strategies should build on existing community institutions and support systems—for example by pre-identifying existing groups, organizations, and institutions that are capable of assuming leadership when a disaster strikes. Again, this approach argues against

highly specialized approaches that tend to result in “stovepiped” rather than well-integrated preparedness and response efforts. The model also recognizes that when a disaster occurs, responding entities must be flexible if they are to be effective and that flexibility is best achieved through a decentralized response structure that seeks to solve problems as they arise, as opposed to top-down decision making. (For more extensive discussions of these two models and their implications, see Dynes, 1993, 1994; Kreps and Bosworth, forthcoming.)

Empirical research, much of which has been carried out with NEHRP support, finds essentially no support for the command-and-control model either as a heuristic device for conceptualizing the disaster management process or as a strategy employed in actual disasters. Instead, as suggested in the discussion above on EMONs, disaster response activities in the United States correspond much more closely to the emergent resources or problem-solving model. More specifically, such responses are characterized by decentralized, rather than centralized, decision making; by collaborative relationships among organizations and levels of government, rather than hierarchical ones; and, perhaps most important, by considerable emergence—that is, the often rapid appearance of novel and unplanned-for activities, roles, groups, and relationships. Other hallmarks of disaster responses include their fluidity and hence the fast pace at which decisions must be made; the predominance of the EMON as the organizational form most involved in carrying out response activities; the wide array of improvisational strategies that are employed to deal with problems as they manifest themselves; and the importance of local knowledge and situation-specific information in gauging appropriate response strategies. (For empirical research supporting these points, see Drabek et al., 1982; Stallings and Quarantelli, 1985; Kreps, 1985, 1989b; Bosworth and Kreps, 1986; Kreps and Bosworth, 1993; Aguirre et al., 1995; Drabek and McEntire, 2002; Waugh and Sylves, 2002; Webb, 2002; Drabek, 2003; Tierney, 2003; Tierney and Trainor, 2004; Wachtendorf, 2004.)

NEW WAYS OF FRAMING DISASTER MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES: DEALING WITH COMPLEXITY AND ACCOMMODATING EMERGENCE

Advancements brought about through NEHRP research include new frameworks for conceptualizing responses to extreme events. In Shared Risk: Complex Systems in Seismic Response , a NEHRP-supported comparative study of organized responses to 11 different earthquake events, Comfort argues that the major challenge facing response systems is to use information in ways that enhance organizational and interorganizational learning and develop ways of “integrating both technical and organiza-

tional components in a socio-technical system to support timely, informed collective action” (Comfort, 1999:14). Accordingly, effective responses depend on the ability of organizations to simultaneously sustain structure and allow for flexibility in the face of rapidly changing disaster conditions and unexpected demands. Response networks must also be able to accommodate processes of self-organization —that is, organized action by volunteers and emergent groups. This approach again contrasts with command-and-control notions of how major crises are managed (Comfort, 1999:263-264):

A socio-technical approach requires a shift in the conception of response systems as reactive, command-and-control driven systems to one of inquiring systems , activated by processes of inquiry, validation, and creative self-organization…. Combining technical with organizational systems appropriately enables communities to face complex events more effectively by monitoring changing conditions and adapting its performance accordingly, increasing the efficiency of its use of limited resources. It links human capacity to learn with the technical means to support that capacity in complex, dynamic environments [emphasis added].

Similarly, research stressing the importance of EMONs as the predominant organizational form during crisis response periods points to the importance of improving strategies for network management and of developing better methods to take advantage of emergent structures and activities during disasters. Planning and management approaches must, in other words, support rather than interfere with the open and dynamic qualities of disaster response activities. Indicators of improved capacity to manage emergent networks could include the diversity of organizations and community sectors involved in pre-crisis planning; plans and agreements facilitating the incorporation of the voluntary sector and emergent citizen groups into response activities; plans and tools enabling the rapid expansion of crisis communication and information-sharing networks during disasters to include new organizations; and protocols, such as mutual aid agreements, making it possible for new actors to more easily join response networks (Tierney and Trainor, 2004).

In the wake of the Katrina disaster, the need for disaster management by command-and-control-oriented entities has once again achieved prominence. For example, calls have increased for greater involvement on the part of the military in domestic disaster management. Such recommendations are not new. Giving a larger role in disaster management to the military was an idea that was considered—and rejected—following Hurricane Andrew (National Academy of Public Administration, 1993). Post-Katrina debates on needed policy and programmatic changes will likely continue to focus on how to most effectively deploy military assets while ensuring that disaster management remains the responsibility of civilian institutions.

Additional Considerations: Do Responses to Natural, Technological, and Human-Induced Events Differ?

One issue that has come to the fore with the emergence of terrorism as a major threat involves the extent to which findings from the field of disaster research can predict responses to human-induced extreme events. Although some take the position that terrorism and bioterrorism constitute such unique threats that behavioral and organizational responses in such events will differ from what has been documented for other types of extreme events, others contend that this assumption is not borne out by social science disaster research.

The preponderance of evidence seems to suggest that there is more similarity than difference in response behaviors across different types of disaster agents. Regarding the potential for panic, for example, there is no empirical evidence that panic was a problem during the influenza pandemic of 1918, among populations under attack during World War II (Janis, 1951), in catastrophic structure fires and crowd crushes (Johnson, 1987; Johnson et al., 1994; Feinberg and Johnson, 2001), or in the Chernobyl nuclear disaster (Medvedev, 1990). Nor was panic a factor in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center (Aguirre et al., 1998), the 1995 Tokyo subway sarin attack (Murakami, 2000), or the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (NIST, 2005; National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, 2004). The failure to find significant evidence of panic across a wide range of crisis events is a testimony to the resilience of social relationships and normative practices, even under conditions of extreme peril.

Similarly, as noted earlier, research findings on challenges related to risk communication and warning the public of impending extreme events are also quite consistent across different types of disaster events. For individuals and groups, there are invariably challenges associated with understanding what self-protective actions are required for different types of emergencies, regardless of their origin.

In all types of disasters, organizations must likewise face a common set of challenges associated with situation assessment, the management of primary and secondary impacts, communicating with one another and with the public, and dealing with response-related demands. The need for more effective communication, coordination, planning, and training transcends hazard type. Although recent government initiatives such as the National Response Plan will result in the incorporation of new organizational actors into response systems for extreme events, most of the same local-, state-, and federal-level organizations will still be involved in managing extreme events of all types, employing common management frameworks such as

the Incident Command System and now the National Incident Management System (NIMS).

Social scientific studies on disasters have long shown that general features of extreme events, such as geographic scope and scale, impact severity, and speed of onset, combined with the overall quality of pre-disaster preparedness, have a greater influence on response patterns than do the specific hazard agents that trigger response activities. Regardless of their origins, very large, near-catastrophic, and catastrophic events all place high levels of stress on response systems.

In sum, social science disaster research finds little justification for the notion that individual, group, and community responses to human-induced extreme events, including those triggered by weapons of mass terror, will differ in important ways from those that have been documented in natural and technological disasters. Instead, research highlights the importance of a variety of general factors that affect the quality and effectiveness of responses to disasters, irrespective of the hazard in question. With respect to warning the public and encouraging self-protective action, for example, warning systems must be well designed and warning messages must meet certain criteria for effectiveness, regardless of what type of warning is issued. Members of the public must receive, understand, and personalize warning information; must understand what actions they need to take in order to protect themselves; and must be able to carry out those actions, again regardless of the peril in question. Community residents must feel that they can trust their leaders and community institutions during crises of all types. For organizations, training and exercises and effective mechanisms for interorganizational communication and coordination are critical for community-wide emergencies of all types. When such criteria are not met, response-related problems can be expected regardless of whether the emergency stems from a naturally occurring event, a technological accident, or an intentional act.

Individual and group responses, as well as organizational response challenges, are thus likely to be consistent across different types of crises. At the same time, however, it is clear that there are significant variations in the behavior of responding institutions (as opposed to individuals, groups, and first responders) according to event type. In most technological disasters, along with the need to help those affected, questions of negligence and liability typically come to the fore, and efforts are made to assign blame and make responsible parties accountable. In terrorist events, damaged areas are always treated as crime scenes, and the response involves intense efforts both to care for victims and to identify and capture the perpetrators. Further, although as noted earlier, scapegoating can occur in disasters of all types, the tendency for both institutions and the public to assign blame to

particular groups may be greater in technological and terrorism-related crises than in natural disasters. 4

Finally, with respect to responses on the part of the public, even though evidence to the contrary is strong, the idea that some future homeland security emergencies could engender responses different from those observed in past natural, technological, and intentional disasters cannot be ruled out entirely. The concluding section of this chapter highlights the need for further research in this area.

Research on Disaster Recovery

Like hazards and disaster research generally, NERHRP-sponsored research has tended to focus much more on preparedness and response than on either mitigation or disaster recovery. This is especially the case with respect to long-term recovery, a topic that despite its importance has received very little emphasis in the literature. However, even though the topic has not been well studied, NEHRP-funded projects have done a great deal to advance social science understanding of disaster recovery. As discussed later in this section, they have also led to the development of decision tools and guidance that can be used to facilitate the recovery process for affected social units.

It is not an exaggeration to say that prior to NEHRP, relatively little was known about disaster recovery processes and outcomes at different levels of analysis. Researchers had concentrated to some degree on analyzing the impacts of a few earthquakes, such as the 1964 Alaska and 1971 San Fernando events, as well as earthquakes and other major disasters outside the United States. Generally speaking, however, research on recovery was quite sparse. Equally important, earlier research oversimplified the recovery process in a variety of ways. First, there was a tendency to equate recovery, which is a social process, with reconstruction, which involves restoration and replacement of the built environment. Second, there was an assumption that disasters and their impacts proceed in a temporal, stage-like fashion, with “recovery” following once “response” activities have

been concluded. 5 Earlier research also underemphasized the extent to which recovery may be experienced differently by different sectors and subpopulations within society. Some of these problems were related to the fact that at a more abstract level, earlier work had not sufficiently explored the concept of recovery itself—for example, whether recovery should be equated with a return to pre-disaster circumstances and social and economic activities, with the creation of a “new normal” that involves some degree of social transformation, or with improvements in community sustainability and long-term disaster loss reduction. Since the inception of NEHRP and in large measure because of NEHRP sponsorship, research has moved in the direction of a more nuanced understanding of recovery processes and outcomes that has not entirely resolved but at least acknowledges many of these issues.

The sections that follow discuss significant contributions to knowledge and practice that have resulted primarily from NEHRP-sponsored work. Those contributions can be seen (somewhat arbitrarily) as falling into four categories: (1) refinements in definitions and conceptions of disaster recovery, along with a critique and reformulation of stage-like models; (2) contributions to the literature on recovery processes and outcomes across different social units; (3) the development of empirically based models to estimate losses, anticipate recovery challenges, and guide decision making; and (4) efforts to link disaster recovery with broader ideas concerning long-term sustainability and environmental management.

Conceptual Clarification. Owing in large measure to NEHRP-sponsored efforts, the disaster field has moved beyond equating recovery with reconstruction or the restoration of the built environment. More usefully, research has moved in the direction of making analytic distinctions among different types of disaster impacts, recovery activities undertaken by and affecting different social units , and recovery outcomes. Although disaster impacts can be positive or negative, research generally tends to focus on various negative impacts occurring at different levels of analysis. As outlined in Chapter 3 , these impacts include effects on the physical and built environment, including residential, commercial, and infrastructure damage as well as disaster-induced damage to the environment; other property losses; deaths and injuries; impacts on social and economic activity; effects at the community level, such as impacts on community cohesiveness and urban

form; and psychological, psychosocial, and political impacts. Such impacts can vary in severity and duration, as well as in the extent to which they are addressed effectively during the recovery process. An emphasis on recovery as a multidimensional concept calls attention to the fact that physical and social impacts, recovery trajectories, and short- and longer-term outcomes in chronological and social time can vary considerably across social units.

Recovery activities constitute measures that are intended to remedy negative disaster impacts, restore social units as much as possible to their pre-disaster levels of functioning, enhance resilience, and ideally, realize other objectives such as the mitigation of future disaster losses and improvements in the built environment, quality of life, and long-term sustainability. 6 Recovery activities include the provision of temporary and replacement housing; the provision of resources (government aid, insurance payment, private donations) to assist households and businesses with replacement of lost goods and with reconstruction; the provision of various forms of aid and assistance to affected government units; the development and implementation of reconstruction and recovery plans in the aftermath of disasters; coping mechanisms developed by households, businesses, and other affected social units; the provision of mental health and other human services to victims; and other activities designed to overcome negative disaster impacts. In some circumstances, recovery activities can also include the adoption of new policies, legislation, and practices designed to reduce the impacts of future disasters.

Recovery processes are significantly influenced by differential societal and group vulnerability; by variations in the range of recovery aid and support that is available; and by the quality and effectiveness of the help that is provided. The available “mix” of recovery activities and post-disaster coping strategies varies across groups, societies, and different types of disasters. For example, insurance is an important component in the reconstruction and recovery process for some societies, some groups within society, and some types of disasters, but not for others.

Recovery outcomes —or the extent to which the recovery activities are judged, either objectively or subjectively, as “complete” or “successful”—also show wide variation across societies, communities, social units, and disaster events. Outcomes can be assessed in both the short and the longer terms, although, as noted earlier, the literature is weak with respect to empirical studies on the outcomes of longer-term disasters. Additionally,

outcomes consist not only of the intended effects of recovery programs and activities, but also of their unintended consequences. For example, the provision of government assistance or insurance payments to homeowners may make it possible for them to rebuild and continue to live in hazardous areas, even though such an outcome was never intended.

Keeping in mind the multidimensional nature of recovery, post-disaster outcomes can be judged as satisfactory along some dimensions, or at particular points in time, but unsatisfactory along others. Outcomes are perceived and experienced differently, when such factors as level of analysis and specific recovery activities of interest are taken into account. With respect to units of aggregation, for example, while a given disaster may have few discernible long-term effects when analyzed at the community level, the same disaster may well be economically, socially, and psychologically catastrophic for hard-hit households and businesses. A community may be considered “recovered” on the basis of objective social or economic indicators, while constituent social units may not be faring as well, in either objective or subjective terms. The degree to which recovery has taken place is thus very much a matter of perspective and social position.

In a related vein, research has also led to a reconsideration of linear conceptions of the recovery process. Past research tended to see disaster events as progressing from the pre-impact period through post-impact emergency response, and later recovery. In a classic work in this genre— Reconstruction Following Disaster (Haas et al., 1977:xxvi), for example—the authors argued that disaster recovery is “ordered, knowable, and predictable.” Recovery was characterized as consisting of four sequential stages that may overlap to some degree: the emergency period; the restoration period; the replacement reconstruction period; and the commemorative, betterment, and developmental reconstruction period. In this and other studies, the beginning of the recovery phase was generally demarcated by the cessation of immediate life saving and emergency care measures, the resumption of activities of daily life (e.g., opening of schools), and the initiation of rebuilding plans and activities. After a period of time, early recovery activities, such as the provision of temporary housing, would give way to longer-term measures that were meant to be permanent. Kates and Pijawka’s (1977) frequently cited four-phase model begins with the emergency period, lasting for a few days up to a few weeks, and encompassing the period when the emergency operations plan (EOP) is put into operation. Next comes the restoration period—when repairs to utilities are made; debris is removed; evacuees return; and commercial, industrial, and residential structures are repaired. The third phase, the reconstruction replacement period, involves rebuilding capital stocks and getting the economy back to pre-disaster levels. This period can take some years. Finally, there is the development phase, when commemorative structures are built, memo-

rial dates are institutionalized in social time, and attempts are made to improve the community.

In another stage-like model focusing on the community level, Alexander (1993) identified three stages in the process of disaster recovery. First, the rehabilitation stage involves the continuing care of victims and frequently is accompanied by the reemergence of preexisting problems at the household or community level. During the temporary reconstruction stage, prefabricated housing or other temporary structures go up, and temporary bracing may be installed for buildings and bridges. Finally, the permanent reconstruction stage was seen as requiring good administration and management to achieve full community recovery.

Later work sees delineations among disaster phases as much less clear, showing, for example, that decisions and actions that affect recovery may be undertaken as early as the first days or even hours after the disaster’s impact—and, importantly, even before a disaster occurs. The idea that recovery proceeds in an orderly, stage-like, and unitary manner has been replaced by a view that recognizes that the path to recovery is often quite uneven. While the concept of disaster phases may be a useful heuristic device for researchers and practitioners, the concept may also mask both how phases overlap and how recovery proceeds differently for different social groups (Neal, 1997). Recovery does not occur at the same pace for all who are affected by disasters or for all types of impacts. With respect to housing, for example, owing to differences in the availability of services and financing as well as other factors, some groups within a disaster-stricken population may remain in “temporary housing” for a very long time—so long, in fact, that those housing arrangements become permanent—while others may move rapidly into replacement housing (Bolin, 1993a). Put another way, as indicated in Chapters 1 and 3 , while stage-like approaches to disasters are framed in terms of chronological time, for those who experience them, disasters unfold in social time.

Researchers studying recovery continue to contend with a legacy of conceptual and measurement difficulties. One such difficulty centers on the question of how the dependent variable should be measured. This problem itself is multifaceted. Should recovery be defined as a return to pre-disaster levels of psychological, social, and economic well-being? As a return to where a community, business, or household would have been were it not for the occurrence of the disaster? The study of disaster recovery also tends to overlap with research on broader processes of social change. Thus, in addition to focusing on what was lost or affected as a consequence of disaster events and on outcomes relative to those impacts, recovery research also focuses on more general post-disaster issues, such as the extent to which disasters influence and interact with ongoing processes of social change, whether disaster impacts can be distinguished from those resulting

from broader social and economic trends, whether disasters simply magnify and accelerate those trends or exert an independent influence, and the extent to which the post-disaster recovery period represents continuity or discontinuity with the past. Seen in this light, the study of recovery can become indistinguishable from the study of longer-term social change affecting communities and societies. While these distinctions are often blurred, it is nevertheless important to differentiate conceptually and empirically between the recovery process, specific recovery outcomes of interest, and the wide range of other changes that might take place following (or as a consequence of) disasters.

Analyzing Impacts and Recovery Across Different Social Units. Following from the discussions above, it is useful to keep in mind several points about research on disaster recovery. First, studies differ in the extent to which they emphasize the objective, physical aspects of recovery—restoration and reconstruction of the built environment—or subjective, psychosocial, and experiential ones. Second, studies generally focus on particular units of analysis and outcomes, such as household, business, economic, or community recovery, rather than on how these different aspects of recovery are interrelated. This is due partly to the fact that researchers tend to specialize in particular types of disaster impacts and aspects of recovery, which has both advantages and disadvantages. While allowing for the development of in-depth research expertise, such specialization has also made it more difficult to formulate more general theories of recovery. Third, the literature is quite uneven. Some aspects of recovery are well understood, while there are others about which very little is known.

Even with these limitations, more general theoretical insights about recovery processes and outcomes have begun to emerge. Key among these is the idea that disaster impacts and recovery can be conceptualized in terms of vulnerability and resilience . As noted in Chapters 2 and 3 , vulnerability is a consequence not only of physical location and the “hazardousness of place,” but also of social location and of societal processes that advantage some groups and individuals while marginalizing others. The notion of vulnerability applies both to the likelihood of experiencing negative impacts from disasters, such as being killed or injured or losing one’s home or job, and to the likelihood of experiencing recovery-related difficulties, such as problems with access to services and other forms of support. Social vulnerability is linked to broader trends within society, such as demographic trends (migration to more hazardous areas, the aging of the U.S. population) and population diversity (race, class, income, and linguistic diversity). Similarly, resilience , or the ability to survive and cope with disaster impacts and rebound after those events, is also determined in large measure by social factors. According to Rose (2004), resilience can be conceptualized

as both inherent and adaptive, where the former term refers to resilience that is based on resources and options for action that are typically available during nondisaster times, and the latter refers to the ability to mobilize resources and create new options following disasters. 7 As discussed in Chapter 6 , resilience stems in part from factors commonly associated with the concept of social capital, such as the extensiveness of social networks, civic engagement, and interpersonal, interorganizational, and institutional trust. (For an influential formulation setting out the vulnerability perspective, see Blaikie et al., 1994). As subsequent discussions show, the concepts of vulnerability and resilience are applicable to individuals, households, groups, organizations, economies, and entire societies affected by disasters. The sections that follow, which are organized according to unit of analysis, discuss psychosocial impacts and recovery; impacts and recovery processes for housing and businesses; economic recovery; and community-level and societal recovery.

Psychological Impacts and Recovery. There is no disagreement among researchers that disasters cause genuine pain and suffering and that they can be deeply distressing for those who experience them. Apart from that consensus, however, there have been many debates and disputes regarding the psychological and psychosocial impacts of disasters. One such debate centers on the extent to which disasters produce clinically significant symptoms of psychological distress and, if so, how long such symptoms last. Researchers have also struggled with the questions of etiology, or the causes of disaster-related psychological reactions. Are such problems the direct result of trauma experienced during disaster, the result of disaster-induced stresses, a reflection of a lack of coping capacity or weak social support networks, a function of preexisting vulnerabilities, or a combination of all these factors? Related concerns center on what constitute appropriate forms of intervention and service delivery strategies for disaster-related psychological problems. Do people who experience problems generally recover on their own, without the need for formally provided assistance, or does such assistance facilitate more rapid and complete recovery? What types of assistance are likely to be most efficacious and for what types of problems?

Research has yielded a wide array of findings on questions involving disaster-related psychological and psychosocial impacts and recovery. Findings tend to differ depending upon disaster type and severity, how disaster victimization is defined and measured, how mental health outcomes are measured, the research methodologies and strategies used (e.g., sampling,

timing, variables of interest), and not inconsequentially, the discipline-based theoretical perspectives employed (Tierney, 2000). With respect to the controversial topic of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), for example, well-designed epidemiological studies have estimated the lifetime prevalence of PTSD at around 5.4 percent in the U.S. population. An important epidemiologic study on the incidence of trauma and the subsequent risk of developing PTSD after various types of traumatic events estimates the risk at about 3.8 percent for natural disasters (Breslau et al., 1998; Kessler and Zhao, 1999). NEHRP-sponsored surveys following recent earthquakes in California found PTSD to be extremely rare among affected populations and not significantly associated with earthquake impacts (Seigel et al., 2000). Other studies show immense variation, with estimates of post-disaster PTSD ranging from very low to greater than 50 percent. Such variations could reflect real differences in the traumatic effects of different events, but it is equally likely that they are the result of methodological, measurement, and theoretical differences among investigators.

One key debate centers on the clinical significance of post-disaster emotional and mental health problems. Research is clear on the point that it is not unusual for disaster victims to experience a series of problems, such as headaches, problems with sleeping and eating, and heightened levels of concern and anxiety, that can vary in severity and duration (Rubonis and Bickman, 1991; Freedy et al., 1994). Perspectives begin to diverge, however, on the extent to which these and other disaster-induced symptoms constitute mental health problems in the clinical sense. In other words, would disaster victims, presenting their symptoms, be considered candidates for mental health counseling or medication if those symptoms were present in a nondisaster context? Do their symptoms correspond to survey based or clinically based measures of what constitutes a “case” for psychiatric diagnostic purposes? Again, as with PTSD, findings differ. While noting that many studies do document a rise in psychological distress following disasters, Shoaf et al. (2004:320) conclude that “those impacts are not of a nature that would significantly increase the rates of diagnosable mental illness.” With respect to severe psychological impacts, these researchers found that suicide rates declined in Los Angeles County following the Northridge earthquake—a continuation of a trend that had already begun before that event. They also note that these findings are consistent with research on suicide following the Kobe earthquake, which showed that the suicide rate in the year following that quake was less than the average rate for the previous 10 years (Shoaf et al., 2004). Yet many researchers and practitioners rightly contend that psychosocial interventions are necessary following disasters, both to address clinically significant symptoms and to prevent more serious psychological sequelae.

There is also the question of whether some types of disasters are more

likely than others to cause negative psychological impacts. Some researchers argue that certain types of technological hazards, such as nuclear threats and chronic exposures to toxic substances, are more pernicious in their effects than natural disasters because they persist longer and create more anxiety among potential victims, and especially because they tend to result in community conflict, causing “corrosive” rather than “therapeutic” communities to develop (Erikson, 1994). Events such as the Oklahoma City bombing, the Columbine school shootings, and the events of September 11, 2001 lead to questions about whether intentional attacks engender psychological reactions that are distinctive and different from those that follow other types of community crisis events. Some studies have suggested that the psychological impacts of terrorist attacks are profound, at least in the short term (North et al., 1999). Other research, focusing specifically on the short-term impacts of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, indicates that the psychological impacts resulting from the events of 9/11 “are consistent with prior estimates of the impact of natural disasters and other terrorist events” (Miller and Heldring, 2004:21). Again, drawing conclusions about the relative influence of agent characteristics—as opposed to other factors—is difficult because studies vary so much in their timing, research designs, methodological approaches, and procedures for defining disaster victimization.

Another set of issues concerns factors associated with risk for poor psychological outcomes. Perilla et al. (2002) suggest that such outcomes can vary as a consequence of both differential exposure and differential vulnerability to extreme events. With respect to differential exposure, factors such as ethnicity and social class can be associated with living in substandard and vulnerable housing, subsequently exposing minorities and poor people to greater losses and disaster-related trauma. Regarding differential vulnerability, minorities and the poor, who are more vulnerable to psychosocial stress during nondisaster times, may also have fewer coping resources upon which to draw following disasters.

In a comprehensive and rigorous review of research on the psychological sequelae of disasters, Fran H. Norris and her colleagues (Norris et al., 2002a,b) carried out a meta-analysis of 20 years of research, based on 160 samples containing more than 60,000 individuals who had experienced 102 different disaster events. These data sets included a range of different types of surveys on both U.S. disaster victims and individuals in other countries, on various subpopulations, and on disasters that differed widely in type and severity. Impacts documented in these studies included symptoms of post-traumatic stress, depression, and anxiety; other forms of nonspecific distress not easily related to specific syndromes such as PTSD; health problems and somatic complaints; problems in living, including secondary stressors such as work-related and financial problems; and “psychosocial resource

loss,” a term that refers to negative effects on coping capacity, self-esteem, feelings of self-efficacy, and other attributes that buffer the effects of stress. According to their interpretation, which was based on accepted methods for rating indicators of psychological distress, the symptoms reported by as many as 39 percent of those studied reached clinically significant levels. However—and this is an important caveat—they found negative psychological effects to be much more prevalent in disasters occurring outside the United States. Generally, symptoms were most severe in the year following disaster events and declined over time.

Norris et al. (2002a, 2002b) classified U.S. disasters as low, moderate, and high in their psychosocial impacts, based on empirical data on post-disaster distress. The Loma Prieta and Northridge earthquakes were seen as having relatively few adverse impacts, and Hurricane Hugo and Three Mile Island were classified as moderate in their effects. Hurricane Andrew, the Exxon oil spill, and the Oklahoma City bombing were classified as severe with respect to their psychological impacts. As these examples suggest, the researchers found no evidence that natural, technological, and human-induced disasters necessarily differ in their effects.

This research review uncovered a number of vulnerability and protective factors that were associated with differential psychological outcomes following disasters. Broadly categorized, those risk factors most consistently shown to be negatively associated with post-disaster psychological well-being include severity of disaster exposure at both the individual and the community levels; being female; being a member of an ethnic minority; low socioeconomic status; experiencing other stressors or chronic stress; having had other mental health problems prior to the disaster; employing inappropriate coping strategies (e.g., withdrawal, avoidance); and reporting problems with both perceived and actual social support.

Overall, these findings are very consistent with perspectives in disaster research that emphasize the relationship between systemically induced vulnerability, negative disaster impacts, lower resilience, and poor recovery outcomes. Recent research situates disasters within the context of other types of stressful events (e.g., death of a loved one or other painful losses) that disproportionately affect those who are most vulnerable and least able to cope. At the same time, studies—many conducted under NEHRP auspices—show how social inequality and vulnerability both amplify the stress that results directly from disasters and complicate the recovery process over the longer term. For example, Fothergill (1996, 1998, 2004) and Enarson and Morrow (1998) have documented the ways in which gender is associated both with the likelihood of becoming a disaster victim and with a variety of subsequent post-disaster stressors. Peacock et al. (1997) and Bolin and Stanford (1998) have shown how pre-disaster conditions such as income disparities and racial and ethnic discrimination contribute both to

disaster losses and to subsequent psychosocial stress and make recovery more difficult for vulnerable groups. Perilla et al. (2002), who studied ethnic differences in post-traumatic stress following Hurricane Andrew, also note that ethnicity can be associated with variations in personality characteristics such as fatalism, which tends to be associated with poor psychosocial outcomes resulting from stressful events, as well as with additional stresses associated with acculturation. 8

Hurricane Katrina represents a critical test case for theories and research on psychosocial vulnerability and resilience. If, as Norris and her collaborators indicate, Hurricane Andrew resulted in relatively high levels of psychosocial distress, what will researchers find with respect to Katrina? For many victims, Katrina appears to contain all of the ingredients necessary to produce negative mental health outcomes: massive, catastrophic impacts; high property losses resulting in financial distress; exposure to traumas such as prolonged physical stress and contact with dead and dying victims; disruption of social networks; massive failures in service delivery systems; continual uncertainty about the future; and residential dislocation on a scale never seen in a U.S. disaster. Over time, research will result in important insights regarding the psychosocial dimensions of truly catastrophic disaster events.

Household Impacts and Recovery. Within the disaster recovery area, households and household recovery have been studied most often, with a significant proportion of that work focusing on post-earthquake recovery issues. Although this line of research predates NEHRP, many later studies have been undertaken with NEHRP support. Studies conducted prior to NEHRP include Bolin’s research on household recovery processes following the Managua earthquake and the Rapid City flood, both of which occurred in 1972 (Bolin, 1976). Drabek and Key and their collaborators had also examined disaster impacts on families and the household recover process (Drabek et al., 1975; Drabek and Key, 1976, 1984). With NEHRP support, Bolin and Bolton studied household recovery following tornadoes in Wichita Falls, Vernon, and Paris, Texas; a hurricane in Hawaii; flooding in Salt Lake City; and the Coalinga earthquake (Bolin, 1982; Bolin and Bolton, 1986). Bolin’s monograph Household and Community Recovery after

Earthquakes was based on research on the 1987 Whittier Narrows and 1989 Loma Prieta events (Bolin, 1993b). Households have also been the focus of more recent studies on the impacts of Hurricane Andrew (Peacock et al., 1997) and the 1994 Northridge earthquake (Bolin and Stanford, 1998). Other NEHRP-sponsored work has focused more specifically on issues that are important for household recovery, such as post-disaster sheltering processes (Phillips, 1993, 1998) and housing impacts and recovery (Comerio, 1997, 1998). As Bolin (1993a:13) observes

[d]isasters can have a multiplicity of effects on a household, including physical losses to property, injury and/or death, loss of job or livelihood, disruption of social and personal relations, relocation of some or all members of a family, physical disruption or transformation of community and neighborhood, and increased household indebtedness.

Accordingly, the literature has explored various dimensions of household impacts and recovery, including direct impacts such as those highlighted by Bolin; changes in the quality and cohesiveness of relationships among household members; post-disaster problems such as conflict and domestic violence; stressors that affect households during the recovery process; and coping strategies employed by households, including the use of both formal and informal sources of post-disaster support and recovery aid.

The literature also points to a number of factors that are associated with differences in short- and longer-term household recovery outcomes. Housing supply is one such factor—as indicated, for example, by housing costs, other real estate market characteristics, and rental vacancy rates Temporary housing options are affected by such factors as the proximity of friends and relatives with whom to stay, although use of this housing option is generally only a short-term strategy. Extended family members may not be able to help if they also are victims (Morrow, 1997). Such problems may be more prevalent in lower-income groups that have few alternative resources and when most members of an extended family live in the same affected community.

Availability of temporary and permanent housing generally is limited by their pre-impact supply in and near the impact area. In the U.S., in situations in which there is an insufficient supply of housing for displaced disaster victims, FEMA provides mobile homes, but even this expedient method of expanding the housing stock takes time. Even when houses are only moderately damaged, loss of housing functionality may be a problem if there is massive disruption of infrastructure. In such cases, tent cities may be necessary if undamaged housing is beyond commuting range (e.g., Homestead, Florida after Hurricane Andrew, as discussed in Peacock et al., 1997).

In the longer term, household recovery is influenced by such factors as household financial resources, the ability to obtain assistance from friends and relatives, insurance coverage, and the mix of housing assistance pro-

grams available to households. Typically, access to and adequacy of recovery resources are inversely related to socioeconomic status. Those with higher incomes are more likely to own their own homes, to be adequately insured, and to have savings and other financial resources on which to draw in order to recover—although disasters can also cause even better-off households to take on additional debt. With respect to formal sources of aid, the assistance process generally favors those who are adept at responding to bureaucratic requirements and who are able to invest time and effort to seek out sources of aid. The aid process also favors those living in more conventional, nuclear family living arrangements, as opposed to extended families or multiple households occupying the same dwelling unit (Morrow, 1997). Recovery may be particularly difficult for single-parent households, especially those headed by women (Enarson and Morrow, 1998; Fothergill, 2004).

The picture that emerges from research on household recovery is not that of a predictable and stage-like process that is common to all households, but rather of a multiplicity of recovery trajectories that are shaped not only by the physical impacts of disaster but also by axes of stratification that include income, race, and ethnicity, as well as such factors as the availability of and access to different forms of monetary aid, other types of assistance, and informal social support—which are themselves associated with stratification and diversity. Disaster severity matters, both because disasters that produce major and widespread impacts can limit recovery options for households and because they tend to be more damaging to the social fabric of the community. As Comerio’s extensive research on housing impacts and issues following earthquakes and other disasters in different societal contexts illustrates, household recovery processes are also shaped by societal-level policy and institutional factors—which themselves have differential impacts (Comerio, 1998). 9

Large-Scale Comparative Research on Household Recovery. Although there is clearly a need for such research, few studies exist that compare household recovery processes and outcomes across communities and disaster events. With NEHRP funding, Frederick Bates and his colleagues carried out what may well be the largest research efforts of this kind: a multicommunity

longitudinal study on household and community impacts and recovery after the 1976 Guatemala earthquake and a cross-national comparative study on household recovery following six different disaster events. The Guatemala study, designed as a quasi-experiment, included households in 26 communities that were carefully selected to reflect differences in the severity of earthquake impacts, size, population composition, and region of the country. That study focused on a broad spectrum of topics, including changes over time in household composition and characteristics; household economic activity; housing characteristics and standards of living; household experiences with relief and reconstruction assistance; and fertility, health, and nutrition. Never replicated for any other type of disaster, the study provided detailed information on these topics, focusing in particular on how different forms of aid provision either facilitated or hampered household recovery (for detailed discussions, see Bates, 1982; Hoover and Bates, 1985; Bates et al., 1979).

The second study carried out by Bates and his colleagues extended methods developed to assess household recovery following the Guatemala earthquake to measure household recovery in disaster-stricken communities in six different countries. The tool used to measure disaster impacts and household recovery across different events and societies, the Domestic Assets Scale, made possible systematic comparisons with respect to one dimension of household recovery—the restoration of household possessions, tools, and technologies (Bates and Peacock, 1992, 1993).

Vulnerability, Resilience, and Household Recovery. Like the other aspects of recovery discussed here, what happens to households during and after disasters can be conceptualized in terms of vulnerability and resilience. With respect to vulnerability, social location is associated with the severity of disaster impacts for households. Poverty often forces people to live in substandard or highly vulnerable housing—manufactured housing is one example—leaving them more vulnerable to death, injury, and homelessness. As discussed in Chapter 3 with respect to disaster preparedness, factors such as income, education, and homeownership influence the ability of households to mitigate and prepare for disasters. Social-structural factors also affect the extent to which families can accumulate assets in order to achieve higher levels of safety, as well as their recovery options and access to resources after disasters strike—for example the forms of recovery assistance for which they are eligible. Households are thus differentially exposed to disasters, differentially vulnerable during the recovery period, and diverse in terms of both inherent and adaptive resilience.

ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS IMPACTS AND RECOVERY: THE CHALLENGE OF ASSESSING DISASTER LOSSES

As discussed in Chapter 3 , assessing how much disasters cost the nation and its communities has proven to be a major challenge. A National Research Council (NRC, 1999c) study concluded that such calculations are difficult in part because different agencies and entities calculate costs and losses differently. Moreover, no universally accepted standards exist for calculating economic impacts resulting from disasters, and there is no single agency responsible for keeping track of disaster losses. For any given disaster event, assessments of economic impacts may vary widely depending on which statistics are used—for example, direct or insured losses versus total losses.

NEHRP-sponsored research has addressed these problems to some degree. For example, as part of the NEHRP-sponsored “Second Assessment of Research on Natural Hazards,” researchers attempted to estimates losses, costs, and other impacts from a wide array of natural and technological hazards. 10 For the 20 year period 1975–1994, they estimated that dollar losses from disasters amounted to $.5 billion per week, with climatological hazards accounting for about 80 percent of those losses; since 1989, losses have totaled $1 billion per week (Mileti, 1999a). Through work undertaken as part of the Second Assessment, data on losses from natural hazard events from the mid-1970s to 2000 are now available at the county level in geocoded form for the entire United States through the Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS). This data collection and database development effort has made it possible to analyze different types of losses, at different scales, using different metrics, and to assess locations in terms of their hazard proneness and loss histories. (For discussions of the data used in the SHELDUS database and associated challenges see Cutter, 2001.) What is still lacking is a national program to continue systematically collecting and analyzing impact and loss data.

Studies on economic impacts and recovery from earthquakes and other disasters can be classified according to the units of analysis on which they focus. Most research concerns economic losses and recovery at the community or, more frequently, the regional level. A smaller set of studies has analyzed economic impacts and recovery at the firm or facility level. There is even less research documenting national-level and macroeconomic impacts.

Community-Level and Regional Studies

Studies on the economics of natural disasters at the community and regional levels of analysis differ significantly in methods, topics of interest, and conclusions. Some researchers, such as Rossi et al. (1978) and Friesema et al. (1979) have argued that at least in the United States, natural disasters have no discernible social or economic effects at the community level and that nondisaster-related trends have a far more significant influence on long-term outcomes than disasters themselves. This position has also been argued at the macroeconomic level, with respect to other developed and developing countries (Albala-Bertrand, 1993). 11 Dacy and Kunreuther (1969:168) even argued (although more than 30 years ago) that “a disaster may actually turn out to be a blessing in disguise” because disasters create reconstruction booms and allow community improvements to be made rapidly, rather than gradually. However, most research contradicts the idea that disasters constitute economic windfalls, emphasizing instead that economic gains that may be realized at one level (e.g., the community, particular economic sectors) typically constitute losses at another (e.g., the national tax base). One analyst has called the idea that disasters are beneficial economically “one of the most widely held misbeliefs in economics” (DeVoe, 1997:188).

Other researchers take the position that post-disaster economic and social conditions are generally consistent with pre-disaster trends, although disasters may amplify those changes (Bates and Peacock, 1993). Disasters may further marginalize firms and sectors of the economy that were already in decline, or they may speed up processes that were already under way prior to their occurrence. For example, Homestead Air Force Base was already slated for closure before Hurricane Andrew despite ongoing efforts to keep the base opened. When Andrew occurred, the base sustained damage and was closed for good. The closure affected businesses that had depended on the base and helped lead to the exodus of many middle-class families from the area, which in turn affected tax revenues in the impact region. These changes would have taken place eventually, but they were accelerated by Hurricane Andrew.

Related research has analyzed the distributive effects of earthquakes and other disasters. In an early formulation, Cochrane (1975) observed that lower-income groups consistently bear a disproportionate share of disaster losses, relative to higher-income groups. This theme continues to be promi-

nent in the disaster literature; the notion that disasters create economic “winners and losers” has been borne out for both households and businesses (Peacock et al., 1997:Chapter 11; Tierney and Webb, forthcoming).

Another prominent research emphasis at the community and regional levels of analysis has grown out of the need to characterize and quantify the economic impacts of disasters (as well as other impacts) in order to be better able to plan for and mitigate those impacts. A considerable amount of NEHRP research on economic impacts and recovery has been driven by concern about the potentially severe economic consequences of major earthquakes, particularly those that could occur in highly populated urban areas. That concern is reflected in a number of NRC reports (1989, 1992, 1999c) on projected losses and potential economic impacts. Within the private sector, the insurance industry has also committed significant resources in an effort to better anticipate the magnitude of insured losses in future disaster events. (For new developments in research on the management of catastrophic insurance risk, see Grossi et al., 2004.)

Stimulated in large measure by NEHRP funding, new tools have been developed for both pre-disaster estimation of potential losses and post-disaster impact assessments, particularly for earthquakes. HAZUS, the national loss estimation methodology, which was originally developed for earthquakes and which has now been extended to flood and wind hazards, was formulated under FEMA’s supervision with NEHRP funding. NEHRP funds have also supported the development of newer and more sophisticated modeling approaches through research undertaken at earthquake centers sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF).

The framework for estimating losses from natural hazards was initially laid out more than 20 years ago in publications such as Petak and Atkisson’s Natural Hazard Risk Assessment and Public Policy (1982) and in applied studies such as the PEPPER (Pre-Earthquake Planning for Post-Earthquake Rebuilding) project (Spangle, 1987), which analyzed potential earthquake impacts and post-disaster recovery strategies for Los Angeles. According to the logic developed in these and other early studies (see, for example, NRC, 1989) and later through extensive NEHRP research, loss estimation consists of the analysis of scenario or probabilistic models that include data on hazards; exposures , or characteristics of the built environment at risk, including buildings and infrastructural systems; fragilities , or estimates of damage likelihood as a function of one or more parameters, such as earthquake shaking intensity; direct losses , such as deaths, injuries, and costs associated with damage; and indirect losses and ripple effects that result from disasters. Within this framework, recent research has focused on further refining loss models and reducing uncertainties associated with both the components of loss estimation models and their interrelationships (for

representative work, see theme issue in Earthquake Spectra, 1997; Tierney et al., 1999; Okuyama and Chang, 2004).

This line of research has led both to advances in basic science knowledge and to a wide range of research applications. At the basic science level, loss modeling research—particularly studies supported through NEHRP—has helped distinguish and clarify relationships among such factors as physical damage, direct economic loss, business interruption effects, and indirect losses and ripple effects. For example, it is now more possible than ever before to disaggregate and analyze separately different types of economic effects and to understand how particular types of damage (e.g., damage to electrical power or transportation systems) contribute to overall economic losses. This research has shed light on factors that contribute to the resilience of regional economies, both during normal times and in response to sudden shocks. It has also shown how the application of newer economic modeling techniques, such as computable general equilibrium modeling and agent-based modeling, constitute improvements over more traditional input-output modeling, particularly for the study of extreme events (for discussions, see Rose et al., 2004; Chang, 2005; Rose and Liao, 2005). Econometric modeling provides another promising approach at both the micro and the regional levels (see West and Lenze, 1994), but this potential remains largely untapped.

At the applications level, loss estimation tools and products have proven useful for raising public awareness of the likely impacts of disaster events and for enhancing community preparedness efforts and mitigation programs. They have also made it possible to assess mitigation alternatives, not only in light of the extent to which those measures reduce damage, but also in terms of their economic costs and benefits. When applied in the disaster context, rapid economic loss estimates have also formed the basis for requests for federal disaster assistance. For the insurance industry, loss models provide important tools to improve risk management decision making, particularly with regard to catastrophic risks.

As noted earlier, loss modeling originally was driven by the need to better understand the economic impacts of earthquakes. In addition to economic losses, earthquake loss models are increasingly taking into account other societal impacts such as deaths, injuries, and residential displacement, as well as secondary effects such as earthquake-induced fires. The methodological approach developed to study earthquakes was first extended to other natural hazards and is now being used increasingly to assess potential impacts from terrorism. The nation is now better able to address the issue of terrorism-related losses because of the investments that had been made earlier for earthquakes and other natural hazards. Significantly, when the Department of Homeland Security decided in 2003 to begin funding

university-based “centers of excellence” for terrorism research, the first topic that was selected for funding was risk and economic modeling for terrorist attacks in the United States. 12 Many of the investigators associated with that center had previously worked on loss modeling for earthquakes.

Business and Facility-Level Impacts and Recovery. Most research on recovery processes and outcomes has focused on households and communities. Prior to the 1990s, most research on the economic aspects of disasters focused not on individual businesses but rather on community-wide and regional impacts. Almost nothing was known about how private sector organizations are affected by and recover from disasters. Since then, a small number of studies have focused on business firms or, in some cases, commercial facilities, as units of analysis. Much of this work, including studies on large, representative samples of businesses, has been carried out with NEHRP support. Business impacts and recovery have been assessed following the Whittier Narrows, Loma Prieta, Northridge, and Kobe earthquakes; the 1993 Midwest floods; Hurricane Andrew; and other flood and hurricane events (for representative studies and findings, see Dahlhamer, 1998; Chang, 2000; Webb et al., 2000; Alesch et al., 2001). Long-term business recovery has been studied in the context of only two disaster events—the Loma Prieta earthquake and Hurricane Andrew (Webb et al., 2003).

These studies have shown that disasters disrupt business operations through a variety of mechanisms. Direct physical damage to buildings, equipment, vehicles, and inventories has obvious effects on business operation. It might be less obvious that disruption of infrastructure such as water/sewer, electric power, fuel (i.e., natural gas), transportation, and telecommunications frequently forces businesses to shut down in the aftermath of a disaster (Alesch et al., 1993; Tierney and Nigg, 1995; Tierney, 1997a, b; Webb et al., 2000). For example, Tierney (1997b) reported that extensive electrical power service interruption after the 1993 Midwest floods caused a large number of business closures in Des Moines, Iowa, even though the physical damage was confined to a relatively small area.

Other negative disaster effects include population dislocation, losses in discretionary income among those victims who remain in the impact area—which can weaken market demand for many products and services—and competitive pressure from large outside businesses. These kinds of impacts can cause small local businesses to experience major difficulties recovering from the aftermath of a disaster (Alesch et al., 2001). Indeed, such factors

can produce business failures long after the precipitating event, especially if the community was already in economic decline before the disaster occurred (Bates and Peacock, 1993; Webb et al., 2003).

It is difficult to generalize on the basis of so few studies, particularly when the issues involved and the methodological challenges are so complex. However, studies to date have uncovered a few consistent patterns with respect to business impacts and recovery. First, studies show that most businesses do recover, and do so relatively quickly. In other words, typical businesses affected by disasters show a good deal of resilience in the face of major disruption.

Second, some businesses do tend to fare worse than others in the aftermath of disasters; clearly, not all businesses are equally vulnerable or equally resilient. Although findings from individual studies differ, the factors that seem to contribute most to vulnerability include small size; poor pre-disaster financial condition; business type, with wholesale and retail trade appearing to be especially vulnerable, while manufacturing and construction businesses stand to benefit most from disasters; and severity of disaster impacts. With regard to this last-mentioned factor, studies show that negative impacts on businesses include not only direct physical damage, lifeline-related problems, and business interruption, but also more long-lasting operational problems that businesses may experience following disasters, such as employee absenteeism and loss of productivity, earthquake-induced declines in demands for goods and services, and difficulties with shipping or receiving products and supplies.

Third, business recovery is affected by many factors that are outside the control of the individual business owner. For example, businesses located in highly damaged areas may experience recovery difficulties independent of whether or not they experience losses. In this case, recovery is complicated by the fact that disasters disrupt local ecologies on which individual businesses depend. Business recovery processes and outcomes are also linked to community-level decision making. After the Loma Prieta earthquake, for example, the City of Santa Cruz offered extensive support to businesses and used the earthquake as an opportunity to reinvent itself and to revitalize a business district that had fallen short of realizing its potential prior to the disaster (Arnold, 1998). Actions that communities take with respect to land-use, structural mitigation, infrastructure protection, community education, and emergency response planning also affect how businesses and business districts fare during and after disasters.

Fourth, recovery outcomes following disasters are linked to pre-disaster trends and broader market forces. For example, focusing on an important transport facility, the Port of Kobe, Chang (2000) showed that the port’s inability to recover fully after the 1995 earthquake was due in part to losses in one part of the port’s business—trans-shipment cargo—that had already

been declining before the earthquake owing to severe competition from other ports in the region. Similarly, Dahlhamer (1998) found that businesses in the wholesale and retail trade sectors were more vulnerable to experiencing negative economic outcomes following the Northridge earthquake, perhaps because they constitute crowded and highly competitive economic niches and because turnover is high in those sectors during normal times. He also found that firms in industries that had been experiencing growth in the two-year period just before the earthquake were less likely than firms in declining industries to report being worse off following the Northridge event. Such findings are consistent with a more general theme in recovery research discussed earlier—that disasters do not generate change in and of themselves, but rather intensify or accelerate preexisting patterns.

Community Recovery. Although the topic of community recovery is still not well studied, significant progress has been made in understanding both recovery processes and factors that are associated with recovery outcomes for communities. Earlier research indicated that communities rebound well from disasters and that, at the aggregate level and net of other factors, the impacts of disasters are negligible (Friesema et al., 1979; Wright et al., 1979). However, other more recent research suggests that such findings paint an overly simplified and perhaps overly optimistic picture of post-disaster recovery. This may have been due to methodological shortcomings—for example, the tendency to aggregate data and to group together both more damaging disasters and those that did comparatively little damage—or because such studies were based on “typical” disasters in the United States, rather than catastrophic or near-catastrophic ones. 13 In contrast, in a methodologically sophisticated study focusing on a much more severe disaster, the 1995 Kobe event, Chang (2001) analyzed a number of recovery indicators, including measures of economic activity, employment in manufacturing, changes in the spatial distribution of work activities, and differences in recovery indicators among different districts within the city. She found that the earthquake did have lasting and significant negative effects on the City of Kobe. Equally important, poor recovery outcomes were more pronounced in some parts of the city than in others—specifically those areas that had already been experiencing declines. This study provides yet another illustration of how disasters exploit existing vulnerabilities. It also cautions against making blanket statements about disaster impacts and recovery.

Another limitation of earlier work on community recovery was that it provided too little information on what actually happens in communities during the recovery process or what communities can do to ensure more rapid and satisfactory recovery outcomes. Later research, much of which has been undertaken with NEHRP support, has addressed these issues. For example, in Community Recovery from a Major Natural Disaster , Rubin et al. (1985) developed a set of propositions regarding factors that affect community recovery outcomes. That monograph, which was based on case study analyses of recovery following 14 disasters that occurred in the early 1980s, emphasized the importance of three general constructs—personal leadership, knowledge of appropriate recovery actions, and ability to act—as well as the influence of intergovernmental (state and federal) policies and programs. This work highlighted the effects of both government decision making and broader societal policies on community recovery.

Some more recent research has more explicitly incorporated community and population vulnerability as factors affecting community-level recovery. Bolin and Stanford (1998) traced how the post-Northridge recovery experiences of Los Angeles and smaller outlying towns differed as a function of such factors as political expertise and influence, preexisting plans, institutional capacity, involvement of community organizations, and interest group competition. In these diverse communities, the needs of more vulnerable and marginalized groups were sometimes addressed during the recovery process. However, recovery programs ultimately did little to improve the safety of those groups, because they failed to address the root causes of vulnerability (Bolin and Stanford, 1998:216):

[s]ince vulnerability derives from political, economic, and social processes that deny certain people and groups access or entitlements to incomes, housing, health care, political rights, and, in some cases, even food, then post-disaster rebuilding by itself will have little effect on vulnerability.

Societal-Level and Comparative Research on Disaster Recovery. International research on disasters is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 6 . This chapter focuses in a more limited way on what little research exists on disaster impacts and post-disaster change at the societal level. Regarding long-term societal impacts, researchers have generally found that disasters, even very large ones, typically do not in and of themselves result in significant change in the societies they affect. Instead, the broad consensus has been that to the extent disasters do have lasting effects, it is because they interact with other factors to accelerate changes that were already under way. Albala-Bertrand, for example has argued that while disasters can highlight preexisting political conflicts, whether such effects are sustained over time “has little to do with the disaster itself, but with preexisting economic and sociopolitical

conditions” (1993:197). This research found that the potential for such changes was generally greater in developing countries than developed ones, although not great in any case.

With respect to the political impacts of disasters at the societal level, comparing very large disasters that occurred between 1966 and 1980, political scientist Richard Olson found that that major disasters can result in higher levels of political unrest, particularly in developing countries that are already politically unstable (Olson and Drury, 1997). In other research, Olson argues that under certain (and rare) circumstances, disasters can constitute “critical junctures,” or crises that leave distinctive legacies within those societies. The 1972 earthquake in Managua, Nicaragua, was one such case. Following that devastating event, the corrupt and dictatorial Somoza regime took a large share of post-disaster aid for itself and mismanaged the recovery, in the process alienating Nicaraguan elites, the business establishment, and finally the middle class, and paving the way for the Sandanistas to assume power in 1979. The 1985 Mexico City earthquake also affected the political system of that nation by, among other things, helping to weaken the hegemony of the Institutional Revolutionary Party. However, rather than having a direct and independent influence on subsequent political changes, that earthquake interacted with factors and trends that were already beginning to affect Mexican society before it occurred. That disaster, which was not well managed by the ruling government, provided the Mexican people with a sharp contrast between the vibrancy and the capability of civil society and the government’s lack of preparedness. Grass-roots response and recovery efforts also facilitated broader mobilization by groups that had been pressing for change. Although not a “critical juncture” in its own right, the earthquake did play a role in moving the political system in the direction of greater pluralism and strengthened the power of civil society institutions vis-à-vis the state (Olson and Gawronski, 2003).

Such findings assume particular significance in the aftermath of the December 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami. The impacts of that catastrophe span at least 12 different nations and a number of semi-autonomous subnational units, each with its own distinctive history, mode of political organization, internal cleavages, and preexisting problems. Research is needed to better understand both recovery processes and outcomes and the longer-term societal effects of this devastating event.

OTHER DISASTER RECOVERY-RELATED ISSUES

Disaster experience and the mitigation of future hazards.

Social science research has also focused in various ways on the question of whether the positive informational effects of disasters constitute learning

experiences for affected social units by encouraging the adoption of mitigation measures and stimulating preparedness activity. While this idea seems intuitively appealing, the literature is in fact quite equivocal with regard to the extent to which disasters actually promote higher levels of safety. On the one hand, at the community and societal levels, there is considerable evidence to suggest that disasters constitute “windows of opportunity” for those seeking to enact loss reduction programs, making it possible to achieve policy victories that would not have been possible prior to those events (Alesch and Petak, 1986). Disasters have the potential to become “focusing events” (Birkland, 1997) that can alter policy agendas through highlighting areas in which current policy has failed, energizing advocates, and raising public awareness. On the other hand, many disasters fail to become focusing events and have no discernible impacts on the adoption and implementation of loss-reduction measures. For example, Burby et al., (1997), who studied communities in five different states, found no relationship between disaster experience and adoption of mitigation measures. Birkland (1997) suggests that these differences are related in part to the extent to which advocacy coalitions exist, are able to turn disaster events to their advantage, and are able to formulate appropriate policy responses.

Further complicating matters, policies adopted in the aftermath of disasters, like other policies, may meet with resistance and be only partially implemented—or implemented in ways that were never intended. While it is possible to point to examples of successful policy adoption and implementation in the aftermath of disasters, such outcomes are by no means inevitable, and when they do occur, they are typically traceable to other factors, not just to disaster events themselves.

Research does suggest that households, businesses, and other entities affected by disasters learn from their experiences and take action to protect themselves from future events. Those who have experienced disasters may, for example, step up their preparedness for future events or be more likely to heed subsequent disaster warnings. At the same time, it is also clear that there is considerable variability in the relationship between experience and behavioral change. While some studies document the positive informational effects of experience, others show no significant impact, and some research even indicates that repeated experiences engender complacency and lack of action (for a review of the literature, see Tierney et al., 2001).

Role of Prices and Markets

Mainstream economic theory, models, and analytical tools (e.g., benefit-cost analysis) assume that markets generally function efficiently and equilibrate. Barring various situations of market failure, prices serve a key role as signals of resource scarcity. In this context, two broad areas of research

needs can be identified. One is the role of prices and markets in pre-disaster mitigation (see also Chapter 3 ). Market-based approaches to reducing disaster risk involve such questions as how prices can serve as better signals of risk taking and risk protection, and the potential for new approaches to risk sharing (e.g., catastrophe bonds). At the same time, better understanding is also needed of market failures in mitigation (e.g., externalities in risk taking and risk protection). The second broad research need concerns markets in post-disaster loss and recovery. Little empirical research has been conducted on the degree to which assumptions of efficient markets actually hold in disasters, especially those having catastrophic impacts, and the degree to which markets are resilient in the face of disasters. Research is also needed on how economic models can capture the adjustment processes and disequilibria that are important as economies recover from disasters, and how economic recovery policies can influence recovery trajectories.

Disaster Recovery and Sustainability

As discussed in more detail in Chapter 6 , which focuses on international research, disaster theory and research have increasingly emphasized the extent to which vulnerability to disasters can be linked to unsustainable development practices. Indeed, the connection between disaster loss reduction and sustainability was a key organizing principle of the NEHRP-sponsored Second Assessment of Research on Natural Hazards. The title of the summary volume for the Second Assessment, Disasters by Design (Mileti, 1999b), was chosen to emphasize the idea that the impacts produced by disasters are the consequence of prior decisions that put people and property at risk. A key organizing assumption for the Second Assessment was the notion that societies and communities “design” the disasters of the future by failing to take hazards into account in development decisions; pursuing other values, such as rapid economic growth, at the expense of safety; failing to take decisive action to mitigate risks to the built environment; and ignoring opportunities to enhance social and economic resilience in the face of disasters. Conversely, communities and societies also have the ability to design safer futures by better integrating hazard reduction into their ongoing policies and practices in areas such as land-use and development planning, building codes and code enforcement, and quality-of-life initiatives.

Just as disasters dramatically highlight failures to address sources of vulnerability, the post-disaster recovery period gives affected communities and societies an opportunity to reassess pre-disaster plans, policies, and programs, remedy their shortcomings, and design a safer future (Berke et al., 1993). The federal government seeks to promote post-disaster mitigation through FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, as well as programs

that seek to reduce repetitive flood losses through relocating flood-prone properties. The need to weave a concern with disaster loss reduction into the fabric of ongoing community life has also guided federal initiatives such as Project Impact, FEMA’s Disaster Resistant Communities program.

Yet the research record suggests that those opportunities are often missed. While it is clear that some disaster-stricken communities do act decisively to reduce future losses, for others the recovery period brings about a return to the status quo ante, marked at most by gains in safety afforded by reconstruction to more stringent building codes. The section above noted that disasters create “windows of opportunity” for loss reduction advocates, in part by highlighting policy failures and temporarily silencing opponents. At the same time, however, research evidence suggests that even under those circumstances, it is extremely difficult to advance sustainability goals in the aftermath of disasters. Changes in land use are particularly difficult to enact, both during nondisaster times and after disasters, despite the fact that such changes can significantly reduce vulnerability. Land use decision making generally occurs at the local level, but local jurisdictions have great difficulty enacting controls on development in the absence of enabling legislation from higher levels of government. Even when land-use and zoning changes and other mitigation measures are seen as desirable following disasters, community leaders may lack the political will to promote such efforts over the long term, allowing opponents to regroup and old patterns to reassert themselves (see, for example, Reddy, 2000; for more detailed discussions on land-use and hazards, see Burby, 1998). Assessing reconstruction following recent U.S. disasters, Platt (1998:51) observed that “[d]espite all the emphasis on mitigation of multiple hazards in recent years, political, social and economic forces conspire to promote rebuilding patterns that set the stage for future catastrophe.” Overall, the research record suggests that while the recovery period should ideally be a time when communities take stock of their loss reduction policies and enact new ones, post-disaster change tends to be incremental at best and post-disaster efforts to promote sustainability are rare.

RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter closes by making recommendations for future research on disaster response and recovery. As the foregoing discussions have indicated, existing research has raised numerous questions that need to be addressed through future research. This concluding section highlights general areas in which new research is clearly needed, both to test the limits of current social science knowledge and to take into account broad societal changes and issues of disaster severity and scale.

Recommendation 4.1: Future research should focus on further empirical explorations of societal vulnerability and resilience to natural, technological, and willfully caused hazards and disasters.

Discussions of factors associated with differential vulnerability and resilience in the face of disasters appear in many places in this report. What these discussions reveal is that researchers have only begun to explore these two concepts and much work remains to be done. It is clear that vulnerability is produced by a constellation of psychological, attitudinal, physical, social, and economic factors. However, the manner in which these factors operate and interact in the context of disasters is only partially understood. For example, while sufficient evidence exists to indicate that race, gender, and ethnicity are important predictors of hazard vulnerability and disaster-related behavior, research has yet to fully explore such factors, their correlates, and their interactions across different hazard and disaster contexts. In many cases age is associated with vulnerability to disasters (see Ngo, 2001; Anderson, 2005), but other factors such as ethnicity and socioeconomic status have differential effects within particular age groups (Bolin and Klenow, 1988), and the vulnerability of elderly persons may be related not only to age but also to other factors that are correlated with age, such as social isolation, which can cut off older adults from sources of lifesaving aid under disaster conditions (Klinenberg, 2002).

Even less is known about how to conceptualize, measure, and enhance resilience in the face of disasters—whether that concept is applied to the psychological resilience of individuals or to the resilience of households, communities, local and regional economies, or other units of analysis. Resilience can be conceptualized as the ability to survive disasters without significant loss, disruption, and stress, combined with the ability to cope with the consequences of disasters, replace and restore what has been lost, and resume social and economic activity in a timely manner (Bruneau et al., 2003). Other dimensions of resilience include the ability to learn from disaster experience and change accordingly.

The large volume of literature on psychological resilience and coping offers insights into factors that facilitate resilient responses by individual disaster victims. Other work, such as research on “high-reliability organizations,” organizational adaptation and learning under crisis conditions, and organizational effectiveness (Roberts, 1989; La Porte and Consolini, 1998; Comfort, 1999; Drabek, 2003) also offers insights into correlates of resilience at the organizational and interorganizational levels. As suggested in Chapter 6 , the social capital construct and related concepts such as civic engagement and effective collective action are also related to resilience. The challenge is to continue research on the resilience concept while synthesizing theoretical insights from these disparate literatures, with the ultimate objective of developing an empirically grounded

theory of resilience that is generalizable both across different social units and across different types of extreme events.

Recommendation 4.2: Future research should focus on the special requirements associated with responding to and recovering from willful attacks and disease outbreaks.

A better understanding is needed of likely individual, group, and public responses to intentional acts of terrorism, as well as disease outbreaks and epidemics. As indicated in this chapter, there appears to be no strong a priori reason for assuming that responses to natural, technological, or intentionally caused disasters and willful or naturally occurring disease outbreaks will differ. However, research on hazards and disasters also calls attention to factors that could well prove to be important predictors of responses to such occurrences, particularly those involving unique hazards such as chemical, biological, nuclear, and radiological agents. Research on individual and group responses to different types of disasters has highlighted the importance of such factors as familiarity, experience, and perceptual cues; perceptions about the characteristics of hazards (e.g., their dread nature, lethality and other harms); the content, clarity, and consistency of crisis communications; knowledge of appropriate self-protective actions; and feelings of efficacy with respect to carrying out those measures (see, for example, classic work on risk perception, discussed in Slovic, 2000, as well as Lindell and Perry, 2004).

Recent research has also highlighted the importance of emotions in shaping perceptions of risk. Hazards that trigger vivid images of danger and strong emotions may be seen as more likely to occur, and more likely to produce harm, even if their probability is low (Slovic et al., 2004). If willful acts engender powerful emotions, they could potentially also engender unusual responses among threatened populations.

The potential for ambiguity and confusion with respect to public communications may also be greater for homeland security threats and public health hazards such as avian flu than for other hazards. For example, warning systems and protocols are more institutionalized and more widely understood for natural hazards than for homeland security and public health threats. While it is generally recognized that organizations such as the National Hurricane Center and the U.S. Geological Survey constitute reliable sources of information on hurricanes and earthquakes, respectively, members of the public may be less clear regarding responsibilities and authorities with respect to other risks, particularly since such threats and the expertise needed to assess them are so diverse.

These kinds of differences could translate into differences in public perceptions and subsequent responses. Research is needed on the manner in which the distinctive features of particular homeland security and public

health threats, such as those highlighted here, as well as official plans and management strategies, could affect responses during homeland security emergencies.

Recommendation 4.3: Future research should focus on the societal consequences of changes in government organization and in emer gency management legislation, authorities, policies, and plans that have occurred as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, as well as on changes that will almost certainly occur as a result of Hurricane Katrina.

The period since the 2001 terrorist attacks has been marked by major changes in the nation’s emergency management system and its plans and programs. Those changes include the massive government reorganization that accompanied the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); the transfer of FEMA, formerly an independent agency, into DHS; the shifting of many duties and responsibilities formerly undertaken by FEMA to DHS’s Office of Domestic Preparedness, which was formerly a part of the Justice Department; the development of the National Response Plan, which supercedes the Federal Response Plan; Presidential Homeland Security Directives 5 and 8, which make the use of the National Incident Management System (NIMS) mandatory for all agencies and organizations involved in responding to disasters and also mandate the establishment of new national preparedness goals; and increases in funding for special homeland security-related initiatives, particularly those involving “first responders.” Other changes include a greater emphasis on regionalized approaches to preparedness and response and the growth at the federal, state, and local levels of offices and departments focusing specifically on homeland security issues—entities that in many cases exist alongside “traditional” emergency management agencies. While officially stressing the need for an “all-hazards” approach, government initiatives are concentrating increasingly on preparedness, response, and recovery in the context of willful attacks. These changes, all of which have taken place within a relatively short period of time, represent the largest realignment of emergency management policies and programs in U.S. history.

What is not known at this time—and what warrants significant research—is how these changes will affect the manner in which organizations and government jurisdictions respond during future extreme events. Is the system that is evolving more centralized and more command-and-control oriented than before September 11? If so, what consequences will that have for the way organizations and governmental entities respond? What role will the general public and emergent groups play in such a system? How will NIMS be implemented in future disasters, and to what effect? What new forms will emergent multiorganizational networks assume in future

disasters? Which agencies and levels of government will be most central, and how will shifts in authority and responsibility affect response and recovery efforts? Will the investment in homeland security preparedness translate into more rapid, appropriate, and effective responses to natural and technological disasters, or will the new focus on homeland security lead to an erosion in the competencies required to manage other types of emergencies? A major research initiative is needed to analyze the intended and unintended consequences in social time and space of the massive changes that have taken place in the nation’s emergency management system since September 11, 2001.

These concerns loom even larger in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. That disaster revealed significant problems in virtually every aspect of intergovernmental preparedness and response. The inept management of the Katrina disaster was at least in part a consequence of the myopic institutional focus on terrorism that developed in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks—a focus that included marginalizing and underfunding FEMA and downplaying the challenges associated with responding to large-scale natural disasters (Tierney, 2006, forthcoming). Katrina is certain to bring about further efforts at reorganizing the nation’s response system, particularly at the federal level. These reorganizations and their consequences merit special attention.

Recommendation 4.4: Research is needed to update current theories and findings on disaster response and recovery in light of chang ing demographic, economic, technological, and social trends such as those highlighted in Chapter 2 and elsewhere in this report.

It is essential to keep knowledge about disaster response and recovery current. The paragraphs above highlight the need for new research on homeland security threats and institutional responses to those threats. Research is also needed to update what is known about disaster response and recovery in light of other forms of social change and to reassess existing theories. Technological change is a case in point. Focusing on only one issue—disaster warnings—the bulk of the research that has been conducted on warning systems and warning responses was carried out prior to the information technology and communications revolutions. With the rise of the Internet and interactive Web-based communication, the proliferation of cellular and other wireless media, and the growing potential for ubiquitous communications, questions arise regarding the applicability of earlier research findings on how members of the public receive, interpret, and act on warnings. Changes in the mass media, including the rise of the 24-hour news cycle and the trend toward “narrowcasting” and now “podcasting” for increasingly specialized audiences, also have implications for the ways in which the public learns about hazards and receives warning-related

information. In many respects, warning systems reflect a preference for “push-oriented” information dissemination approaches. However, current information collection practices are strongly “pull oriented.” These and other trends in communications technology introduce additional complexity into already complex processes associated with issuing and receiving warnings, decision making under uncertainty, and crisis-related collective behavior. New research is needed both to improve theories and models and to serve as the basis for practical guidance.

Much the same can be said with respect to organizations charged with responding during disaster events. Along with being affected by policy and programmatic changes such as those discussed above, crisis-relevant agencies are also being influenced by the digital and communications revolution and by the diffusion of technology in areas such as remote sensing, geographic information science, data fusion, decision support systems, and visualization. In the more than 15 years since Drabek (1991b) wrote Microcomputers and Emergency Management , which focused on the ways in which computers were affecting the work of local emergency management agencies, technological change has been rapid and massive. How such changes are affecting organizational performance and effectiveness in disasters is not well understood and warrants extensive systematic study.

Recommendation 4.5: More research is needed on response and recovery for near-catastrophic and catastrophic disaster events.

Chapter 1 discusses issues of determining thresholds of disastrous conditions. NEHRP-sponsored social science research indicates that, in the main, U.S. communities have shown considerable resilience even in the face of major disasters. Similarly, at the individual level, U.S. disasters have produced a range of negative psychosocial impacts, but such impacts appear to have been neither severe nor long-lasting. While recognizing that disasters disproportionately affect the most vulnerable in U.S. society and acknowledging that recovery is extremely difficult for many, disasters have been less devastating in the United States and other developed societies than in the developing world. Disaster-related death tolls have also been lower by orders of magnitude, and economic losses, although often large in absolute terms, have also been lower relative to the size of the U.S. economy. At least that was the case until Hurricane Katrina, a catastrophic event that has more in common with disasters in the developing world than with the typical U.S. disaster.

The vast majority of empirical studies on which such generalizations are based have not focused on truly catastrophic disasters, and therefore research results may not be “scalable” to such events. Katrina clearly demonstrates that the nation is at risk for events that are so large that they overwhelm response systems and produce almost insurmountable post-

disaster recovery challenges. What kinds of social and economic impacts and outcomes would result from a large earthquake under downtown Los Angeles, a 7.0 earthquake event on the Hayward Fault in the San Francisco Bay area, a repeat of Hurricane Andrew directly striking Miami, or another hurricane landfall in the already devastated Gulf Coast region? What about situations involving multiple disaster impacts, such as the 2004 hurricane season in Florida and multiple disaster events that produce protracted impacts over time, such as the large aftershocks that are now occurring after the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami? To move into the realm of worst cases, what about an attack involving weapons of mass destruction, or simultaneous terrorist attacks in different cities around the United States? Such events are not outside the realm of possibility. There is a need to envision the potential social and economic effects of very large disasters, to learn from catastrophic events such as Hurricane Katrina, and to analyze historical and comparative cases for the insights they can provide.

Recommendation 4.6: More cross-societal research is needed on natural, technological, and willfully caused hazards and disasters.

Most of the research discussed in this chapter has focused on studies conducted within the United States, but it is important to recognize that findings from U.S. research cannot be overgeneralized to other societies. Disaster response and recovery challenges are greater by many orders of magnitude in smaller and less developed societies than in larger and more developed ones.

Disaster impacts, disaster responses, and recovery processes and outcomes clearly vary across societies. Although the earthquakes that struck Los Angeles in 1994, Kobe in 1995, and Bam, Iran, in 2003 were roughly equivalent in size, they differed in almost every other way: lives lost, injuries, extent of physical damage, economic impacts, and subsequent response and recovery activities. Research suggests that such cross-societal differences are attributable to many factors, including differences in physical and social vulnerability; governmental and institutional capacity; government priorities with respect to loss reduction; and response and recovery policies and programs (see, for example, Davis and Seitz, 1982; Blaikie et al., 1994; Berke and Beatley, 1997; Olson and Gawronski, 2003). NEHRP has made significant contributions to cross-societal research through initiatives such as the U.S.-Japan research program on urban earthquake hazards, which was launched following the Northridge and Kobe earthquakes, as well as a similar initiative that was developed after the 1999 Turkey and Taiwan earthquakes. In some cases, these initiatives have led to longer-term research partnerships; Chapter 6 contains information on one such collaboration, involving the Texas A&M University Hazard Reduction and Recovery Center and the National Center for Hazards Mitigation at the National

Taiwan University. Significantly more cross-national and comparative research is needed to further document and explain cross-societal variations in response and recovery processes and outcomes across different scales and different disaster events. Disasters such as the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami merit intensive study because they allow for rich comparisons at various scales (individuals, households, communities, and institutional and societal levels), providing an opportunity to greatly expand existing social science knowledge.

Recommendation 4.7: Taking into account both existing research and future research needs, sustained efforts should be made with respect to data archiving, sharing, and dissemination.

As noted in detail in Chapter 7 , attention must be paid to issues related to data standardization, data archiving, and data sharing in hazards and disaster research. NEHRP has been a major driving force in the development of databases on response and recovery issues. However, vast proportions of these data have yet to be fully analyzed. For social scientists to be able to fully exploit the data that currently exist, let alone the volume of data that will be collected in the future, specific steps have to be taken to make available and systematically collect, preserve, and disseminate such data appropriately within the research community. As recommended in Chapter 7 , information management strategies must be well coordinated, formally planned, and consistent with federal guidelines governing the protection of information on human subjects. Assuming that these foundations are established, the committee supports the creation of a Disaster Data Archive organized in ways that would encourage broader use of social science data on disaster response and recovery. Contents of this archive would include (but not be limited to) survey instruments; cleaned databases in common formats; code books, coding instructions and other forms of documentation; descriptions of samples and sampling methods; collections of papers containing analyses using those databases; photographs and Internet links (where applicable); and related research materials. Procedures for data archiving and sharing would build on existing protocols set out by organizations such as the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (e.g., ICPSR, 2005).

The distributed Disaster Data Archive would perform a number of important functions for social science hazards and disaster research and for the nation. The existence of the archive would make it much more likely that existing data sets will be used to their full potential by greatly improving accessibility. The archive would serve as an important tool for undergraduate and graduate education by making data more easily available for course projects, theses, and dissertations. By enabling researchers to access instruments used in previous research and incorporate past survey and

interview items into their own research, the archive should help make social science research on disasters more cumulative and replicable. An archive would also make it easier for newcomers to the field of disaster research to become familiar with existing research and enable researchers to identify gaps in past research and avoid unnecessary duplication. The archive would also serve an important function in preserving data that might otherwise be lost. Finally, such an archive would enable social science disaster research to better respond to agency directives regarding the desirability of data sharing.

For an effort of this kind to succeed, a number of conditions must be met. Funds will be needed to support the development and maintenance of the archive, and researchers must be willing to make their data sets and all relevant documentation available. This second condition is crucial, because the committee is aware of a number of important data sets that are not currently being shared, and the archive cannot succeed without broad researcher support. Challenges related to human subjects review requirements, confidentiality protections, and disclosure risks must be fully explored and addressed. Other issues include challenges associated with the development and enforcement of quality control standards, rules and standards for data sharing, procedures to ensure that proper acknowledgment is given to project sponsors and principal investigators, and questions about long-term management of the archive.

Related to the need for better data archiving, sharing, and dissemination strategies, social scientists must be poised to take advantage of new capabilities for data integration and fusion. Strategies are needed to integrate social science data with other types of data collected by both pervasive in situ and mobile ad hoc sensor networks (Estrin et al., 2003), such as networks that collect data on environmental and ecological changes and disaster impacts. In light of the availability of such a wide array of data, the hazards and disasters research community must recognize that hazards and disaster informatics—the application of information science and technology to disaster research, education, and practice—is an emerging field.

To realize this potential, and with the foundation established through implementing recommendations in Chapter 7 , the committee further supports the creation of a Data Center for Social Science Research on Hazards and Disasters. In addition to maintaining the Disaster Data Archive, this center would conduct research on automated information extraction from data, including the development of efficient and effective methods for storing, querying, and maintaining both qualitative and quantitative data from disparate and heterogeneous sources.

Social science research conducted since the late 1970's has contributed greatly to society's ability to mitigate and adapt to natural, technological, and willful disasters. However, as evidenced by Hurricane Katrina, the Indian Ocean tsunami, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, and other recent events, hazards and disaster research and its application could be improved greatly. In particular, more studies should be pursued that compare how the characteristics of different types of events—including predictability, forewarning, magnitude, and duration of impact—affect societal vulnerability and response. This book includes more than thirty recommendations for the hazards and disaster community.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

How it works

Useful Links

How much will your dissertation cost?

Have an expert academic write your dissertation paper!

Dissertation Services

Get unlimited topic ideas and a dissertation plan for just £45.00

Order topics and plan

Get 1 free topic in your area of study with aim and justification

Yes I want the free topic

29 Best Disaster Management Topic Ideas

Published by Owen Ingram at December 29th, 2022 , Revised On October 10, 2023

Disasters can potentially be quite dangerous to the continued existence of humans on Earth. Therefore, it is crucial to develop fresh, cutting-edge approaches to managing the damage caused by natural disasters. Dissertation themes on disaster management cover all the tactics, policies, and plans relating to disaster management. In addition, evaluating disasters and their effects on various populations is another important area for disaster management research.

If you are looking for specific, focused and relevant disaster management thesis ideas, your search is over. We have provided a great selection of disaster management topics below for your consideration.

Intriguing Disaster Management Topics & Ideas

A thorough examination of occupational therapists’ contributions to disaster management.
An analytical investigation of how disaster management can help flood victims remain resilient.
Relationships between community-based organizations in managing regional disasters.
Managing the Arsenic Disaster in Water Supply: Risk Assessment, Medical Costs, and Bangladeshi Policy Options.
Comparison of the Chinese and Turkish disaster management programs, with recommendations.
Setting Up Disaster Resilience Indicators for Taiwan’s Tan-SUI River Basin.
An analysis of how food aid affects the growth of schooling.
An evaluation of the damaging effects of flooding and methods to prevent the calamity.
An explanation Examining the part weather radar plays in catastrophe management procedures.
Analysis of how catastrophe management policies and techniques compare ethically.
Analysis of Potential Large-Scale Natural Disasters: A Case Study of Wenzhou City, China
Information technology’s potential benefits and drawbacks in the field of catastrophe management.
Effects of a comprehensive system of geospatial information services in disaster management.
An evaluation of the connection between cultural diversity and readiness for disasters
Issues with the cyclone disaster management system and proposed fixes.
How do big data computing and social sensing maintain catastrophe management? A systematic approach.
A comparison of developed and developing countries approaches to catastrophe management.
The part social workers play in X country’s disaster management programs.
An evaluation of risk management techniques aimed at boosting food security
Disaster management decision-making processes: how are emergencies handled?
A descriptive approach to disaster management systems for people with disabilities.
Extreme Natural Event Mitigation: A Study of the Latin American National Disaster Funds.
A survey of the literature on the role performed by drone applications in disaster management systems.
Philippines Natural Disaster Risk Management: Reducing Vulnerability.
Ensure sustainable hazard mitigation through community planning, public involvement, and disaster management.
A thorough investigation of money and technology’s role in keeping a disaster management organization operational.
Disaster Vulnerability and Evacuation Readiness: Floridians living in coastal mobile homes.
A Critical Perspective on the Relationships Between Natural Disasters, Humanitarian Aid, and Disaster Risk Reduction.
Findings from a Field Survey in Post-Earthquake Nepal on Natural Disaster Damages and Their Relationship to Coping Strategy Choices.

Final Words

There you go. Use or get inspired by our list of top trending dissertation topics on disaster management to kickstart your dissertation writing . Make sure to research your topic well and pass some ideas to your supervisor before you begin writing. If you are still having trouble deciding on a suitable topic and moving on with the proposal, you can get professional help from our topic and outline services available online. Start writing!

Frequently Asked Questions

List down the best disaster management topic ideas.

1. “Effective Community Evacuation Plans” 2. “Cybersecurity in Disaster Preparedness” 3. “Climate Change Resilience Strategies” 4. “Role of AI in Disaster Response” 5. “Sustainable Rebuilding After Disasters”

Free Dissertation Topic

Phone Number

Academic Level Select Academic Level Undergraduate Graduate PHD

Academic Subject

Area of Research

Search for dissertations about: "disaster management"

Showing result 1 - 5 of 62 swedish dissertations containing the words disaster management .

1. Centralized Disaster Management Collaboration in Turkey

Author : Helena Hermansson ; Daniel Nohrstedt ; Charles Parker ; Annica Sandström ; Uppsala universitet ; [] Keywords : SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP ; SOCIAL SCIENCES ; collaboration ; disaster management ; collaborative disaster management ; cross-sector collaboration ; trust ; power balance ; legitimacy ; integration ; local knowledge ; local actors ; civil society ; interdependence ; pre-existing relations ; political affiliation ; natural disaster ; disaster response ; damage assessment ; aid distribution ; search and rescue ; decentralization ; central-local collaboration ; political-administrative system ; Turkey ; Van ; Erciş ; Statskunskap ; Political Science ; Statsvetenskap med inriktning mot krishantering och internationell samverkan ;

Abstract : Following unprecedented earthquakes in 1999, highly centralized Turkey initiated reforms that aimed to improve disaster management collaboration and to empower local authorities. In 2011, two earthquakes hit the country anew affecting the city of Van and town of Erciş in Turkey’s southeast. READ MORE

2. Sustainability of Social Housing in the Urban Tropics: A Holistic Development Process for Bamboo-Based Construction

Author : Corinna Salzer ; Chalmers tekniska högskola ; [] Keywords : TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP ; SOCIAL SCIENCES ; TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; NATURVETENSKAP ; NATURAL SCIENCES ; Philippines ; Sustainability assessment of buildings ; Social housing ; Life Cycle Assessment ; Bamboo ; Climate change mitigation and adaptation ; Disaster Risk Reduction ; Technology Development ;

Abstract : This thesis is motivated by a tremendous need for more inclusive, sustainable and disaster resistant social housing in rapidly developing countries such as the Philippines. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the New Urban Agenda name the use of local raw materials as one area for action. READ MORE

3. Behind the Charts - Exploring Conditions for High Level Emergency Response Management in a Complex Environment

Author : Christian Uhr ; Avdelningen för Brandteknik ; [] Keywords : TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; krishantering ; ledning ; trust ; social networkanalysis ; complex adaptive systems ; emergency response management ; crisis management ; emergency management ; disaster management ; respons ; responssystem ; ledningssystem ; nätverk ; förtroende ;

Abstract : The thesis uses, as a starting point for a discussion of emergency response management, the problem of gradual coordinated adaptation of management functions in relation to an event and its dynamics. Empirical observations and analyses carried out in the research project show that important problemsolving processes not included in, and sometimes diverging from, planning and preparations frequently occur. READ MORE

4. Improving disaster response evaluations : Supporting advances in disaster risk management through the enhancement of response evaluation usefulness

Author : Ralf Josef Johanna Beerens ; Avdelningen för Riskhantering och Samhällssäkerhet ; [] Keywords : TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP ; SOCIAL SCIENCES ; crisis ; disaster ; emergency ; disaster risk management DRM ; preparedness ; exercise ; simulation ; response ; performance ; evaluation ; usefullness ; design ; The Netherlands ;

Abstract : Future disasters or crises are difficult to predict and therefore hard to prepare for. However, while a specific event might not have happened, it can be simulated in an exercise. READ MORE

5. Improving emergency and disaster response management performance : A problem-solving perspective

Author : Tove Frykmer ; Avdelningen för Riskhantering och Samhällssäkerhet ; [] Keywords : TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; emergency ; disaster ; response management performance ; problem solving ; collective ;

Abstract : The purpose of this doctoral thesis is to investigate how collective emergency and disaster response management performance can be further improved. Based on four studies, this research contributes with knowledge in two areas.First, collective processes that might improve response management are investigated. READ MORE

Searchphrases right now

Surface Plasmon Resonance Imaging
Naturvetenskap Data- och informationsvetenskap
Feedback mechanism
PAPER COATING
Network density
Niche of species
Federico Rorro
Fecal microbiome
Oxide layer
barbro isaksson
Neural networks.
Fecal Incontinence

Popular dissertations yesterday (2024-04-11)

Glaucoma Characteristics and Risk Factors - Results from Malmö Eye Survey
Women´s health after childbirth
In-plane mechanical properties of birch plywood and its performance in adhesively bonded connections
Undermining Memory for the Experiences of Victims and Offenders: Implications for the Legal Arena
Beam mode : Modelling optical systematics in the search for CMB B-mode polarisation
The Politics of Legal Challenges to Pornography: Canada, Sweden, and the United States
Intrarenal oxygen homeostasis in acute and chronic kidney disease
Topics in Combinatorial Algebraic Geometry
Tourism Impacts and Sustainable Development
The science of imagining solutions : design becoming conscious of itself through design
Popular complementary terms: essays, phd thesis, master thesis, papers, importance, trend, impact, advantages, disadvantages, role of, example, case study.

See yesterday's most popular searches here . Dissertations.se is the english language version of Avhandlingar.se .

Bibliography
More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
Automated transliteration
Relevant bibliographies by topics
Referencing guides

Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Disaster management response'

Create a spot-on reference in apa, mla, chicago, harvard, and other styles.

Consult the top 50 dissertations / theses for your research on the topic 'Disaster management response.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse dissertations / theses on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

Saeed, Muhammad Rizwan. "A System for Disaster Response Process Management." Thesis, KTH, Skolan för informations- och kommunikationsteknik (ICT), 2012. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-90245.

Kovel, Jacob Paul. "Planning construction for disaster response." Diss., Georgia Institute of Technology, 1996. http://hdl.handle.net/1853/20690.

SILVA, DANIEL RICARDO ECKHARDT DA. "CONCEPTUAL PROPOSAL FOR A DISASTER RESPONSE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM." PONTIFÍCIA UNIVERSIDADE CATÓLICA DO RIO DE JANEIRO, 2015. http://www.maxwell.vrac.puc-rio.br/Busca_etds.php?strSecao=resultado&nrSeq=25642@1.

McCabe, John Michael Arnold Christopher J. "Parameters to facilitate the creation of initial response capsules for survivors of prodigious disasters." Auburn, Ala., 2006. http://hdl.handle.net/10415/1299.

Al-Dahash, H. F. "Evaluation of disaster response management in Iraq resulting from terrorism." Thesis, University of Salford, 2017. http://usir.salford.ac.uk/44197/.

Borkosheva, Nazgul. "Local Nonprofit and Government Organization Conceptualizations of Disaster Response Effectiveness." Thesis, North Dakota State University, 2013. https://hdl.handle.net/10365/27199.

Khunwishit, Somporn. "Community Resilience in Thailand: a Case Study of Flood Response in Nakhonsawan City Municipality." Thesis, University of North Texas, 2013. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc271841/.

Bong, Carine Kuo, and Joseph Bayiah Ngang. "The use of Information and Communication Technology in disaster management : The case of Cameroon." Thesis, Jönköping University, JIBS, Business Informatics, 2010. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-13235.

The frequency of natural disasters and its negative consequences in terms of the number of people killed, property destroyed and negative environmental impacts caused in the affected communities constitute one of the basic foundations and motivations for the development and use of ICT and other means of preventing as well as responding to disasters in the world today. This is simply because disaster management constitutes an important part of any developmental framework. Unfortunately a majority of these natural disasters occur in developing countries where information flow is greatly hampered because the national actors in disasters lack the skills to use ICT to prepare for and to response to disasters in their communities. Current study aims at studying the use of ICT in disaster management in Cameroon-a less developing country south of the Sahara

To achieve the aim of this study, a quantitative research approach was chosen. A total sample of 150 organisations was selected from a population of 285 organisations within Cameroon, that are directly or indirectly involved with disaster management or developmental issues of any nature. In total 150 questionnaires were administered to these selected national actors by mail, internet, telephone and self-administration and 85 of the organisations respondended to the questionnaire.

After collecting and analysing the data, the authors came to the conclusions that; disasters occur in Cameroon on frequent bases causing lots of damages thus the need for ICT use in humanitarian logistics to move information and material. Results showed that national actors use the radio and local TV (CRTV) for disaster preparedness and the mobile phone for disaster response, while the internet and computer techonology, foreign TV, Fixed phone and fax had a very low usage rate or sometimes not used at all. The reason for low usage or no usage was due to problems encountered by national actors in an attempt of trying to use them. Against this background, the authors suggested a number of recommendations that could improve the degree of ICT usage. One of them was that the Cameroon government should partner with private sector firms to make ICT infrastructure available by investing more and improving on the telecommunication sector in the country. This will solve the problem of poor ICT infrastructure, poor radio and TV signals, limited internet connectivity accessibility and availability in Cameroon.

LeClerc, Christina. "Are disaster response plans used during the initial phase of a disaster response| A case study of the implementation of the sheltering plan during Hurricane Sandy." Thesis, California State University, Long Beach, 2015. http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/#viewpdf?dispub=1587292.

This research examines the collaboration that took place between the American Red Cross and the City of New York in the development and dissemination prior to Hurricane Sandy, and looks at how that plan was implemented during the storm. It examines how the responsibility of government to care for its people influences response plans and how the government collaborates with non-profit agencies to care for those citizens in planning for and responding to disasters. The data for this research was collected through an online survey tool that was distributed to employees and volunteers of the American Red Cross, then compiled and analyzed. The results from the survey were utilized to understand how the disaster response plan was utilized and make recommendations for future responses.

Kabaka, Martha Nthambi. "Disaster preparedness and administrative capacity of the disaster risk management centre of the city of Cape Town." Thesis, University of the Western Cape, 2012. http://hdl.handle.net/11394/4096.

Kargbo, Abdulai Hassan. "An Approach to Dynamic Resource Allocation for Electric Power Disaster Response Management." Thesis, The George Washington University, 2018. http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/#viewpdf?dispub=10981665.

Electricity has become an invaluable commodity for the rest of humanity such that nations irrespective of their classification in the world economy will find it difficult to function without it’s reliable supply. For nations such as the United States and the rest of the developed world, sustainable electricity supply is no longer optional. It has become a race for survival and maintenance of the very fabrics of those societies that made them who or what they are. So, whenever there is a disruption of electricity supply due to major natural disasters, the electric utility industry in the United States marshal thousands of first responders. These first responders always answer to the call of duty to face the challenge of restoring this valuable service to affected communities within the shortest possible time. In addition to the human element, electric grid restoration methods after disasters have depended mainly on the ability of intelligent electronic devices (IEDs) to communicate vital grid information with each other for system status. At one end are field devices and at the other end are human operators through outage management systems (OMS) with considerable command and control capabilities using Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) processes. Traditional use of centralized SCADA for system restoration during natural disasters takes too long and presents serious constrains on field workforce especially those on mutual assistance. In this study, we present a hybrid multi agent system (MAS) form of electric grid disaster response management that decentralizes the SCADA functions. The proposed system forms a Mobile Coordination and Restoration Center (MCRC) model that allows the different restoration agents the autonomy to execute restoration functions per outage demand after a disaster. The choice of agent location is modelled on the concept of Facility Location and Relocation Problem – under Uncertainty (FLRP-U) to identify optimum grid nodes that minimize distance travel and response time for field restoration crews. The model considers a dynamic approach that identifies agent locations based on outage demand changes and minimizes the total weighted distance for first responders. Using systems engineering (SE) concepts, an encompassing viewpoint is presented. The resulting architecture will examine the different agents and subsystems to help establish a technical framework that is logistical for future electric utility disaster response managers. This could be adopted by disaster managers in different settings to achieve improved restoration performance.

Leshinsky, Eric L. "Prepared for disaster? Improving the Department of Defense's immediate response authority." Thesis, Monterey, Calif. : Naval Postgraduate School, 2006. http://bosun.nps.edu/uhtbin/hyperion.exe/06Dec%5FLeshinsky.pdf.

Matthews, Tami J. "Disaster communication networks : a case study of the Thai Red Cross and its disaster communication response to the Asian tsunami /." Diss., CLICK HERE for online access, 2006. http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/ETD/image/etd1661.pdf.

Carr, John Alexander. "Pre-Disaster Integration of Community Emergency Response Teams within Local Emergency Management Systems." Thesis, North Dakota State University, 2014. https://hdl.handle.net/10365/27332.

Laine, John Stanley. "Cultural Competence, Emergency Management, and Disaster Response and Recovery Efforts Among African Americans." ScholarWorks, 2016. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/2189.

Hermansson, Helena. "Centralized Disaster Management Collaboration in Turkey." Doctoral thesis, Uppsala universitet, Statsvetenskapliga institutionen, 2017. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-319273.

Mma, Stephanie Weiya. "Formulation of a parametric systems design framework for disaster response planning." Diss., Georgia Institute of Technology, 2011. http://hdl.handle.net/1853/42919.

Aswalap, Supaluk Joy O'Connor Brian C. "Tsunami disaster response a case analysis of the information society in Thailand /." [Denton, Tex.] : University of North Texas, 2009. http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc12075.

Brown, Bethany L. "Organizational response and recovery of domestic violence shelters in the aftermath of disaster." Access to citation, abstract and download form provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company; downloadable PDF file, 285 p, 2009. http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1818417601&sid=6&Fmt=2&clientId=8331&RQT=309&VName=PQD.

Nilupaer, Julaiti. "Utilization of Crowdsourcing and Volunteered Geographic Information in International Disaster Management." Miami University / OhioLINK, 2019. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=miami1574759318427083.

Catalino, Joseph. "The Impact of Federal Emergency Management Legislation on At-Risk and Vulnerable Populations for Disaster Preparedness and Response." ScholarWorks, 2015. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/572.

Gutierrez, Miguel. "Flexibility in Emergency Management: Exploring the Roles of Spontaneous Planning and Improvisation in Disaster Response." Thesis, University of North Texas, 2019. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1609078/.

Worthy, William Tuley. "Aligning Social Media, Mobile, Analytics, and Cloud Computing Technologies and Disaster Response." ScholarWorks, 2018. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4696.

Wilkinson, Kevin James. "More effective federal procurement response to disasters maximizing the extraordinary flexibilities of IDIQ contracting /." View thesis, 2006. http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA454285.

Aswalap, Supaluk Joy. "Tsunami disaster response: A case analysis of the information society in Thailand." Thesis, University of North Texas, 2009. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc12075/.

Ullah, Habib, and Goktug Gungor. "Comparative analysis of immediate response by national disaster management systems of the U.S., Pakistan, and Turkey." Thesis, Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/10945/42637.

Helsing, Joseph. "Validation and Evaluation of Emergency Response Plans through Agent-Based Modeling and Simulation." Thesis, University of North Texas, 2018. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1157648/.

Andersen, Sharri Suesette. "Assessment of Detroit Hospital Preparedness for Response to an Improvised Nuclear Attack." ScholarWorks, 2016. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/2634.

Khosa, Sana. "Examining multi-level and inter-organizational collaborative response to disasters: The case of Pakistan Floods in 2010." Doctoral diss., University of Central Florida, 2013. http://digital.library.ucf.edu/cdm/ref/collection/ETD/id/6302.

Noori, Nadia Saad. "Coordination Dynamics in Disaster Response Operations: A Network Based Discrete Event Analysis." Doctoral thesis, Universitat Ramon Llull, 2016. http://hdl.handle.net/10803/396129.

Pedroso, Frederico Ferreira Fonseca. "Dynamic Response Recovery Tool for Emergency Response within State Highway Organisations in New Zealand." Thesis, University of Canterbury. Dept of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering, 2010. http://hdl.handle.net/10092/4934.

Walker, Juliana M. "The military and domestic disaster response lead role revealed through the eye of Hurricane Katrina?" Thesis, Monterey, Calif. : Naval Postgraduate School, 2006. http://bosun.nps.edu/uhtbin/hyperion.exe/06Dec%5FWalker.pdf.

Yasumiishi, Misa. "Spatial and temporal analysis of human movements and applications for disaster response management| Using cell phone data." Thesis, State University of New York at Buffalo, 2015. http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/#viewpdf?dispub=1600848.

This survey study examines cell phone usage data and focuses on the application of the data to disaster response management. Through the course of this study, the structure of cell phone usage data and its characteristics will be reviewed. Cell phone usage data provides us with valuable information about human movements and their activities. The uniqueness of the data is that it contains both spatial and temporal information and this information is free of fixed routes such as roads or any preset data capturing timing. In short, it is a very fluid kind of data which reflects our activities as humans with freedom of movement. Depending on data extraction methods, the data server can provide additional information such as application activities, battery level and charge activities. However, cell phone usage data contains shortcomings including data inconsistency and sparseness. Both the richness and the shortcomings of the data expose the hurdles required in data processing and force us to devise new ways to analyze this kind of data. Once the data has been properly analyzed, the findings can be applied to our real life problems including disaster response. By understanding human movement patterns using cell phone usage data, we will be able to allocate limited emergency resources more adequately. Even more, when disaster victims lose their cell phone functionality during a disaster, we might be able to identify or predict the locations of victims or evacuees and supply them with necessary assistance. The results of this study provide some insights to cell phone usage data and human movement patterns including the concentration of cell phone activities in specific zones and rather universal cell phone charging patterns. The potential of the data as a movement analysis resource and the application to disaster response is apparent. As a base to leverage the study to the next level, a possible conceptual model of human movement factors and data processing methods will be presented.

Matthews, Tami J. "Disaster Communication Networks: A Case Study of the Thai Red Cross and Their Disaster Communication Response to the Asian Tsunami." BYU ScholarsArchive, 2006. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/1091.

Nourjou, Reza. "GIS-based Intelligent Assistant Agent for Supporting Decisions of Incident Commander in Disaster Response." 京都大学 (Kyoto University), 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/2433/188867.

Hughey, Erin P. "A Longitudinal Study: The Impact of a Comprehensive Emergency Management System on Disaster Response in The Commonwealth of The Bahamas." [Tampa, Fla] : University of South Florida, 2008. http://purl.fcla.edu/usf/dc/et/SFE0002743.

Beckman, Malin. "Resilient society, vulnerable people : a study of disaster response and recovery from floods in central Vietnam /." Uppsala : Dept. of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2006. http://epsilon.slu.se/2006115.pdf.

鍵屋, 一. "基礎自治体における防災・減災マネジメントの研究." 京都大学 (Kyoto University), 2015. http://hdl.handle.net/2433/198959.

Fogo, Wendy Renee. "University Disaster Preparedness: A Network Approach." Bowling Green, Ohio : Bowling Green State University, 2008. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc%5Fnum=bgsu1213399877.

Keith, Hamish D. "Disaster management and response : a lifelines study for the Queenstown Lakes District : a thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Hazard and Disaster Management in the University of Canterbury /." Thesis, University of Canterbury. Department of Geological Sciences, 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/10092/2563.

Edwards, Jennifer L. "Post-Disaster Climatology for Hurricanes and Tornadoes in the United States: 2000-2009." Kent State University / OhioLINK, 2013. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1366415657.

Remington, Christa L. "The Cultural Competence of Response & Recovery Workers in Post-Earthquake Haiti." FIU Digital Commons, 2017. http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/3455.

OLIVEIRA, Josué Petrônio Quirino de. "Palmares resiliente: a reconstrução do urbano após as enchentes de 2010/11." Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, 2015. https://repositorio.ufpe.br/handle/123456789/16495.

Hollis, Melanie. "Formulating Disaster Recovery Plans for New Zealand: using a case study of the 1931 Napier Earthquake." Thesis, University of Canterbury. Geological Sciences, 2007. http://hdl.handle.net/10092/1456.

Runesson, Elin. "Kommunal krishanteringsförmåga : Uppsala kommuns beredskap inför en eventuell naturkatastrof." Thesis, Uppsala universitet, Kulturgeografiska institutionen, 2015. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-244751.

Adams, Jennifer Ann. "Institutions of Higher EducationEmergency Management GrantResiliency?" University of Akron / OhioLINK, 2017. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=akron1514997283259817.

Baldwin, Brian. "The Role of Geographic Information Systems in Post-Disaster Neighborhood Recovery: Lessons from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita." ScholarWorks@UNO, 2010. http://scholarworks.uno.edu/td/1142.

Ayhan, Murat. "A Model-based Guidance And Vulnerability Assessment Approach For Facilities Under The Threat Of Multi-hazard Emergencies." Master's thesis, METU, 2012. http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12614534/index.pdf.

Gill, Glenda A. "Will a twenty-first century logistics management system improve Federal Emergency Management Agency's capability to deliver supplies to critical areas, during future catastrophic disaster relief operations?" Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College, 2007. http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA471327.

Chung, Alexander Quoc Huy. "Emergency Preparedness and Response Planning: A Value-Based Approach to Preparing Coastal Communities for Sea Level Rise." Thesis, Université d'Ottawa / University of Ottawa, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/10393/31446.

APUS Richard G. Trefry Archives | Home: Emergency and Disaster Management

Mission and Collection Development
Featured Exhibit
From the Archivist Blog
Research Requests
Documenting COVID-19 Experiences
Criminal Justice
Emergency and Disaster Management
Environmental Policy and Management
Homeland Security
Information Technology
Intelligence Studies
International Relations and Conflict Resolution
Legal Studies
Military History
Military Studies
National Security Studies
Political Science
Public Administration
Public Health
Security Management
Space Studies
Sports and Health Sciences
Transportation and Logistics Management
Digital Texts
University Journals
Westphalia Press

Emergency and Disaster Management Master's Capstone Theses

This list contains only those master’s capstone theses published within the emergency and disaster management program. for a complete list of apus master’s capstone thesis programs, visit this link ., browse by year of publication in the menu at left., emergency and disaster management program theses, emergency and disaster management program theses: 2016.

Airports and Catastrophes: Understanding Preparations for the Response Phase After Catastrophic Incidents Luke I.W. Balthazar Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: August 2016 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Michael R. Charter Abstract: The low income of Haiti and Nepal inherently make them more likely to experience a catastrophic incident compared to wealthy nations with robust emergency and disaster management capabilities. Both of these nations have experienced a catastrophic event in the last decade and the speed of the international responses were significantly different. Part of the difference in the response can be contributed to logistics and the ability of the affected nation to open their airports for international aid and first responders. Airports are vital to the response phase of catastrophic incidents because speed can mitigate impacts. This thesis analyzes the preparedness of Haiti’s Toussaint Louverture International Airport and Nepal’s Tribhuvan International Airport to support the influx of humanitarian aid during the response phase of the emergency management cycle, utilizing the 2010 Haiti earthquake and 2015 Nepal earthquake as case studies. It recommends that developed nations increase investments into the preparedness of airports of low income nations in order to set the environment necessary to quickly open the basic logistical support necessary for international aid and assistance to enter into the country. Globalization has ensured that catastrophes anywhere in the world impact every other nation in some way and it is on the international community to work together to mitigate these impacts.
Partners for the Future: Emergency Managment and Technology Alexandra L. Huston Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: May 2016 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Michael R. Charter Abstract: This research explores the relationship between emergency and disaster management and information technology. Information technology has the ability to improve the capabilities of emergency and disaster management, but has not been fully operationalized within the field. This research explores the information technology that holds potential to be applied to emergency and disaster management operations. The research examines the factors the influence the determination to utilize these technologies within the field to determine the influential determinants to adapt for the allowance of development and growth for information technology in emergency and disaster management.
The Impacts of Climate Change on the Field of Emergency Management Brian C. Newcomer Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: August 2016 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Robert Ditch Abstract: While the argument continues regarding the reasons behind climate change, the fact remains that the climate is indeed changing. These changes are projected to impact the frequency and intensity of storms in the future. This case study investigates current and predicted changes in the intensity of hurricanes, flooding, tornadoes, drought, and wildfires and how those changes affect the profession of emergency management. Specifically, current decision making regarding planning, mitigation, and adaptation is based on a historical perspective though many of those decisions have impact 50 – 100 years into the future. As natural disasters including hurricanes, tornadoes, drought, floods and wild fires increase in intensity and frequency due to anthropogenic climate change, they will exceed current protection methodologies in mitigation and adaptation thereby increasing vulnerability for people and property to future hurricanes, tornadoes, drought, floods, and wild fires. The tools and methods must be updated to incorporate future change as well as historic trends while policy makers and emergency management professionals need to incorporate potential changes in their decision making regarding planning, mitigation and adaptation. Failure to incorporate these changes may lead to more deaths and higher costs associated with more intense and more frequent storms in the future.
Improving Multijurisdictional Disaster Response Capabilities Dominica R. Ramirez Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: May 2016 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Randall Cuthbert Abstract: This research examines multijurisdictional response efforts for five different disasters that affected the state of Texas. A qualitative approach was used to identify common themes in these disaster responses where multijurisdictional training would have provided benefit. Examination of each response uncovered that despite the National Incident Management System, jurisdictions across Texas would benefit from a robust multijurisdictional training initiative to facilitate more effective response operations. Problems such as communication, command and control, mutual aid deficiencies, and self-deployments were apparent in almost every studied disaster. The areas for improvement identified in each disaster confirmed the hypothesis that mitigation of these response faults would best be served through multijurisdictional training efforts.
Crisis Management for Refugee Populations Lynn S. Solace Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: August 2016 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Michael Charter Abstract: The purpose of this research is to examine whether there is a need to introduce refugee populations to disaster preparedness and crisis management training after they resettle. Research was conducted to determine the legal and ethical aspects of disaster management, the effect of cultural and language barriers, the capability of community based organizations, and the need to address refugee trauma. Resilient communities start with acknowledging the individuals that make up the community and understanding their unique strengths and weaknesses in order to build relationships and plan for catastrophe. The conclusion of this research is that while disaster preparedness training is critical to everyone’s survival, special emphasis needs to be placed on societies’ most vulnerable populations to ensure their needs are addressed and plans are in place to fulfill those requirements if crisis occurs. The obligation is on the whole community to step up and assist through financial support of humanitarian organizations, volunteering to teach English, first aid, or job skills or ensuring that someone has a hot meal and a place to lay their head during an evacuation.

Emergency and Disaster Management Program Theses: 2015

Triage: Is it Time for an Update to Standards and Protocols? Michele A. Farris Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: August 2015 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Randall Cuthbert Abstract: The most recognized goal of any triage system is to do the greatest good for the greatest number of people, but is doing the greatest good leaving out an entire generation. The older population is aging and this will have far-reaching implications in the future regarding disaster triage goals if the current expectant categories of triage systems are not updated. A review of the available literature was analyzed and the findings validated the initial claim that the older population is significantly undertriaged and classified as unsalvageable based on chronological age. Additionally, triage system algorithms do not take into consideration the physiological changes in addition to the comorbidities that occur in the aging population. In order to mitigate this generation being ignored during mass casualty incidents in the triage phase, policymakers will need to implement an updated set of protocols that incorporate a new set of criteria aimed specifically at the older population. Unless these protocols are deemed a necessity in the near future, the result of the overall response effort will not be considered as doing the greatest good for the greatest number because at some point the greatest number of people will be the older population.
An Exposition of Social Vulnerability, Inequality and Disaster Management: Revisiting Hurricane Katrina Elizabeth A. Hughes Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: August 2015 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Randall Cuthbert Abstract: Socially vulnerable populations suffer greater losses and have more difficulties recovering when disasters occur. Hurricane Katrina, systems of social inequity, as well as the governments’ preparedness and response failures turned a natural disaster into a social catastrophe. This research seeks to understand the challenges faced by the elderly, impoverished, disabled, and minority communities before a disaster strikes so as to identify the means required by emergency planners to develop more effective and inclusive emergency operations plans. Hurricane Katrina exposed government failures at every level of mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. These critical flaws must be addressed so as to prevent similar catastrophic outcomes. The concluding section addresses recommendations the emergency management and disaster planning community must take to assist and protect special needs residents. Developing solutions and reducing gaps in emergency planning will save lives.
Urban Sinkholes: Are Our Communities Prepared for Them? Tamara L. Mann Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: November 2015 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Len Clark Abstract: The purpose of this research is to examine the theory that sinkhole events are a common problem, are increasing in frequency within the United States and resulting in costly damages, disrupted communities, and lost lives. Communities are ill prepared to deal with them or their aftermath. Remediation and mitigation costs range in the thousands, usually paid out-of-pocket as insurance coverage is not always available and, in some cases, only covers catastrophic losses. A mixed methods approach with a pragmatic worldview was used to evaluate data with the overarching goal to show that communities must be knowledgeable about sinkhole hazards in order to make informed decisions to better protect residents from their potentially devastating results. Sinkholes are natural phenomenons that under normal circumstances take many, even hundreds of years to development; human activities often accelerate that timeframe to just hours or days. As humans trigger up to three-quarters of all sinkholes, it is largely within our grasp to control factors that trigger the development of most sinkholes. Building long-term sustainable communities able to withstand sinkhole occurrences will require action by governmental authorities and others to develop policies and procedures that minimize the incidence and impact of sinkholes.
An Analysis of the Potential Benefits of Creating Specialized United Nations' Emergency Operations Centers in the Developing Countries Esther W. Ngotho Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: November 2015 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Randall Cuthbert Abstract: Three case studies from the developing parts of the world were investigated in an attempt to understand how each country’s capacity to respond to disaster is linked to its social, economic and political factors. Further, the examination of terrorism, spread of pandemics and global warming revealed that globalization has resulted into an interconnectedness that leads to spillover effects of disasters from one country to another, pointing to a need for the world to cooperate in international emergency management. Currently, the UN is the most suitable international body that can advance crises’ management in the world as a human right for all nations. It has the capacity to design and codify invaluable principles for responding to international disasters by offering voluntary membership to countries that meet predetermined conditions of participation for disaster relief programs. Obviously, the developing countries would benefit meaningfully from such operations if a way to even out wealth disparities between the rich and the poor nations was found, and a system for incorporating automatic request for international assistance once their national response plans became overloaded was devised. However, the structure and funding of these systems were issues that this study recommended for further research.
Emergency Plans: A Perception of Preparedness in Non-Public K-8 Schools Bobbi Jo Nye Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: February 2015 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Christina Spoons Abstract: This research examines state and local requirements for 25 non-public K-8 schools in the identified counties of West Virginia, Virginia, and Maryland to have emergency plans that meet the federal recommended guidelines for comprehensive emergency management planning. A mixed methods approach using a web enabled survey instrument developed and used to determine school plan comprehensiveness. The researcher used the same survey instrument to perform a comparative analysis for a sample of public schools in the same counties and states. To gain total plan value to verify if the school plan met the comprehensive definition, the researcher developed a matrix to quantitatively analyze the data. Examination of state statute concluded ambiguous verbiage relating to what schools should develop school emergency plans; only one state specifically included non-public schools in its legislature. Hypothesis one states if there is no requirement to have emergency plans in place, non-public schools have not developed comprehensive plans. This proved inconclusive due to minimal participation by non-public schools. Hypothesis two stated if non-public schools are required to have emergency plans, these schools do not follow perspective state statute and federal recommended emergency planning guidelines for schools (2013). This proved correct for the non-public schools that responded.
Preparedness and Vulnerability of Hospital and Healthcare Systems in Biological and Pandemic Incidents Krista M. Sobecki Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: August 2015 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Randall Cuthbert Abstract: Throughout history, biological and pandemic outbreaks have plagued the global population. In recent history, the fear of a bioterrorism event has become even more prevalent. Because of events such as the anthrax attacks following September 11th, and even more recently with the Ebola outbreak, preparedness and vulnerability of the population to these biological agents has become an even bigger priority. On the front lines of the fight to combat these biological agents are the hospital and healthcare systems of the United States. The ability of hospitals and healthcare systems to prepare for and respond to a biological weapons or a pandemic incident may be the difference between life and death for a large number of the population. This paper will examine the current state of preparedness and vulnerability of hospital and healthcare systems in the in the Western Pennsylvania region. Research consisted of qualitative analysis of past and current regulations regarding preparedness for biological events, case studies of past events, and review of academic journals, media reports, and government resources. Research shows that the threat of bioterrorism and pandemic events remains a serious threat. While the probability of bioterrorism and mass pandemic outbreaks may be low, the risk and potential consequences should it occur is far too high to not be prepared for the incident. However, results show that there will be many obstacles and challenges to overcome in order to ensure that hospital and healthcare systems are fully prepared to respond to the threat of bioterrorism and pandemic events. These challenges must be met and overcome in order to guarantee that safety of patients and victims.
Cell Phone Technology and Big Data Applications in Emergency Evacuations Paul R. Van Reed Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: May 2015 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Christina Spoons Abstract: This research examines the viability of cell phone tracking to enhancing emergency manager’s situational awareness of compliance with evacuations orders and using big data analytics for the purpose of identifying special populations. Cell phone tracking and big data analytics are emerging technologies and can be seen as complementary to one another. Therefore, this research will consider the two technologies together for applicability to emergency evacuations. The research methodology is a ground theory qualitative strategy as it provides the best approach to examine the complex behavioral response to real world evacuation events in the social, political and legal context. There is strong evidence that both cell phone tracking and big data analytics would afford emergency managers valuable insight to evacuate response dynamics and enhanced information on special population. The research also makes clear that the necessary legal foundation for the use of these technologies by emergency managers for evacuations is lacking. There are no clear statutory or regulatory foundations for using such technologies. Therefore, despite the potential practical value the technologies offer, the absence of legal support for use places both technologies outside the emergency manager’s evacuation toolbox.
The Necessity for the Implementation of Basic Emergency Management Courses into the High School Setting Cassandra J. White Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: November 2015 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Michael Charter Abstract: The purpose of this research is to identify and validate the importance of employing the instruction of basic emergency management principles into the high school setting. Research was conducted comparison between current emergency management practices and the Common Core Standards for Educators. Findings include a vast lacking of emergency management principles in the public school curriculum. The capability to implement emergency management principles into the student curriculum while maintaining the integrity of the common core standards is a capability unique to the career field. The research conclusion is that through the addition of EM principles, the local community and students will be better prepared to handle and respond to natural and man-made disasters.
Gender Impact of Climate Change in Nigeria Teresa C. Wilmoth Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: August 2015 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Randall Cuthbert Abstract: The world is experiencing a phenomenon called climate change. Climate change and its effects are found on every continent on the planet. Climate change affects men and women differently, depending upon the socio-economic status of the individual. The Niger Delta is the economic core of Nigeria. Men are treated differently than women in Nigeria which correlates as to how each gender deals with climate change. The purpose of the research was to discover whether or not climate change has a gendered quality. The selected strategy of inquiry used in this paper is the qualitative, archival analysis design method. The findings in the body of this paper support that climate change does affect women differently than men. Work is being conducted in the international community attempting to alter the gendered face of climate change. Women are being empowered around the globe in order to make their voices heard in the climate change arena.

Emergency and Disaster Management Program Theses: 2014

Emergency Vehicle LED Lighting: Friend or Foe? Matthew Smith Bright Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: August 2014 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Christi Scott Bartman Abstract: LED emergency lights are one of the newest tools emergency responders are using to be visible. These lights are not without concern however. The purpose of this research is to address the primary question: Does the use of LED lighting on emergency vehicles contribute to secondary or subsequent collisions at accident scenes? Literature was reviewed on the topics of emergency vehicle and worker conspicuity, lighting color and flash patterns for emergency lighting, and driver distraction. Secondary research questions answered were: 1) What is the prevalence (both before and after LED) of secondary or subsequent accidents during emergency response activities? 2) How does LED lighting affect driver perception during nighttime and inclement weather? 3) What is the relationship between driver perception of an accident and their subsequent reaction? Research was then contrasted with the reviewed literature and recommendations were made including: adding emergency vehicle specific elements to nationwide uniform crash reporting, future research for LED lighting level standards, and manufacturer standard for auto-dimming LED emergency lights.
Legislative and Policy Issues Hindering Resilience of Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources against Cyber Threats Jesse A. Magenheimer Program: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: June 2014 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Christina Spoons Abstract: This research addresses the importance of cybersecurity resilience for critical infrastructure and key resources for emergency managers in their communities. The issue is framed by the relevance for practitioners, the challenging legal and policy landscape, and the criticality of the public-private sector dynamic in achieving greater resilience against cyber threats. Leveraging a qualitative research methodology, the findings and recommendations affirm the salience of the topic for emergency managers. Incongruent policy and legislation coupled with insufficient collaboration between the public sector and private sector owners of critical infrastructure requires emergency managers to draw upon their knowledge, skills, and abilities as they seek to address the issue in their planning and preparedness efforts.
The Necessity of a Social Media Unit in the Incident Command System Structure Blair Anthony Scholl Program: Criminal Justice: Capstone-Thesis: Emergency and Disaster Management: Capstone-Thesis: Master of Arts (MA) Awarded: May 2014 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Robert O. Dawkins Abstract: Recent research has revealed that global warming is increasing and is leading to an increase in disaster frequency, which places more people at risk to the effects of disasters. The use of social media, as well as social media platforms and technologies, has increased as well. This paper demonstrates that a social media unit should be created within the Incident Command System structure in order to leverage the vast amount of social media data and avoid data management concerns during disasters. This unit should be created within the Planning Section to avoid chain of command issues and streamline information sharing. This study utilizes case studies to show how various social media platforms are being used as well as government documents to show how the Incident Command System is being employed.
<< Previous: Criminal Justice
Next: Environmental Policy and Management >>
Last Updated: Apr 11, 2024 7:38 AM
URL: https://apus.libguides.com/apusuahome

Landslide risk management: from hazard to disaster risk reduction

Published: 31 August 2023
Volume 20 , pages 2031–2037, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

Irasema Alcántara-Ayala ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0794-1201 1 &
Kyoji Sassa 2

2971 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Integrated disaster risk management is crucial in reducing landslide risk. The International Consortium on Landslides has launched several initiatives to enhance research and practice in landslide risk management, including the Tokyo Action Plan 2006, the ISDR-ICL Sendai Partnerships 2015–2025, and the Kyoto Landslide Commitment 2020. This article presents a collection of papers covering various aspects of landslide research and disaster risk management across diverse scales and regions worldwide. To effectively manage landslide disaster risk, it is essential to have a solid understanding of disaster risk and foster a sustained collaboration between science and policy-making to strengthen disaster risk governance. The ICL is dedicated to this mission, and by working together, its members and partners can contribute to the comprehension, reduction, and mitigation of landslide disaster risk globally.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

The collection of papers titled “Landslide risk management: from hazard to disaster risk reduction” is a virtual thematic issue covering various aspects of landslide research to manage disaster risks on diverse scales. This includes 20 articles published between 2005 and 2023 addressing global and specific concerns about managing landslide disaster risk. These include those issues of interest reflected by the International Consortium on Landslides’ (ICL) key initiatives to reduce disaster risk.

There has been international consideration regarding the impact of landslides worldwide. Consequently, global landslide and avalanche hotspots were created to identify developing countries most at risk for landslides and avalanches, using climate, lithology, earthquake activity, and topography data. The resulting model scaled the hazard index into nine levels and used global population data to assess risk. However, their application may not accurately reflect local conditions, so further investigation is necessary before using or interpreting the results for specific national circumstances (Nadim et al. 2006 ). This has led to the developing of national strategies to understand disaster risk, which involve challenges associated with landslide occurrence at the national level, particularly in mountain regions.

In Switzerland, for example, approximately 6% of the land is susceptible to slope instability. Since a long time ago, the Swiss government has been working to manage natural hazards like avalanches, floods, and landslides. With population growth and climate change, the risk is increasing. Authorities use zoning laws and hazard maps to manage landslide disaster risk and prevent hazardous land development. These maps use colors to indicate restricted construction areas with safety requirements and areas without restrictions. Communication with locals may raise disagreements. Nonetheless, with community approval, strict policies can reduce landslide risks (Lateltin et al. 2005 ).

Similarly, although landslide disasters are rare in the UK, they cause over £10 million in financial losses annually. A management framework was built on managing small and larger landslides affecting urban areas. Case studies identified three key issues: lack of evidence, the need to evaluate guidance, and the significance of near misses. Local response effectively manages small landslides, while emergency services respond promptly and efficiently to larger landslides. However, it was possible to identify that a lack of data and understanding of near misses pose risks. Investment in geohazard databases, specific planning guidance, accounting for near misses, and more case studies are still needed (Gibson et al. 2013 ). This goes hand in hand with the availability and allocation of resources.

Klimeš et al. ( 2017 ) suggested a more comprehensive landslide risk assessment in the Czech Republic due to uneven government spending. They proposed using the term “low-risk environment” to understand public perception better. Additionally, they recommended calculating the frequency of potentially fatal landslides using near-miss events and raising public awareness of the risks. Accurately assessing the likelihood of landslides’ impact on people or traffic is crucial for effective risk management.

Raška ( 2019 ) studied the history of community-based landslide disaster risk reduction in NW Czechia by analyzing a database of 230 events from 1531 to 2019. The study examined institutional and social conditions, the number of events, triggers, impacts, and recovery processes for five historical periods. From this analysis, a hybrid model was developed which combines traditional and newly established practices. This means that community engagement in landslide disaster risk reduction should consider the region’s environmental, institutional, social, and technological factors, as well as the unique conceptualizations of the community that enable productive engagement. The study recommends further attention to community engagement approaches and regularly re-evaluating traditional perspectives. Furthermore, interdisciplinary studies should address long-term path dependencies and cross-cultural variations in community engagement within landslide disaster risk reduction in specific settings.

By understanding how hazards change over time, information from past events can be used to deal with current hazards. Sassa et al. ( 2016 ) created a numerical model that can simulate the development of tsunamis caused by landslides. This model was tested using data from the Unzen-Mayuyama disaster in Japan in 1792, and the simulated tsunami heights matched the recorded heights at the coast. This information was documented by “Tsunami-Dome-Ishi,” a stone that marks where the tsunami reached and memorial stone pillars and can be applied to similar scenarios (Fig. 1 ).

Impact of Landslides-1792 Unzen-Mayuyama landslides and tsunami disaster (source: Sassa et al. 2016 )

Hong Kong is another country that faces landslide risk. Since the late 1940s, it has experienced over 470 deaths due to severe landslides. This is due to the city’s hilly terrain, seasonal rainfall, and urban development. A holistic approach to risk management is required to address the impact of climate change. The slope safety system is an example of using engineering and non-engineering methods to manage landslide risk and build a smart city in Hong Kong. The strategy involves a central authority overseeing slope design and construction, research and development, geotechnical standards, slope upgrades, regular maintenance, a landslide warning system, public education, and innovation. These efforts have significantly decreased the number of landslide fatalities in Hong Kong. However, climate change and extreme rainfall remain challenges for the future (Cheung 2021 ).

The Geotechnical Engineering Office established a Slope Safety System in 1977 to address this. The system has effectively reduced landslide risk using various strategies and has been continuously improved to enhance emergency preparedness. Technical developments in landslide risk management, early warning, and emergency systems aim to improve the system’s resilience against extreme rainfall events caused by climate change. The Slope Safety System in Hong Kong has successfully managed the risk of landslides for many years. Although it is impossible to eliminate this risk completely, proactive steps have taken place to enhance the system for the future (Pun et al. 2020 ). This includes Hong Kong’s Landslip Warning System (LWS), which covers the entire territory and has been upgraded multiple times since its launch in 1977. The LWS continuously increases the number of rain gauges and uses the Internet of Things (IoT) and cloud computing to withstand extreme weather conditions. Along with slope upgrading and geotechnical control, the system has reduced injuries, loss of lives, and landslide damage. Accurate data and regular upgrades are necessary for reliable prediction models, and multi-level warning systems provide ample time for emergency preparedness. The LWS must remain resilient and use technological advancements (Kong et al. 2020 ).

ICL is focused on improving collaboration among its members, which is one of its most valuable contributions. In 2009, a catastrophic landslide occurred in the Peruvian Andes, and scientists and community members worked together on a disaster risk reduction project. Not only did they undertake hazard mapping and landslide monitoring but they also emphasized the importance of identifying stakeholder roles accurately and implementing effective risk communication strategies. To understand the community’s needs and opinions, it was crucial to have effective communication between external experts and community leaders. Therefore, a cultural paradigm shift in DRR is necessary to build stakeholders’ trust and ensure the project’s scientific basis (Klimeš et al. 2019 ).

Along this vein, Czech Republic and Peru experts have long worked to monitor slope movements at Machu Picchu. They installed a network of instruments that adhered to site protection requirements and showed no major hazards. Tourist access to Intiwatana Hill has been limited since 2019. Historical photos from the 1940s were also analyzed, showing that Inca structures have not been affected by damaging processes. This successful collaboration between the Czech World Centre of Excellence on Landslide Risk Reduction and managers of the National Archaeological Park of Machu Picchu has led to low-cost and environmentally friendly hazard management, which comprised the use of portable extensometers and dilatometric measurements of low-impact and eco-friendly monitoring. These devices are strong, precise, and eliminate the need for permanent on-site installations. Sustained future cooperation between both parties will benefit research and conservation efforts (Vilímek et al. 2020 ).

Analysis of disaster drivers and hazard dynamics should be considered to reduce landslide disaster risk. In this regard, a study by Cui et al. ( 2019 ) expressed concern about a debris slide, flow, and flood that resulted in over 500 fatalities and the destruction of hundreds of homes in Freetown, Sierra Leone. The researchers emphasized that urbanization has led to hazardous conditions that cause loss of life, property damage, and environmental harm. The lack of proper risk assessment during urban planning has worsened the situation. Informal settlements and slums are particularly vulnerable due to low-quality buildings. Early warning systems, emergency plans, education, and community participation are necessary to minimize the risk of disasters.

On that note, Hostettler et al. ( 2019 ) evaluated the effectiveness of community-based soil-bioengineering techniques in mitigating shallow landslide events. The Red Cross worked with local communities in Honduras to stabilize 230 landslide hazard sites using bioengineering measures, a cost-effective technology that offers multiple benefits to landowners. Through this initiative, it was possible to recognize the importance of empowering communities to take responsibility for their own future by building self-confidence. Thus, participatory approaches are essential for sustainable, long-term transformative change and risk reduction.

In like manner, it should be noted that current efforts to reduce vulnerability to natural hazards like landslides are inadequate, and more investment in disaster risk reduction is needed. More investment in disaster risk reduction is necessary to mitigate the insufficient impact of natural disasters like landslides. Maes et al. ( 2019 ) proposed a social multi-criteria evaluation participatory methodology to identify effective DRR measures based on stakeholder groups’ perceptions. Stakeholder acceptability is prioritized over cost, feasibility, and effectiveness. SMCE can facilitate discussions and aid in developing long-term strategies for reducing landslide risks closely tied to how landslides are perceived.

In their research, Hernández-Moreno and Alcántara-Ayala ( 2017 ) emphasized that understanding potential disaster risks is crucial for building resilient communities. Psychological numbness and effectively communicating hazards and risk management must be overcome to prevent future disasters. Likewise, disaster response plans must consider short, medium, and long-term impacts on affected populations and the environment. Furthermore, resilience can be built by promoting disaster risk management as an opportunity for community and family development. Evaluating risk perception and vulnerability can help improve future disaster risk management.

The participation of various actors should not be neglected to manage disaster risk from an integrated perspective. This is one of the endeavors that ICL has been supporting for a long time. For instance, experts from various countries gathered in Harbin City, China, for an academic conference on landslides. Transportation authorities, government officials from Heilongjiang Province and Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, and teachers and students from Chinese universities and research institutes also attended. The event was co-organized by the Northeast Forestry University of China and the State Key Laboratory of Frozen Soil Engineering and co-sponsored by multiple organizations (Guo et al. 2019 ).

Cooperating with all parties is essential to effectively carry out the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) at all levels. Developing nations require improved training and education on reducing the risks of landslides. To address this need, ICL has developed a set of teaching materials that can benefit university students, government officials, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the general public. These resources offer practical guidance for teaching the skills and knowledge necessary for landslide risk reduction (He et al. 2014 ).

Along those lines, Matsuoka and Gonzales Rocha ( 2020 ) emphasized the importance of collaboration in building resilient communities and nations for sustainable development. Therefore, disaster risk reduction is essential, and the Sendai Framework Voluntary Commitments online platform monitors progress and showcases the work of all stakeholders. This platform provides an opportunity to identify oversights and opportunities for improvement. Recent data from the platform revealed that landslides are the third most covered hazard, focusing on capacity development, risk management, and community-based DRR. Increased partnerships and innovative technology solutions are needed to address these challenges effectively. Joint action from all stakeholders is necessary to implement the Sendai Framework successfully. Nonetheless, progress in the implementation relies on the commitment of national governments.

Bhuiyan and colleagues ( 2023 ) analyzed landslide databases in relation to the SFDRR indicators. They also evaluated the availability of damage data and assessed the compatibility of current data collection practices with SFDRR guidelines. Furthermore, the feasibility of using existing data to estimate landslide costs was examined. Their study unveiled insufficient damage data in existing national databases and identified gaps in current landslide data management practices in Malaysia.

The International Consortium on Landslides drives global research and disaster risk reduction (Fig. 2 ). Through the implementation of the Sendai Landslide Partnerships 2015–2025 and the Kyoto Landslide Commitment 2020, ICL has brought together various scientific communities to participate in global agendas and promote knowledge sharing. ICL’s commitment to building capacity, particularly in developing countries, is a testament to its dedication to making a positive impact. By bridging the gap between science and policy-making, the ICL equips its members to interact with policymakers and build trust with other major stakeholders in landslide DRR (Alcántara-Ayala and Sassa 2021 ).

Timeline of the UN international strategies concerning DRR and the initiatives promoted by the ICL (source: modified from Alcántara-Ayala and Sassa 2021 )

To effectively manage the risk of landslide disasters, ICL develops three key cornerstones. These include the Tokyo Action Plan, the ISDR-ICL Sendai Partnerships, and the Kyoto Landslide Commitment 2020.

In 2006, the Tokyo Action Plan, “Strengthening research and learning on landslide and related earth system disasters for global risk preparedness,” was adopted at the United Nations University in Tokyo, Japan. The actions proposed in the Plan include organizing the World Landslide Forum, identifying World Centres of Excellence on Landslide Risk Reduction, and establishing the IPL Global Promotion Committee to manage the International Programme on Landslides. The IPL supports disaster risk reduction efforts made by the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR), which is currently known as the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) (Sassa 2006 ).

The ISDR-ICL Sendai Partnerships were established during the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai, Japan, in 2015. These partnerships aim to reduce landslide disasters and align with the SFDRR. The partnerships support all four priorities of the SFDRR, including understanding disaster risks, strengthening disaster risk governance, investing in disaster risk reduction, and enhancing disaster preparedness. The ICL, a core activity of the Sendai Partnerships, produces Landslide Dynamics: ISDR-ICL Landslide Interactive Teaching Tools (Sassa 2015 ).

On November 5, 2020, the Kyoto Landslide Commitment 2020 (KLC2020) was adopted. This commitment aligns with the ISDR-ICL Sendai Partnerships 2015–2025, the SFDRR, the 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goals, the New Urban Agenda, and the Paris Climate Agreement. The 2020 Kyoto Declaration was launched on the same day. Additional signatories were later approved by the General Conference at the Fifth World Landslide Forum in Kyoto, Japan, on November 2–6, 2021. The KLC2020 comprises 10 priority actions aimed at research and capacity-building activities, and it is expected to continue until 2030, as stated by Sassa ( 2021 ) and Sassa et al. ( 2021 ) (Table 1 ).

In an effort to provide scientific evidence for landslide disaster risk management, the ICL is publishing the “Progress in landslide research and technology” Open Access book series (Sassa et al. 2023 ; Alcántara-Ayala et al. 2023a , b ). This series is a valuable platform for the latest advancements in landslide research and technology, which can be applied in practical settings to benefit society. Additionally, it contributes to the KLC 2020 and promotes global understanding and the reduction of landslide disaster risk in line with the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda.

Thanks to ongoing collaboration with its members and partners, the ICL has successfully bolstered landslide disaster risk management capabilities at the international, regional, national, and local levels. The strides in landslide research and practice have been fruitful, fostering a greater understanding of landslide disaster risk by bringing together diverse disciplines and stakeholders.

Concluding remarks

The Landslides Journal contains numerous papers on landslide hazard dynamics and topics related to risk management. This virtual issue has been carefully curated to showcase articles that provide valuable insights into the relationship between landslide research and practices required for disaster risk management. These thought-provoking pieces delve into various related topics, offering a comprehensive and informative look at the challenges facing those tasked with reducing landslide disaster risks.

Besides hazard dynamics, landslide disaster risk drivers can be attributed to population growth, poverty, inequality, urbanization, environmental degradation, climate change, and the increased use of land and resources for profitable activities. The risk of landslides is also increased by urban sprawl and expensive housing or tourist spots on unstable slopes.

Climate change is expected to exacerbate the intensity and frequency of precipitation and temperature extremes, thereby intensifying the vulnerability and exposure of people in areas susceptible to landslides. This, in turn, will significantly impact diverse regions and may influence and trigger landslides. Extreme drought, wildfires, and snow melting will contribute to slope instability by inducing increased runoff due to changes in hydrological processes, vegetation, and ground cover removal, which reduces soil infiltration capacity and increases soil erosion. Likewise, floods will favor slope undercutting and landslide occurrence.

Disasters triggered by landslides can have serious consequences, including loss of life, property damage, environmental destruction, and harm to livelihoods. To manage landslide disaster risk, the participation of a range of stakeholders and taking an integrated disaster risk approach is necessary. This involves a complex process aiming at predicting, reducing, and permanently controlling landslide disaster risk drivers while aiming for sustainable human, economic, and environmental development.

Dynamic landslide inventories are fundamental for mapping landslide susceptibility, hazard, and risk. By leveraging this information, stakeholders can better assess and manage the potential impact of landslides on public safety and infrastructure. Understanding the geological, geomorphological, environmental, and social factors contributing to landslides is essential for developing effective mitigation strategies. Therefore, sustained collaboration between science and policy-making is critical to managing landslide disaster risks.

The promptness and implementation of such endeavors will strengthen disaster risk governance and ensure better preparation and prevention measures. The ICL is committed to this cause, and together all its members and partners can make a difference in understanding, mitigating, and reducing landslide disaster risk around the world.

Alcántara-Ayala I, Arbanas Ž, Cuomo S, Huntley D, Konagai K, Mihalić Arbanas S, Mikoš M, Sassa K, Sassa S, Tang H, Tiwari B (Eds.) (2023b) Progress in landslide research and technology, Volume 2 Issue 1, 2023. Springer Nature, 570 p

Alcántara-Ayala I, Arbanas Ž, Huntley D, Konagai K, Mikoš M, Sassa K, Sassa S, Tang H, Tiwari B (Eds.) (2023a) Progress in landslide research and technology, Volume 1 Issue 2, 2022. Springer Nature, 475 p

Alcántara-Ayala I, Sassa K (2021) Contribution of the International Consortium on Landslides to the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction: engraining to the Science and Technology Roadmap. Landslides 18(1):21–29

Article Google Scholar

Bhuiyan TR, Muhamad N, Lim CS, Choy EA, Pereira JJ (2023) Assessing damage data availability in national landslide databases for SFDRR reporting: a case study of Kuala Lumpur as a local-level application. Landslides, 1–20

Cheung RW (2021) Landslide risk management in Hong Kong. Landslides 18(10):3457–3473

Cui Y, Cheng D, Choi CE, Jin W, Lei Y, Kargel JS (2019) The cost of rapid and haphazard urbanization: lessons learned from the Freetown landslide disaster. Landslides 16:1167–1176

Gibson AD, Culshaw MG, Dashwood C, Pennington CVL (2013) Landslide management in the UK—the problem of managing hazards in a ‘low-risk’environment. Landslides 10:599–610

Guo Y, Zhang C, Han Q, Shan W (2019) Seminar on “Engineering and environmental geology in the permafrost region along the Sino-Russian-Mongolian Economic Corridor under the background of climate change” and the Annual Academic Conference of 2018 of ICL-CRLN and the Cold Region Landslide Research of IPL-WCoE held in Harbin. Landslides 16:857–861

He B, Sassa K, McSaveney M, Nagai O (2014) Development of ICL landslide teaching tools. Landslides 11:153–159

Hernández-Moreno G, Alcántara-Ayala I (2017) Landslide risk perception in Mexico: a research gate into public awareness and knowledge. Landslides 14:351–371

Hostettler S, Jöhr A, Montes C, D’Acunzi A (2019) Community-based landslide risk reduction: a review of a Red Cross soil bioengineering for resilience program in Honduras. Landslides 16:1779–1791

Klimeš J, Stemberk J, Blahut J, Krejčí V, Krejčí O, Hartvich F, Kycl P (2017) Challenges for landslide hazard and risk management in ‘low-risk’ regions, Czech Republic—landslide occurrences and related costs (IPL project no. 197). Landslides 14:771–780

Klimeš J, Rosario AM, Vargas R, Raška P, Vicuña L, Jurt C (2019) Community participation in landslide risk reduction: a case history from Central Andes, Peru. Landslides 16:1763–1777

Kong VWW, Kwan JSH, Pun WK (2020) Hong Kong’s landslip warning system—40 years of progress. Landslides 17(6):1453–1463

Lateltin O, Haemmig C, Raetzo H, Bonnard C (2005) Landslide risk management in Switzerland. Landslides 2(4):313–320

Maes J, Mertens K, Jacobs L, Bwambale B, Vranken L, Dewitte O, ... Kervyn M (2019) Social multi-criteria evaluation to identify appropriate disaster risk reduction measures: application to landslides in the Rwenzori Mountains, Uganda. Landslides, 16, 1793–1807

Matsuoka Y, Gonzales Rocha E (2020) Sendai voluntary commitments: landslide stakeholders and the all-of-society approach enhanced by UNDRR. Landslides 17(10):2253–2269

Nadim F, Kjekstad O, Peduzzi P, Herold C, Jaedicke C (2006) Global landslide and avalanche hotspots. Landslides 3:159–173

Pun WK, Chung PWK, Wong TKC, Lam HWK, Wong LA (2020) Landslide risk management in Hong Kong-experience in the past and planning for the future. Landslides 17(1):243–247

Raška P (2019) Contextualizing community-based landslide risk reduction: an evolutionary perspective. Landslides 16(9):1747–1762

Sassa K (2021) The Kyoto Landslide Commitment 2020: launched. Landslides 18:5–20

Sassa K, Dang K, Yanagisawa H, He B (2016) A new landslide-induced tsunami simulation model and its application to the 1792 Unzen-Mayuyama landslide-and-tsunami disaster. Landslides 13:1405–1419

Sassa K, Bobrowsky PT, Takara K, Rouhban B (2021) Kyoto 2020 Commitment for global promotion of understanding and reducing landslide disaster risk. Understanding and reducing landslide disaster risk: Volume 1 Sendai Landslide Partnerships and Kyoto Landslide Commitment 5th, 145–153

Sassa K, Konagai K, Tiwari B, Arbanas Ž, Sassa S (Eds.) (2023) Progress in landslide research and technology, Volume 1 Issue 1, 2022. Springer Nature, 474 p

Sassa K (2006) 2006 Tokyo Action Plan-strengthening research and learning on landslides and related earth system disasters for global risk preparedness. Landslides 3(4):361–369

Sassa K (2015) ISDR-ICL Sendai partnerships 2015–2025 for global promotion of understanding and reducing landslide disaster risk. Landslides 12(4):631–640

Vilímek V, Klimeš J, Ttito Mamani RV, Bastante Abuhadba J, Astete Victoria F, Champi Monterroso PZ (2020) Contribution of the collaborative effort of the Czech WCoE to landslide risk reduction at the Machupicchu, Peru. Landslides 17:2683–2688

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Doan Huy Loi for helping to prepare Fig. 1 and to the anonymous reviewers, whose suggestions helped improve the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Geography, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico

Irasema Alcántara-Ayala

International Consortium On Landslides (ICL), Kyoto, Japan

Kyoji Sassa

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Irasema Alcántara-Ayala .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Alcántara-Ayala, I., Sassa, K. Landslide risk management: from hazard to disaster risk reduction. Landslides 20 , 2031–2037 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-023-02140-5

Download citation

Received : 27 July 2023

Accepted : 22 August 2023

Published : 31 August 2023

Issue Date : October 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-023-02140-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Landslide disaster risk management
Disaster risk reduction
International Consortium on Landslides
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

[email protected]

Home » Blog » Dissertation » Topics » Disaster Management » 80 Disaster Management Research Topics

80 Disaster Management Research Topics

FacebookXEmailWhatsAppRedditPinterestLinkedInWelcome to a valuable resource for students searching for engaging research topics in disaster management. We understand the importance of finding the right subject that resonates with your academic pursuits, whether you’re an undergraduate, master’s, or doctoral student. Our comprehensive list of topics is designed to inspire and guide you on your journey towards crafting […]

Welcome to a valuable resource for students searching for engaging research topics in disaster management. We understand the importance of finding the right subject that resonates with your academic pursuits, whether you’re an undergraduate, master’s, or doctoral student.

Our comprehensive list of topics is designed to inspire and guide you on your journey towards crafting a compelling thesis or dissertation. From examining the effectiveness of disaster response strategies to exploring the role of technology in disaster preparedness, our curated selection covers a broad spectrum of themes within disaster management. Your commitment to this critical area of study can contribute to the betterment of society, enhancing our collective ability to mitigate, respond to, and recover from various types of disasters.

A List Of Potential Research Topics In Disaster Management:

Psychosocial support and mental health in disaster management: a comprehensive review
Technological innovations for rapid needs assessment in disaster zones.
Role of cultural heritage in community resilience and identity.
Remote sensing applications for damage assessment and recovery monitoring.
Role of social media and technology platforms in disaster communication.
Public health preparedness and response during pandemics and natural disasters.
Climate change adaptation in a post-pandemic world: exploring the intersections of climate change and pandemic preparedness for holistic disaster management.
Community engagement and information dissemination: analyzing communication strategies used during the pandemic and their implications for disaster preparedness.
Historical analysis of UK disasters: a comparative study of past disasters in the UK, their impacts, and lessons learned for future disaster management.
Disaster-induced migration and resettlement: challenges and solutions.
Communication and information sharing in disaster management: a review of studies
Evacuation strategies and decision-making processes in disaster scenarios.
Humanitarian ethics and cultural sensitivity in disaster response.
Education system resilience and continuity during disruptions.
Indigenous knowledge and traditional practices in disaster resilience.
Humanitarian assistance and international cooperation: a review of global disaster response efforts
Pandemic preparedness and response: evaluating the effectiveness of strategies and lessons learned from COVID-19 for future pandemics.
Resilience-building measures for small island developing states (SIDs).
Health care system resilience and capacity building.
Enhancing community engagement and participation in disaster management.
Water management and sanitation in disaster-prone areas.
Mental health and psychosocial support: investigating the long-term psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and strategies for providing support.
Governance and institutional factors in disaster management: a systematic review
Policy gaps and challenges in ensuring disaster resilience in developing countries.
Humanitarian drone technology for disaster assessment and relief.
Pandemic preparedness and lessons from COVID-19: assessing the UK’s pandemic preparedness strategy and identifying areas for improvement based on the COVID-19 experience.
Emergency response and preparedness in the UK: a comprehensive analysis of the UK’s disaster management system and its effectiveness in responding to various crises.
A review of disaster risk assessment methods: analyzing the evolution of disaster risk assessment approaches and their applicability in diverse disaster scenarios.
Disaster risk reduction in informal settlements and slums.
Disaster management strategies for vulnerable and marginalized populations.
Cybersecurity preparedness and resilience in the digital age of disasters.
Disaster recovery and resilience planning: a meta-analysis of case studies
Economic recovery and reconstruction: analyzing post-COVID-19 economic recovery and reconstruction efforts and their alignment with disaster resilience.
Climate change adaptation and disaster management: investigating the integration of climate change adaptation measures in the UK’s disaster management practices.
Coastal management and adaptation to sea-level rise and storm surges.
Environmental management and restoration after industrial disasters.
Cultural heritage preservation and disaster risk reduction.
Disaster-responsive urban mobility and transportation.
Economic resilience and recovery post-disaster: case studies.
Supply chain resilience: examining supply chain disruptions caused by COVID-19 and identifying strategies to enhance stability.
Role of technology in UK disaster management: examining technological solutions and innovation adoption in enhancing disaster response and recovery.
Climate change and its implications for disaster management strategies.
Integrating indigenous knowledge with scientific approaches in disaster preparedness.
Healthcare infrastructure resilience: assessing the strength of healthcare systems to handle both pandemics and natural disasters.
Crisis communication and public awareness: analyzing the effectiveness of communication strategies in informing and educating the public during various disasters in the UK.
Gender dynamics in disaster management: empowering vulnerable groups.
Cross-border collaboration in disaster management and response.
Disaster risk reduction strategies in urban environments.
Technological innovations in disaster management: a literature review
Humanitarian aid delivery in post-disaster scenarios: challenges and innovations.
Urban planning and disaster resilience: analyzing urban development policies and their contribution to enhancing resilience against natural and man-made disasters.
The role of technology in enhancing disaster preparedness and response.
Role of technology in disaster management: investigating technological innovations and solutions adopted during COVID-19 and their applicability in future disasters.
Remote learning and education continuity during disasters.
Legal frameworks and regulations for disaster risk reduction.
Evaluating the social and psychological impacts of disasters on communities.
Adaptive strategies for agricultural resilience in the face of climate-related disasters.
Reducing disaster risk in healthcare facilities and hospitals.
Education continuity in crisis: exploring strategies for ensuring learning continuity during disruptions, including remote and hybrid learning models.
Climate-induced migration and its impact on host communities.
Ethical considerations in disaster research and humanitarian interventions.
Flood risk management strategies in the UK: evaluating the role of policy frameworks and technological innovations in mitigating flood disasters.
Water scarcity and management strategies in drought-prone regions.
Environmental impact assessment in disaster management: a critical literature review
Remote sensing and geographic information systems (GIS) in disaster management.
Infectious disease management in post-disaster environments.
Disaster management and theoretical foundations: a comprehensive review of theoretical frameworks and models shaping disaster management strategies and practices.
Sustainable energy solutions for disaster-affected areas.
Case studies of successful community-based disaster risk management.
Sustainable building practices for disaster-resilient infrastructure.
The role of NGOs in disaster relief and recovery.
Wildlife conservation and biodiversity preservation in disaster zones.
Role of private sector partnerships in disaster relief and recovery.
Policy analysis of government response to natural disasters.
Humanitarian logistics and supply chain management in disaster response.
Community engagement in disaster preparedness: exploring community participation and collaboration in disaster preparedness activities across different regions of the UK.
Conflict and disasters: exploring intersections and complexities.
Remote work and disaster resilience: analyzing the role of remote work in maintaining business continuity during and after disasters.
Role of faith-based organizations in disaster relief and recovery.
Community-based disaster management interventions: a critical review of effectiveness and challenges.

The diverse array of disaster management research topics provided here is a gateway to exploring the intricate landscape of disaster preparedness, response, and recovery. Whether pursuing an undergraduate, master’s, or doctoral degree, these research avenues present opportunities to contribute to advancing disaster management knowledge. As you embark on this scholarly voyage, remember that your dedication to understanding and improving disaster management practices can have a lasting impact on communities and societies worldwide.

Order Disaster Management Dissertation Now!

External Links:

Download Disaster Management Dissertation Sample For Your Perusal

Research Topic Help Service

Get unique research topics exactly as per your requirements. We will send you a mini proposal on the chosen topic which includes;

Research Statement
Research Questions
Key Literature Highlights
Proposed Methodology
View a Sample of Service

Ensure Your Good Grades With Our Writing Help

Talk to the assigned writer before payment
Get topic if you don't have one
Multiple draft submissions to have supervisor's feedback
Free revisions
Complete privacy
Plagiarism Free work
Guaranteed 2:1 (With help of your supervisor's feedback)
2 Installments plan
Special discounts