Risk Wise

[

] 28

because of reliance on distant resources and just-in-time

inventory delivery, with the result that the economic

impact of a natural hazard event can be much broader

than its storm track or rupture zone.

The fifth challenge is to develop standardized methods

for communities to measure and assess disaster

resilience across multiple hazards. A key implementa-

tion step is developing and distributing community

assessment tools that can be applied to setting priorities

in order to maximize resilience. Federal agencies must

work with universities, local governments, and the

private sector to identify effective standards and metrics

for assessing disaster resilience. With consistent factors

and regularly updated metrics, communities will be able

to maintain report cards that accurately assess the

community’s relative level of disaster resilience.

The final challenge is to promote risk-wise behaviour.

The costs of natural disasters are rising as people increas-

ingly move into harm’s way in low-lying coastal areas,

the wildland-urban interface and geologically active

regions. In order to achieve ‘hazards literacy’ and

sustained risk reduction, hazards must be real to people.

Scenarios are a tool that can spell out the impacts of

likely events on high-risk areas, combining scientific

and engineering knowledge with local planning and

emergency management expertise to deliver a compre-

hensive picture of potential losses to encourage

mitigation measures.

From a global standpoint, these grand challenges

reflect the contributions that science and technology can

make towards achieving the Hyogo Framework for

Action. Adopted in 2005 during the World Conference

on Disaster Risk Reduction in Kobe, Japan, the agree-

ment calls on participating countries to:

1. Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and

local priority

2. Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks, and

enhance early warning capabilities

3. Use knowledge, innovation and education to build

a culture of safety and resilience at all levels

4. Reduce the underlying risk factors

5. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective

response at all levels.

The common goals of the Hyogo Framework and the

grand challenges reflect a shared commitment to build-

ing more disaster-resilient communities. Each of the

hazard-specific implementation plans includes a section

that identifies the same set of desired outcomes for

meeting the grand challenges: a nation where relevant

hazards are recognized and understood; where commu-

nities at risk know when a hazard event is imminent;

where individuals can live safely in the context of our

planet’s extreme events; and where disaster-resilient

communities experience minimum disruption to life and

economy after a hazard event has passed. Through the

application of science and technology, the US will strive

to achieve these outcomes at home, as well as encour-

age their application around the globe.

Southern California Earthquake Scenario

Source: US Geological Survey

This ShakeMap depicts expected ground shaking from a magnitude-7.8

earthquake on California’s southern San Andreas Fault. These estimated shaking

intensities were used as the basis for developing a scenario exploring the

economic and social impacts that such an earthquake would have on the more

than 20 million people who live in southern California.

In November 2008, the

scenario will be used as the basis for emergency response and public

preparedness exercises in order to improve the risk-wise behaviour in southern

California communities. The colours reflect the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale

with warmer colours representing areas of greater damage

The third challenge is to develop hazard mitigation strategies and

technologies that can reduce the impact of extreme events on both the

built environment and vulnerable ecosystems. Scientists must invent –

and communities must implement – affordable and effective hazard

mitigation strategies, including land-use planning and zoning laws that

recognize the risks of natural hazards. In addition, technologies such

as disaster-resilient design and materials, as well as smart structures

that respond to changing conditions, must be used for development in

hazardous areas. Meeting this challenge will also require developing

an understanding of the social, cultural, and economic factors that

promote or inhibit adoption and enforcement of these and other

promising mitigation technologies. Getting the right incentives in place

for mitigation is the key to successful loss reduction.

The fourth grand challenge is to reduce the vulnerability of infra-

structure. One of the greatest obstacles to recovery in any disaster is

the delayed restoration of critical infrastructure such as transportation,

drinking water, electricity, and gas distribution systems. A key imple-

mentation step is establishing the technical basis for revised codes

and standards for critical infrastructure and essential facilities. Using

integrated models of interdependent systems, additional vulnerabil-

ities can be identified and then addressed. Protecting critical

infrastructure provides a solid foundation from which the commu-

nity can respond to hazards rapidly and effectively. Paradoxically,

advancements in technology can increase society’s vulnerability