HAZARD RESPONSE CAPABILITIES OF A SMALL COMMUNITY

HAZARD RESPONSE CAPABILITIES OF A SMALL COMMUNITY
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Major emergencies and disasters have occurred throughout history and, as the world’s population grows and resources become more limited, communities are increasingly vulnerable to the hazards that cause disasters. Statistics gathered since 1969 show a rise in the number of people affected by disasters. However, since there is little evidence that the actual events causing disasters are increasing in either intensity or frequency, it can only be concluded that vulnerability to disasters is growing. Emergencies and disasters do not affect only health and well-being; frequently, large numbers of people are displaced, killed or injured, or subjected to greater risk of epidemics. Considerable economic harm is also common, and Fig. 2 shows how economic and insured losses have risen since 1960. This has led to a restructuring of the insurance industry, with insured parties bearing more costs, and governments assisting the insurance and reinsurance markets. Uninsured and economic losses are creating immense burdens on communities, economies, and governments. A recent Latin American study indicated that for each disaster listed in officially recognized disaster databases, there are some 20 other smaller emergencies with destructive impact on local communities that are unacknowledged. Hence, the actual harm caused by emergencies and disasters probably far outweighs the accepted disaster statistics.
While each country is responsible for the national development policies that it pursues within these global frameworks, it is clear that, given the integrality of natural systems, national policies must take impacts beyond each country’s borders into consideration. Incorporating DRM into planning systems and processes poses a number of challenges. Development planning must take into account the complex interrelationships existing among various elements (processes, instruments, institutions and stakeholders), and these interrelationships give rise to intertemporal, intersectoral and inter-scale challenges in the coordination and linkage of multiple actors (Máttar and Cuervo, 2017). Similar challenges also arise in DRM planning, since this entails the use of a long-term multisectoral strategy involving different levels of government, the private sector and civil society. National governments have to find ways to integrate their development and DRM planning processes. DRM rests on five pillars: (i) risk identification, (ii) risk reduction, (iii) preparedness, (iv) financial protection and (v) resilient recovery. These pillars are closely interrelated and must be set within a conducive institutional, political, normative and financial environment that permits the allocation of the necessary resources and the appropriate definition of roles and responsibilities (ECLAC, 2019).
BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS RESEARCH
The purpose of the organizational component of this research is to gain a more complete understanding of the factors and processes which determine the response of community organizations to natural hazard threats. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has. for a number of years, conducted surveys of key local officials in areas affected by major disasters. These surveys have provided useful insights into the problems encountered during disaster events. While the primary focus of these surveys has been on NOAA and National Weather Service (NWS) operat~ons, they have also provided information on the interaction between these federal agencies and local officials. In addition to these NOAA surveys, numerous field studies conducted under the auspices of the Disaster Research Center at Ohio State University have provided more analytic insights into the processes involved in the response of local organizations to disaster events. To a large extent, the questions on which this component of our research focuses are based on this existing literature. Through our prepost design, we have attempted to document both the manner in which our study sites differ with respect to the basic organizational structure of their civil defense or emergency service functions and the manner in which these differing organizational structures affect the effectiveness of their response to natural hazard threats. In particular, our research focuses on three quite specific problems which have been repeatedly cited as affecting the effectiveness of a community's response to natural disasters.