Author Archives: recoverydiva

Why Is Recovery So Hard To Do? – some observations and suggestions

Posted on by
3

Time after time, my blog postings document (and lament) the difficulties that various countries, states (prefectures, provinces), and localities are having working through an effective and efficient recovery. You name the country and the recent disaster event, and it will be on the list of places struggling with recovery.

First a brief account of why we need to do a better job with recovery, soon and worldwide. In short, the costs are too high to go unchecked.  It’s a global necessity that we need get better at recovering from disasters. See this article from HS Wired, March 15: 2012 economic losses from disasters set new record at $138 billion.  The lead paragraph says:

The UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) reported that for the first time in history, the world has experienced three consecutive years in which annual economic losses have exceeded $100 billion. The losses are the result of an enormous increase in exposure of industrial assets and private property to extreme disaster events. brief account of why we need to do a better job with recovery:

In reviewing some of the recent examples of recovery from major disasters in 3 countries, as covered in this blog, some common concerns can be seen. After reading the Bosner article about Japan, and Ian McLean’s article about Christchurch, and some of my recent posts about the Hurricane Sandy (US), I the nations currently dealing with recovery from major to catastrophic events have several features in common.  I will note just two, because this is a topic that warrants a dissertation or two and not just a blog posting.

Pace: In the first two years of effort, generally recovery is proceeding more slowly than anyone imagined or hoped for.  Typically, neither public officials or citizens are satisfied Some of the problems are lack of knowledge and experience, some are public policy and management  deficiencies, and others have to do with political will.

Organizations– in all cases the organizations in place were not adequate, so new ones had to be created after the disaster occurred.

·       In Japan, they created a national Reconstruction Agency. See earlier postings on this blog for more details.

·       In the Christchurch area, they created a new regional organization – CERA.  Here is the link to the Recovery Strategy developed by CERA.

·      And in the U.S., HUD assumed responsibility at the federal level for recovery and created the Hurricane Sandy Recovery Task Force. The organization, functions, and responsibilities are still being sorted out at the present time.

My concern is that organizational problems, many of which could be anticipated, are preventing effective leadership during  the recovery period.  I think more help is needed from the public administration community on recovery organization and management matters. And I would like to see the executive agencies better utilize the existing talent – researchers, consultants, and practitioners. Several excellent mechanisms exist, such as the National Academy of Public Administration and the National Academy of Science. Think about using them!

And I would like to see more groups like the American Society for Public Administration, NEMA, and IAEM get more pro active and make recommendations to the executive agencies.

Presently,  the spotlight is on the new role of HUD and specifically on the new organization –  the Sandy Rebuilding Task Force. In my view, until the needs of the recovery process are dealt with. making progress with “resilience” is not realistic.

As always, comments and additions are welcome.

 

Japan’s Response to Disaster – One Former FEMA Staffer’s Perspective

Posted on by
2

It is not often that a FEMA person can be this candid about a country’s response capabilities; in fact, about the only way to do it is to be retired!  Long-time employee and long-time critic of FEMA, Leo Bosner, wrote this account recently: Can Japan Respond Better to its Next Large Disaster? [Published in japanfocus.org; no date.] In this 10 page article, he lists 10 problem areas and also offers some suggestions to the Japanese government. From his introduction:

Having worked for the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for nearly thirty years, the subject of my fellowship was Japan’s response to a large-scale disaster, and whether it could be improved. Under it, I interviewed individuals who were involved in or were familiar with the response to the March 11, 2011 earthquake/tsunami disaster in eastern Japan and lectured on local-level disaster response planning. * * * I focused on the overall response to the earthquake/ tsunami.

First and foremost, it was clear to me that the Government of Japan simply does not have a comprehensive, realistic plan for responding to large disasters. Rather, the Japan Government’s disaster response plan seems to consist of numerous government agency plans that are unrelated to each other. In many cases these plans failed to address or even acknowledge problems that were occurring in the field. In part, this is because the government lacks trained, experienced disaster response professionals. As a result, the government’s response to the March 11 disaster was poorly managed and coordinated, and many people suffered needlessly. * * *

Note that Bosner also has some harsh words for his former employer and comments on the state of FEMA at the time of Hurricane Katrina. See Bosner’s reply in the Comments section.

Catastrophic Insurance Study

Posted on by
Reply

The Benefits of a Multi-State Catastrophic Risk Pool. HS Wire, March 13.   The Diva admits right up front that she is not an insurance expert, but this study seemed to be worth mentioning.  Some excerpts follow:

The study’s findings are particularly relevant in the wake of Sandy, which pelted coastal and inland regions with high winds, driving rains, heavy snow and flooding along the Eastern Seaboard. Kinetic Analysis projects that that storm’s direct impacts could run as high as $25 billion, excluding the New York City underground infrastructure.

Sandy has renewed calls for a federal catastrophe plan that creates risk pools across larger geographic areas — along with objections that doing so will force low-risk areas to subsidize high-risk states.

The study found, however, that the opposite to be true. As geographic diversity increased, funding levels for sustainable catastrophic risk pools decreased relative to premiums, actually resulting in savings for both low and high risk areas.

“If subsidies are created in this setting, it is due to incorrect risk pricing rather than the risk itself,” said FSU’s Dumm. “Our analysis found that each state derives benefits from geographic diversification regardless of risk ranking. In fact, failure to diversify catastrophic wind risk may impose its own set of costs in the form of lost diversification benefits that exist precisely where they are needed, for less frequent and more severe catastrophic events.”

Related articles

FEMA Receives Award for Innovative Use of Geospatial Technology After H. Sandy

Posted on by
1

FEMA Receives Prestigious Making a Difference Award; Thursday, 14 March 2013. Award given at Esri Federal GIS Conference for Superstorm Sandy Response. [FEMA is the user of the ESRI technology.] According the article in Surveyer,

The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) efforts to assist after the destruction of Superstorm Sandy—including its first-of-its-kind mapping platform, the GeoPlatform—were recognized by Esri at its annual Federal GIS Conference held in Washington, DC, February 25–27. The company honored FEMA with its prestigious Making a Difference Award, which recognizes organizations doing exemplary work using geospatial technology. * * *

A few of the powerful applications included the following:

• Check Your Home—People could click on the online map to see how many homes, neighborhoods, and communities were impacted. The application provided easy access to imagery FEMA collected immediately after the storm.
• Modeling Task Force Map—This map predicted flood areas that would incur damage. Desktop experts ran sophisticated models and published them to the web with updates happening almost daily
• Advisory Base Flood Elevation (ABFE)—FEMA issued ABFE maps post-Sandy for the recovery work. As rebuilding efforts take place, the maps and related information help people stay current with new floodplain and insurance guidelines.

Related article

The FEMA Workforce – a new blog is needed

Posted on by
2

Once again I see that some of my past, slightly out-of-date postings about FEMA workforce issues continue to get a lot of hits.  In the past I have done postings on topics  ranging from higher education degree candidates/job seekers, current or potential reservists, and current or future FEMA Corps recruits. I know these are all topics of great interest to many people, but (1) I do not have the sources or contacts to continue discussing these topics and (2) they do not have much to do with recovery, which is my main focus.

So, as I offered previously, I will be glad to give advice and technical  to anyone who wants to start a blog on FEMA workforce issues.  I have 3 years of experience working with Word Press, which is a wonderful and inexpensive way to support a blog.

Climate Change as a National Security Issue

Posted on by
Reply

Climate change as a national security issue, published in HS Wire, Feb. 22.

“The net conclusion is that weather is changing dramatically in specific regions, and the nature of the change is that we’re seeing more record high temperatures and many, many fewer low-temperature records.”

“The bottom line is that our national security depends on our ability to sustain and augment our scientific and technical capacity to monitor unfolding events and forewarn of important changes,” Baker said. “The imminent increase in extreme events will affect water availability, energy use, food distribution, and critical infrastructure — all elements of both domestic and international security.”Other potential effects, McElroy said, are tied to changes in an atmospheric circulation pattern called the Hadley circulation, in which warm tropical air rises, resulting in tropical rains. As the air moves to higher latitudes, it descends, causing the now-dry air to heat up. Regions where the hot, dry air returns to the surface are typically dominated by desert.

Full text of the 134 page report from Harvard University is here.

A related report that may be of interest: 2013 WorldWide Threat Assessment. (March 13, 2013)

Related articles

“Flood Mapping for the Nation” – new report from ASFPM

Posted on by
Reply

The full report and other reports regarding the National Flood Insurance Program are on this webpage. Below is the executive summary of the report:

The Association of State Floodplain Managers has developed an estimate, based on a careful analysis, of the total cost to provide floodplain mapping for all communities in the nation based on the parameters specified in the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012. The Nation has invested $4.3 billion in flood mapping to date, and has enjoyed multiple benefits from that investment, including providing the basis for guiding development that saves over $1 billion/year in flood damages. ASFPM has identified criteria of what constitutes adequate flood mapping for the country, and has produced an estimate showing the initial cost to provide flood mapping for the nation ranging from $4.5 billion to $7.5 billion. The steady-state cost to then maintain accurate and up-to-date flood maps ranges from $116 million to $275 million annually.[1] This national investment in a comprehensive, updated flood map inventory for every community in the nation will drive down costs and suffering of flooding on our nation and its citizens, as well as providing the best tool for managing flood risk and building sustainable communities.

[1] These estimates do not include revenue from the Federal policy fee which is primarily used to support administrative cost including the issuance of letter of map change, program management, and data dissemination.

Thanks to Bill Cumming for this citation.

Recovery in Japan Is Going Slowly- second anniversary of the 3 disasters

Posted on by
Reply

As the 2nd anniversary of the 3-part catastrophic disaster in Japan occurs, here are a couple of articles that document difficulties during the recovery process:

lt should be noted that the recovery process in Japan is a huge, unprecedented effort and the Japanese should be given credit for all they have achieved thus far.  As we know, it is easier to criticize than to be positive.

The recovery effort probably will be a major milestone in disaster recovery history and be studied for years to come.

Do Poorer Countries Recover Faster than Wealthier Ones?

Posted on by
Reply

 

The debate has been ongoing about which countries more efficiently deal with long-term recovery from disaster. Most recently, an article titled  Christchurch highlights how rich can lag at rebuilding,  Japan Times FEB 23, 2013, generated a lot of attention and controversy.

I am pleased to feature this reply, which has not been published anywhere else.  Did Bureacracy Delay the Christchurch Recovery? by Ian McLean.  The paper is short (4 pages) so I will not attempt to summarize it.

I think the paper underscores the point that the pace of recovery is not the only factor to consider. In my experience, recovery has at least three essential attributes: efficiency, effectiveness, and equity.  And of course there is a cost factor.

______________________________________

Mr. McLean is the principal of Ian McLean Consultancy Services, Ltd. in Rotorua, NZ. He was the lead author of the report titled  “Review of the CDEM Response to 22 Feb Christchurch Earthquake,” which was done under contract to the Director of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, NZ. Details about that report and related articles are on the NZ page of this blog.