An official website of the United States government
Disaster risk reduction requires the identification and assessment of critical infrastructure that may be impacted during a disaster event and taking proactive steps to mitigate these impacts. Yet little consideration is given towards how systemic marginalization of certain populations may inhibit their access to critical infrastructure. Understanding and expanding our understanding of what is considered “critical” in a community could help build greater adaptive capacity and reduce vulnerability, particularly for marginalized or underrepresented populations. In this case study, we examine how Latinx coastal community residents in Oregon (USA) perceive current critical facilities and their values associated with these places, as well as the identification of new locations that are valued as critical to their community and seen as places they would go to in times of need. Our analysis reveals that hazard resilience planning efforts that focused only protecting current critical facilities without including marginalized community members’ perspective, run the risk of creating inequitable access and utilization of these spaces during emergencies. Our results point to the need to broaden the types of facilities that are considered “critical” and incorporating inclusionary policies within existing critical facilities in order to increase communities’ capacity to respond and recover from natural hazards. The aim of this research is to identify systemic issues in resilience planning efforts, not to catalog cultural differences.
more »
« less
Toward equitable coastal community resilience: Incorporating principles of equity and justice in coastal hazard adaptation
Abstract To meet the challenges of hazards impacting coastal communities, demand is growing for more equitable coastal natural hazard adaptation and disaster mitigation approaches, supported by co-productive research partnerships. This review paper outlines contemporary advances in hazard adaptation and disaster mitigation with attention to how an equity and justice framework can address the uneven impacts of hazards on marginalized and underserved communities. Drawing upon the allied concepts of distributive, procedural, systemic, and recognitional equity and justice, we illustrate how these concepts form the basis for equitable coastal resilience. To demonstrate how equitable resilience can effectively advance contemporary adaptation and mitigation strategies, we present two vignettes where collaborative partnerships underscore how equitable coastal hazard planning and response practices complement these processes in coastal zones subject to large earthquakes and tsunamis. The first vignette focuses on disaster response and takes place in the Tohoku region of Japan, with diverse gender and sexual minority community members’ experiences of, and responses to, the 2011 Tohoku disasters. The second vignette centers on hazard planning and takes place on the U.S. Pacific Northwest coast along the Cascadia Subduction Zone to demonstrate how principles of distributive, procedural, systemic, and recognitional equity can inform the co-production of alternative coastal futures that prioritize equitable resilience. From this discussion, we suggest applying an equity lens to research processes, including alternative futures modeling frameworks, to ensure that the benefits of hazard adaptation and disaster mitigation strategies are equitably applied and shared.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2103713
- PAR ID:
- 10521742
- Publisher / Repository:
- Cambridge Prisms: Coastal Futures
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Cambridge Prisms: Coastal Futures
- Volume:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2754-7205
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
In the context of climate change, the term resilience was popularized by the field of ecology to describe how ecological systems respond to stress and has since been adopted and significantly adapted by various fields, including psychology, policy, urban planning, and engineering. The exact meaning of resilience has blurred over time. In the context of coastal hazards, “resilience” is a holistic idea that relates long and short-term physical hazards with societal and biological impacts and mitigation measures. However, applying this idea to community-based mitigation planning remains challenging due to: (1) the diverse meanings, perspectives, and applications of the term, (2) the tendency of the term to defer to the status quo, thereby neglecting the voices of historically marginalized populations, and (3) the non-participatory and quantitative nature of resilience studies, often depending on cost-benefit analyses. In this paper, an interdisciplinary team of researchers and practitioners develops and proposes a new conceptual model for coastal resilience that offers to help address these aforementioned challenges by focusing on meaningful community engagement. The goal of this paper is to introduce the pitfalls of existing interpretations of coastal resilience, describe the team-based approach applied to develop this framework, and provide a theoretical path forward that addresses the current challenges in describing coastal resilience. This new framework (a) integrates relevant factors of coastal resilience including hazards, exposure, vulnerability, adaptation, mitigation and preparedness to qualitatively explore a community’s perception and state of resilience which (b) transcends existing models and (c) can be interpreted through a variety of perspectives. This model can be applied to document and assess locally differential understandings of coastal resilience and to engage communities in reflections of their individual and collective sense of resilience.more » « less
-
Abstract U.S. states, territories, and tribal areas develop State Hazard Mitigation Plans (SHMPs) to reduce the impact of disasters. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) approves SHMPs every five years as required for states to receive disaster relief grants and mitigation project funding. In 2023, FEMA’s updated policy guidance for SHMPs took effect, recommending more robust use of social vulnerability as an assessment of equity in multi-hazard risk assessments. Such approaches are necessary because social vulnerability emerges from systemic inequities that result in marginalized populations facing disproportionate exposure and impacts from natural hazards. We developed two novel datasets on the different population groups, definitions, and measures of social vulnerability included in SHMPs for all 50 U.S. states and the 5 inhabited U.S. territories. Our analysis shows that states differ in terms of how (and if) social vulnerability is defined and measured. All plans include at least one vulnerable population in their guidance – most often the elderly, children, or people with disabilities. Inclusion of other populations such as immigrants, LGBTQIA + persons, or unhoused persons is much more varied. The study concludes with recommendations for how SHMPs can advance equitable and inclusive planning processes that center robust definitions and measures of social vulnerability and socially vulnerable populations.more » « less
-
Abstract The eastern North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act region is one of the most hurricane-prone areas of the United States. Hurricanes incur substantial damage and economic losses because structures located near the coast tend to be high value as well as particularly exposed. To bolster disaster mitigation and community resilience, it is crucial to understand how hurricane hazards drive social and economic impacts. We integrate detailed hazard simulations, property data, and labor compensation estimates to comprehensively analyze hurricanes’ economic impacts. This study investigates the spatial distribution of probabilistic hurricane hazards, and concomitant property losses and labor impacts, pinpointing particularly hard hit areas. Relationships between capital and labor losses, social vulnerability, and asset values reveal the latter as the primary determinant of overall economic consequences.more » « less
-
Abstract Coastal communities are increasingly vulnerable to hurricanes, which cause billions of dollars in damage annually through wind, storm surge, and flooding. Mitigation efforts are essential to reduce these impacts but face significant challenges, including uncertainties in hazard prediction, damage estimation, and recovery costs. Resource constraints and the disproportionate burden borne by socioeconomically vulnerable groups further complicate retrofitting strategies. This study presents a probabilistic methodology to assess and mitigate hurricane risks by integrating hazard analysis, building fragility, and economic loss assessment. The methodology prioritizes retrofitting strategies using a risk‐informed, equity‐focused approach. Multi‐objective optimization balances cost‐effectiveness and risk reduction while promoting fair resource allocation among socioeconomic groups. The novelty of this study lies in its direct integration of equity as an objective in resource allocation through multi‐objective optimization, its comprehensive consideration of multi‐hazard risks, its inclusion of both direct and indirect losses in cost assessments, and its use of probabilistic hazard analysis to incorporate varying time horizons. A case study of the Galveston testbed demonstrates the methodology's potential to minimize damage and foster equitable resilience. Analysis of budget scenarios and trade‐offs between cost and equity underscores the importance of comprehensive loss assessments and equity considerations in mitigation and resilience planning. Key findings highlight the varied effectiveness of retrofitting strategies across different budgets and time horizons, the necessity of addressing both direct and indirect losses, and the importance of multi‐hazard considerations for accurate risk assessments. Multi‐objective optimization underscores that equitable solutions are achievable even under constrained budgets. Beyond a certain point, achieving equity does not necessarily increase expected losses, demonstrating that more equitable solutions can be implemented without compromising overall cost‐effectiveness.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2023.24
