A practical approach to constructing hierarchical networks for urban hazard mitigation planning using GIS: The case of Futian, Shenzhen

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 629-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xue Jiang ◽  
Jusheng Song ◽  
Yaoyu Lin ◽  
Yongxi Gong
2021 ◽  
pp. 296-332
Author(s):  
Dylan Sandler ◽  
Anna K. Schwab

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 06019001
Author(s):  
Tara Shenoy Kulkarni ◽  
Rebecca Sanborn Stone ◽  
Lauren Oates ◽  
Stephanie Smith

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Andrea M. Jackman, PhD ◽  
Mario G. Beruvides, PhD, PE

Under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and Federal Emergency Management Agency's subsequent Interim Final Rule, the requirement was placed on local governments to author and gain approval for a Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) for the areas under their jurisdiction. Low completion percentages for HMPs—less than one-third of eligible governments— were found by an analysis conducted 3 years after the final deadline for the aforementioned legislation took place. Follow-up studies showed little improvement at 5 and 8 years after the deadline. Based on these results, a previous study hypothesized that the cost of creating a HMP might be an influential factor in explaining why most jurisdictions had failed to write or gain approval for a HMP. The frequency of natural hazards experienced by the planning jurisdiction, the number of jurisdictions participating in the plan, and the population and population density were found to explain more than half of the variation in HMP costs. This study is a continuation of that effort, finding that there are significant differences in cost both across ranges of values for the jurisdictional attributes and single-jurisdictional versus multijurisdictional plans.


2005 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Pine, EdD ◽  
Hassan Mashriqui, PhD ◽  
Stephanie Pedro ◽  
Jennifer Meyer

This study uses FEMA’s new flood model software, HAZUS-MH (Multi-Hazard), to assess the socio economic damages following floods. HAZUS-MH provides dollar figures for land use planners, flood managers, and emergency planners to utilize in their pre- and post-disaster planning of the economical, social, and environmental consequences of flooding. HAZUS-MH estimates financial losses resulting from a 100-year flood by analyzing the potential direct and indirect economic damages that could occur in a local jurisdiction. HAZUS-MH Flood Model and Hurricane Wind Model was used to estimate losses in the Parish of East Baton Rouge, Louisiana, as part of the jurisdiction’s hazard mitigation planning process. Depth grid maps and flood loss maps are explained and displayed to show the results of the flood hazard and loss analysis. The article evaluates HAZUS-MH against the criteria of quality, timeliness, and completeness. The different levels of HAZUS-MH are explained within the context of accuracy. The article also explains how geographic information system (GIS) data layers can be made available to public officials by use of a free downloadable GIS data reader.


Author(s):  
Andrea Sarzynski ◽  
Paolo Cavaliere

Public participation in environmental management, and more specifically in hazard mitigation planning, has received much attention from scholars and practitioners. A shift in perspective now sees the public as a fundamental player in decision making rather than simply as the final recipient of a policy decision. Including the public in hazard mitigation planning brings widespread benefits. First, communities gain awareness of the risks they live with, and thus, this is an opportunity to empower communities and improve their resilience. Second, supported by a collaborative participation process, emergency managers and planners can achieve the ultimate goal of strong mitigation plans. Although public participation is highly desired as an instrument to improve hazard mitigation planning, appropriate participation techniques are context dependent and some trade-offs exist in the process design (such as between representativeness and consensus building). Designing participation processes requires careful planning and an all-around consideration of the representativeness of stakeholders, timing, objectives, knowledge, and ultimately desired goals to achieve. Assessing participation also requires more consistent methods to facilitate policy learning from diverse experiences. New decision-support tools may be necessary to gain widespread participation from laypersons lacking technical knowledge of hazards and risks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document