DAVID APPLEGATE"Science and technology can play a critical role in the quest for disaster resilience." The deadly typhoon that struck Burma
in early May and the devastating earthquake that struck China a week later carried with them echoes of
the devastation wrought by the Sumatra earthquake and tsunami on the Indian Ocean region in 2004. In the United States, the vulnerability of Burma’s coastal populations to severe winds and
storm-surge inundation also served to remind us of Hurricane Katrina and the
ongoing recovery in New Orleans and other Gulf Coast
communities. Although U.S.
cities have not experienced a catastrophic earthquake since the one in Anchorage, Alaska,
in 1964, we know that events as large as the Chinese earthquake will strike in
the future.
Extreme events are facts of life on an active planet like
ours. How those events affect us reflects not only the power of nature but the
decisions we make in how we build our societies. Achieving security at home and
abroad must reflect an overall resilience to all hazards that confront our
communities. Achieving that resilience is a grand challenge, and it will take
the collective action of government at all levels, nonprofit organizations, the
private sector and above all individuals trying to do what is best for
themselves, their families and their communities.
Science and technology can play a critical role in the quest
for disaster resilience. To better define this role, the National Science and
Technology Council’s Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction, representing 22
federal departments and agencies, identified six grand challenges for disaster
reduction.
The first of these challenges is to provide hazard and
disaster information where and when it is needed. Meeting this challenge
requires robust monitoring systems with the capability to reach those in harm’s
way and provide emergency responders with the information they need. Such
systems are only as good as their weakest link, which in many cases is the link
to the people at risk. Improving communications to the most vulnerable
populations, so that they can protect themselves, requires education.
The second challenge is to understand the natural processes
that produce hazards. Targeted research can harness advances in computing power
and draw upon data generated by global observational systems to improve
predictive modeling. For coastal hazards, this understanding must include
assessment of the impacts of climate change on coastal inundation.
The third challenge is to develop strategies and technologies
to reduce the impact of extreme events on the built environment and vulnerable
ecosystems. Meeting this challenge will require understanding social, cultural
and economic factors that promote or inhibit promising mitigation technologies.
The fourth grand challenge is to reduce the vulnerability of
infrastructure. One major obstacle to recovery in any disaster is the delayed
restoration of critical infrastructure such as drinking water, electricity and
gas distribution systems. A key step is establishing the technical basis for
revised codes and standards for critical infrastructure. Paradoxically,
advances in technology can increase society’s vulnerability 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 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 step is developing and distributing assessment tools that can be used to
set priorities.
The final challenge is to promote risk-wise behavior. The
costs of natural disasters are rising as people increasingly 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 comprehensive picture of potential losses.
The subcommittee has released plans identifying the priority
science and technology actions needed to meet these challenges for all major
hazards. These plans will help to shape sustained federal science and
technology investments in disaster reduction and can also serve as a blueprint
for international cooperation.
All the plans identify the same desired outcomes: A nation
where relevant hazards are recognized and understood, communities at risk know
when a hazard event is imminent, individuals can live safely in the context of
our planet’s extreme events and communities experience minimum disruption to
life and economy after a hazard event.
David Applegate is
chair of the National Science and Technology Council’s Subcommittee on Disaster
Reduction and senior science adviser for earthquake and geologic hazards at the
U.S.
Geological Survey. The Grand Challenges for Disaster Reduction and accompanying
implementation plans are available at www.sdr.gov. Applegate can be reached at
applegate@usgs.gov.
Text Size
John Knight
Ken Godwin
Sige - [Link was removed]
Please login or register to participate.