Search results

Citizens who live in disaster prone areas need to protect their properties – particularly their homes – against the destructive effects of natural disasters to avoid large‐scale economic losses. The purpose of this paper is to present the basic concepts and methodology for an improved system for rating the resilience of homes against natural disaster perils. This system is referred to as the Resilient Scoring Utility (ReScU) framework.

A two‐pronged approach was undertaken in developing the ReScU framework. Existing building programs for homes were studied as potential models for a system to rate the natural disaster resilience of homes. Simultaneously, a diverse 25‐member stakeholder panel (focus) group was queried periodically, using a Delphi technique, in order to better understand and gain a consensus about the issues surrounding homes, incentives and natural disasters.

Using the results from the above approach, the ReScU framework was designed with four key operational features: an output that can be tied to incentives; the use of performance‐based evaluation criteria; utilization of “threshold” adjustments to represent the variability due to the location of homes; and adaptability to new technologies, perils, and non‐perils.

There are few existing programs that offer assistance to homeowners by providing them with guidance on how to protect/reinforce their homes against natural disasters. Unlike these other programs, the ReScU framework proposed in this paper is location specific, performance‐driven, and may be tied readily to incentives. These features will assist homeowners, homebuilders, and others in designing, building, and maintaining more natural disaster resilient homes. It should, however be noted that the proposed ReScU framework is a concept, and future work will include testing the assumptions for their reliability and validity when rating homes.

The purpose of this paper is to contrast the behavior of a US homeowner exposed to hurricane risk with government policies designed to limit hurricane losses. Owners limit these losses by selecting structural improvements or mitigation and wind and flood insurance.

The paper uses mitigation costs, hurricane probabilities, and insurance premiums to frame rational cost‐minimizing choices for the homeowner.

First, even though nationwide hurricane damage costs are large, the cost‐minimizing response for an individual property owner may be to buy no mitigation or structural improvements, no flood insurance and minimal wind insurance, as probabilities of strong hurricanes striking particular locations are extremely low. Second, additional insurance is a less costly defense than structural improvement, even under much higher insurance premiums and hurricane strike probabilities. Third, federally subsidized flood insurance may reduce the effectiveness of government programs encouraging structural mitigation.

The last few years were underscored by the catastrophic damages of Hurricanes‐Katrina, Ike and Wilma. Enormous costs suffered by the public and private sectors could have been avoided with greater mitigation by homeowners. This paper examines the financial incentives for such mitigation. Those incentives are examined in a previously untested framework.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how an academic institution may more effectively respond to a disaster. In this particular situation the issues are being investigated in the context of a hurricane event. From 2005 to 2008 two hurricanes directly hit Lamar University in Beaumont, Texas. This paper examines the impact Hurricane Ike, the latter of these hurricanes, had on this academic institution. This research shares valuable insight into the vulnerabilities confronting academic institutions during natural disasters and highlights the lessons learned.

This is a practitioner paper which applies survey data and qualitative interviews of key decision makers.

Success in the aftermath of this disaster required serious consideration and forethought in institutional preparedness and continuity planning. Specifically, success relied on adequately prioritizing the recovery effort, effectively addressing communication and financial concerns, fostering administrative empowerment in the decision process, and devoting sufficient consideration to the development of alternative academic calendars.

The paper identifies issues of practical significance which academic institutions should consider when developing emergency plans related to natural disasters.

This paper contains new information about the impact of a natural disaster on an academic institution. The issues addressed are of value to comparable institutions in the process of developing their response and recovery plans.

Changing climate dynamics have resulted in a confluence of disaster events to which Louisiana government leaders and emergency managers have never before had to respond simultaneously: a global pandemic and an “epidemic” of landfalling hurricanes during the 2020 season (eight cones over Louisiana) with challenging, unusual characteristics: (1) two hurricanes passing over the same location within 36 hours, a fujiwhara – Hurricanes Marco and Laura, (2) 150 mile-per-hour winds inadequately forecasted and of an almost unprecedented speed, (3) a difficult to forecast surge magnitude that led to incorrect immediate response, (4) delayed long-term recovery efforts from responders outside of the area because of initial reporting errors regarding surge heights and wind speed, and (5) a storm, Zeta, that passed directly over a densely populated area that would have been hard hit by rain if the storm had slowed. In addition, the number and closeness in dates of storm occurrences led to lengthy coastal high-water levels. To these co-occurring threats forecasters, state and local officials and residents responded with expertise and commitment, adhering to close collaboration, modifying evacuations and undertaking protective measures, all contributing to a low death rate from storms and a modest death rate from COVID. More just outcomes were supported by the general capacity of the responders, commitment to keep the residents informed about both risks and appropriate responses to them and the provision of special services, calculated for the new situation of the pandemic and the storm epidemic, for those without the means to respond adequately to both.

The simulated scenarios can be used to compute risk premiums per risk class in the portfolio. These can then be used to adjust the policy premiums by accounting for storm risk.

A complete model to analyse and characterise future losses of the property portfolio of an insurance company due to hurricanes is proposed. The model is calibrated by using the loss data of the Fidelidade insurance company property portfolio resulting from Hurricane Leslie, which hit the centre of continental Portugal in October, 2018.

Several scenarios are simulated and risk maps are constructed. The risk map of the company depends on its portfolio, especially its exposure, and provides a Hurricane risk management tool for the insurance company.

A statistical model is considered, in which weather data is not required. The authors reconstruct the behaviour of storms through the registered claims and respective losses.

Tropical storms pose a significant threat to population despite the noteworthy improvements in forecasting and emergency management. Following the effects of Hurricane Sandy in the continental North America (USA and Canada) and the Caribbean, the purpose of this paper is to examine the mortality caused by the hurricane, focussing on differences in human vulnerability between these two regions.

The authors developed a database of 233 deaths, consisting of variables that provided a description of the circumstances under which the fatal incidents occurred and demographic details of the victims.

Analysis of the database showed higher percentages of female and young victims in the Caribbean than in continental North America, where mortality increased progressively with age and the ratio of males to females was higher. The majority of deaths occurred outdoors especially during clean-up and in vehicle crashes related to the storm. Physical trauma and drowning were identified as the most common causes of death, followed by carbon monoxide poisoning, hypothermia and others, although substantially different percentages were recorded between the two regions. Overall, indirect deaths presented a higher percentage than direct ones. Among the latter, incidents caused by storm surge and tree falls showed the highest numbers. Power failure and car crashes were the most common cause of indirect incidents.

The paper provides a thorough analysis of the circumstances under which fatal incidents occurred. It identifies parameters that affected the vulnerability of human life to the storm and discusses the differences between the Caribbean and continental North America.

This paper aims to address a critical aspect of post‐event recovery, namely the rebuilding of the housing stock following a devastating natural disaster. Using hurricanes as an example, challenges and opportunities are systematically discussed in hopes of sparking some further discussion and new economic models (including incentive‐based) that can help move communities toward greater resiliency and sustainability.

As a viewpoint paper, this paper relies on the author's experience in post‐hurricane damage investigation, structural retrofit, and design to minimize loss.

In evaluating how best to rebuild following a natural disaster, there are clear opportunities (and needs) in the areas of structural damage/loss mitigation, codes and standards, building material and system selection, and risk communication. Specific suggestions are made in each of these areas and the importance of risk‐based decision is stressed in each area.

This paper contributes to the ongoing and informed discussions on resiliency, sustainable design, and disaster‐resistant communities.