Hazard mitigation is an important plan for societies and communities to devise, that can prepare them for various types of hazards. The mitigation process involves actions that can help to reduce or eliminate the risks associated with hazards. The process can have many positives to it, and with a mitigation plan in place, states will be safer and ready for anything. With any plan, hazard mitigation has certain tools involved. The tools are Preventions, Property Protection, Public Education and Awareness, Natural Protection, Emergency Services, and Structural Projects. Each tool is fundamental to hazard mitigation and each has importance. The key to mitigation involves planning and being prepared with the right plan that will help achieve the best results.
To understand the tools properly, the importance of hazard mitigation to the public must be understood. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 is very important to the planning process. The act “provides the legal basis for FEMA mitigation planning requirements for State, local and Indian Tribal governments as a condition of mitigation grant assistance.” (FEMA, 2010). This act enacted by Congress, is to ensure that the assistance would lend to any state in need of it. The idea that the government would take this type of initiative for disaster planning can have very positive results for society. Essentially the federal government will help State and Local government, suffering from disasters, anyway possible. This is where hazard mitigation comes into play, since the state and local governments must first prepare themselves with the essentials tools necessary to ensure that devastation will not be the outcome of a disaster. A prepared community will not have to worry about...
... middle of paper ...
...reparing their area and its residents for potential dangers. Natural disasters have destructive effects and are virtually impossible to control, but sustainable hazard mitigation will ensure that property, natural resources and people are not left vulnerable.
Works Cited
FEMA , . (2010, October 30). Disaster mitigation act of 2000. Retrieved from
http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1935
Houlihan, A. (2007). Sustainable hazards mitigation. Informally published manuscript,
Center for Environmental Policy and Management, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky. Retrieved from http://cepm.louisville.edu/Pubs_WPapers/practiceguides/PG18.pdf
Mc Donald, C T. (2005, July 23). A comprehensive natural hazard mitigation strategy
should be the basis for sustainable development. Retrieved from http://www.carecreation.org/documents/hazard_001.pdf
Mitigation: Measures taken to lessen the consequences of disaster events upon our citizens and our
Once this concept is understood, preparation and mitigation within the plan can be molded to fit the disaster event presented to a community. Identification of threats and hazards to mold preparation and mitigation is key when responding to the event. Every event will reveal new types of hazards and threats, thus it is up to the emergency manager and the planning team to assess and revise the EOP each and every time this occurs. Lessons learned per event will only make the community stronger in response to natural and/or man-made disasters moving
Bissell, R. (2010). Catastrophic Readiness and Response Course, Session 6 – Social and Economic Issues. Accessed at http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/edu/crr.asp
Federal intervention in the aftermath of natural disasters began after the San Francisco earthquake in 1906. This 8.3 magnitude earthquake killed 478, and left over 250,000 homeless. While the disaster itself was obviously unavoidable, the subsequent fires that burned throughout the city were a result of poor planning. (1, 17) In an effort to consolidate existing programs, and to improve the nation’s level of preparedness, President Carter created FEMA in 1979. Initially, FEMA was praised for improving communication between various levels of government, and multiple agencies during a crisis. (1,19)
After the attack, the United States hastily constructed the Department of Homeland Security and downgraded FEMA, whose main duty was civil protection. This attracted criticism from some public administration experts that the U.S. government concentrated too much on terrorism…[After Hurricane Katrina] Critics… charged that too many government officials were not familiar with the “National Response Plan” which was implemented in December 2004 after 9/11 terrorist attack. Planning and training for large natural disasters were insufficient after the implementation of the plan. In short, too great a focus on counter-terrorism undermined capacities for natural disaster mitigation, response, and recovery in the post-9/11 United States (para. 7,
Hazards pose risk to everyone. Our acceptance of the risks associated with hazards dictates where and how we live. As humans, we accept a certain amount of risk when choosing to live our daily lives. From time to time, a hazard becomes an emergent situation. Tornadoes in the Midwest, hurricanes along the Gulf Coast or earthquakes in California are all hazards that residents in those regions accept and live with. This paper will examine one hazard that caused a disaster requiring a response from emergency management personnel. Specifically, the hazard more closely examined here is an earthquake. With the recent twenty year anniversary covered by many media outlets, the January 17, 1994, Northridge, California earthquake to date is the most expensive earthquake in American history.
...certain risks and use that knowledge to make solid comprehensive management decisions. These decisions are designed to create a long-term plan that provides solid strategies for preventing and mitigating risk. The risk management also provides Department of homeland security and its partner’s resources and training to educate and prepare members on federal, state, local, tribal and territorial levels to prepare for disaster. Unfortunately, it impossible for our government to completely eliminate risk, whether it is terrorism or man-made or natural disasters, however, with effective risk management, we can rest assure that the risk can be brought down acceptable level where the department of homeland security and their partners are adequately prepared and have the capabilities to handle that risk and lower the potential harm that it could cause the nation long term.
While the number of lives lost has declined in the past 20 years - 800,000 people died from natural disasters in the 1990s, compared with 2 million in the 1970s - the number of people affected has risen. Over the past decade, the total affected by natural hazards has tripled to 2 billion. According to wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn a hazard is: - a source of danger; a possibility of incurring loss or misfortune. Predict is defined as:-The skill of explaining new events based on observations or information.
It also affects the impact the hazard has on many people and their ability to prepare for the hazard.
... middle of paper ... ... What can we do to be prepared for future natural disasters? The federal government began increasing the height and strength of the levees shortly after Katrina, and millions of dollars have been spent on coastal restoration programs.
Authorities have attempted to implement codes or regulations, but that has proved to be very difficult tasks becasue there are many variables that effect the dynamic response of buildings. One way to try to avoid disaster is to evaluate seismic risk is to look at a buildings hazards, exposure, vulnerability, and location. Hazards are, for example, landslides ad soil type. Exposure is a building's occupancy and function. Vulnerability is the expected performance of a building's system, and location is how often earthquakes occur in the area. (Lagorio)
Communities throughout the country and the world are susceptible to disasters. The environment and location of a community often predisposes a greater susceptibility to the type of disaster. For example Central Pennsylvania would not be susceptible to an avalanche however communities in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado would have increase vulnerability. Understanding the types of disaster for which the community is susceptible is essential for emergency preparedness (Nies & McEwen, 2011). All communities are susceptible to man-made disasters; terrorism, fires, and mass transit accidents and emergency preparedness are essential. The Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA) is responsible for disaster planning.
Disaster Mitigation: A Community-Based Approach. Oxford: Oxfam. UNISDR. a.
Natural disasters can be traumatic and often heart-breaking for many individuals and there is no way to predict when and where these tragedies will strike. Towns, personal property, and even lives can be lost due to Mother Nature’s wrath. Hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, blizzards, floods, wildfires and draughts are just a few of the natural occurrences that create both individual suffering but economic hardship. Businesses suffer, unemployment rates rise, crops are destroyed, trade is reduced, and fewer taxes paid all due to an unplanned natural catastrophe. Regardless of the type of cataclysm, the aftermath has the potential to cost the economy billions of dollars.
Of the four phases of emergency management, mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery, perhaps the place that individuals can make the biggest difference in their own state of resiliency and survival of a disaster is in the preparedness phase. Being prepared before a disaster strikes makes sense yet many people fail to take even simple, precautionary steps to reduce the consequences of destruction and mayhem produced by natural events such as earthquakes, volcanos and tornados (see Paton et al, 2001, Mileti and Peek, 2002; Tierney, 1993, Tierney et al, 2001).