Abstract
The research presented in this chapter seeks to demonstrate a new method to more accurately estimate populations vulnerable to hazards, especially in densely developed mega-cities, and to characterize at-risk populations based on measures of social, physical, and health vulnerability. Emergency management and disaster preparation, planning, mitigation, and recovery requires accurate estimation of potentially at-risk populations and sub-populations. Census data alone, however, cannot provide sufficiently detailed knowledge of population location and distribution, particularly in large, hyper-heterogeneous urban areas like New York City. Additionally, specific sub-populations (i.e., racial/ethnic minorities) may be at higher risk, yet under-counted by existing methods of calculating potentially exposed or impacted populations. We discuss two new inter-related methods that employ Geographic Information Science (GISc) to assess and quantify risk and vulnerability: the Cadastral-based Expert Dasymetric System (CEDS) and the New York City Hazard Vulnerability Index (NYCHVI). CEDS uses an expert system and dasymetric mapping to disaggregate population and sub-population data to the property tax lot level. The analysis shows that compared to CEDS, conventional areal weighting of census data and centroid-containment selection methods under count at-risk population for floods by 37 and 72%, respectively. We found that minorities and other vulnerable sub-populations are disproportionately underestimated using traditional methods, which impairs preparedness and relief efforts. NYCHVI provides a straightforward way of assigning a vulnerability rating to populations in potentially impacted areas, and incorporates locally significant factors that are not captured using national models. Used in tandem, CEDS and NYCHVI are effective in characterizing the vulnerable populations and areas subject to flooding and other hazards, enabling significant improvements in estimating vulnerability over prevailing methods.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Abbreviations
- ATSDR:
-
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
- AW:
-
Areal weighting
- CCM:
-
Centroid Containment Method
- CDC:
-
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
- CEDS:
-
Cadastral-based Dasymetric Expert System
- FAW:
-
Filtered Areal Weighting
- FEMA:
-
Federal Emergency Management Agency
- GIS:
-
Geographic Information System
- GISc:
-
Geographic Information Science
- GPS:
-
Global Positioning Systems
- GRASP:
-
Geospatial Research, Analysis, and Services Program
- HAZUS:
-
Hazards US
- HVA:
-
Human Vulnerability Assessment
- NYC:
-
New York City
- NYCHVI:
-
New York City Hazards Vulnerability Index
- RA:
-
Residential Area
- RU:
-
Residential Units
- SPARCS:
-
Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (New York State Department of Health)
References
Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I., and Wisner, B. (1994). At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability, and Disasters. London, UK: Routledge.
Bloomfield, J., Smith, M., and Thompson, N. (1999). Hot Nights in the City: Global Warming, Sea-Level Rise and the New York Metropolitan Region. Washington, DC: Environmental Defense Fund.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR). (2008). The CDC/ATSDR Public Health Vulnerability Mapping.
Coch, N.K. (1994). Hurricane hazards in the Northeast US. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue, 12:115–147.
Cutter, S.L. (Ed.) (2006). Hazards, Vulnerability and Environmental Justice. London, UK: Earthscan.
Cutter S.L., Boruff B.J., and Shirley W.L. (2003). Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Social Science Quarterly, 84(2):242–261.
Cutter, S.L., Mitchell, J.T., and Scott, M.S. (2000). Revealing the Vulnerability of People and Places: A Case Study of Georgetown County, South Carolina. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90(4):s713–737.
Eicher, C., and Brewer, C. (2001). Dasymetric mapping and areal interpolation: implementation and evaluation. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 28:125–138.
Etzel, R.A., and French. J.G. (1997). Chapter 16: Air Pollution. In Noji, E.K. editor. The Public Health Consequences of Disasters. 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 336–353.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (1983). The 100-year Base Flood Standard and the Floodplain Management Executive Order: A Review. Prepared for the Office of Management and Budget. Washington DC: US Printing Office.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2006). HAZUS: FEMA’s Software Program for Estimating Potential Losses from Disasters, FAQ; http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/hazus/.
Fedeski, M., and Gwilliam, J. (2007). Urban Sustainability in the presence of flood and geological hazards: The development of a GIS-based vulnerability and risk assessment methodology. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83:50–61.
Fielding, J, and Burningham, K. (2005). Environmental inequality and flood hazard. Local Environment, 10(4):379–395.
Fothergill, A., Maestas, E.G.M., and Darlington, J. (1999). Race, ethnicity and disasters in the United States: A review of the literature. Disasters, 23(2):156–173.
Gornitz, V. (2000). Climate Change and a Global City: An Assessment of the Metropolitan East Coast (MEC) Region Coastal Zone Sector Report: Sea Level Rise and Coastal Hazards. (June 8, 2000). http://metroeast_climate.ciesin.columbia.edu/.
Gornitz, V., Couch, S., and Hartig, E. (2002). Impacts of sea level rise in the New York City metropolitan area. Global and Planetary Changes, 32:61–88.
Holt, J. B., Lo, C.P., and Hodler, T. W. (2004). Dasymetric estimation of population density and areal interpolation of census data. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 31:103–121.
Homeland Security Working Group. (14 Sept. 2005). Homeland Security Working Group Symbology Reference. 28 Apr 2008 http://www.fgdc.gov/HSWG/index.html.
Kilbourne, E.M. (1997). Chapter 12: Heat waves and hot environments. In: Noji, E.K. (ed.) The Public Health Consequences of Disasters. 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 245–269.
LotInfo, LLC. (2003). LotInfo. SpaceTrack, Inc. 304 Park Ave, 11th Floor New York, NY 10010.
Maantay, J.A., Maroko, A., and Herrmann, C. (2007). Mapping population distribution in the urban environment: The cadastral-based expert dasymetric system (CEDS). Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 34(2):77–102.
Maantay, J.A., and Ziegler, J. (2006). GIS for the Urban Environment. Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) Press.
Marandola Jr., E. and Hogan, D.J. (2007). Vulnerabilities and risks in population and environmental studies. Population and Environment, 28(2):83–112.
Mitchell, J.K. (1999). Crucibles of Hazard: Megacities and Disasters in Transition. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
Negri, A., Burkardt, N., Golden, J., Halverson, J., Huffman, G., Larsen, M., McGinley, J., Updike, R., Verdin, J., and Wieczorek, G. (2005). The hurricane–flood–landslide continuum. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 86(9):1241–1247.
New York Coty Department of Health and Mental Hygiene [DOHMH]. (2006). Community Health Profiles: Southern Brooklyn.
Noji, E.K. (1992). Disaster epidemiology: Challenges for public health action. Journal of Public Health Policy, 13(3):332–340.
Noji, E.K. (1997). Chapter 8: Earthquakes. In: Noji, E.K. (ed.) The Public Health Consequences of Disasters. 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 135–178.
Sanderson, L.M. (1997). Chapter 18: Fires. In Noji, E.K. editor. The Public Health Consequences of Disasters. 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 373–396.
Wu, S., Qiu, X., and Wang, L. (2005). Population estimation methods in GIS and remote sensing: A review. GIScience and Remote Sensing, 42(1):80–96.
Acknowledgments
This research was partially supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Cooperative Remote Sensing Science and Technology Center (NOAA-CREST) under NOAA grant number NA17AE162. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health also provided critical support for this project under NIEHS grant number 2 R25 ES01185-05. The statements contained within this paper are not the opinions of the funding agencies or the US government, but reflect the authors’ opinions. This research was also supported by a Faculty Research Award from the Professional Staff Congress of the City University of New York (PSC-CUNY), Awards # 69372-0038, “Perfecting the Denominator: Developing a Cadastral-based Expert Dasymetric System in New York City.”
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Maantay, J., Maroko, A., Culp, G. (2009). Using Geographic Information Science to Estimate Vulnerable Urban Populations for Flood Hazard and Risk Assessment in New York City. In: Showalter, P., Lu, Y. (eds) Geospatial Techniques in Urban Hazard and Disaster Analysis. Geotechnologies and the Environment, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2238-7_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2238-7_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-2237-0
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-2238-7
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)