Natural Hazards

, Volume 54, Issue 1, pp 141–158

The perceived landfall location of evacuees from Hurricane Gustav

  • J. C. Senkbeil
  • D. M. Brommer
  • P. G. Dixon
  • M. E. Brown
  • K. Sherman-Morris
Original Paper

Abstract

Hurricane evacuations in the United States are costly, chaotic, and sometimes unnecessary. Many coastal residents consider evacuation after viewing a forecasted graphic of where the storm is anticipated to make landfall. During the evacuation process, hurricane tracks commonly deviate from the forecasted landfall track and many evacuees may not pay attention to these track deviations after evacuating. Frequently, a disconnect may occur between the actual landfall track, the official forecasted track, and the perceived track of each individual as they made their evacuation decision. Specifically for evacuees, a shift in track may decrease the hazards associated with a landfalling hurricane since evacuees perceive their threat level to be high at the time of evacuation. Using survey data gathered during the evacuation from Hurricane Gustav (2008) in coastal Louisiana (USA), we calculated a type of Z-score to measure the distance error between each evacuee’s perceived landfall location and the actual landfall location from each evacuee’s home zip code. Results indicate a personal landfall bias in the direction of home zip code for evacuees of three metropolitan regions. Evacuees from the greater New Orleans area displayed the highest error, followed by evacuees from greater Lafayette. Furthermore, we validate the authenticity of the previous results by employing two additional methods of error assessment. A large regional error score might possibly be a predictor of evacuation complacency for a future hurricane of similar magnitude, although there are many other variables that must be considered.

Keywords

Hurricanes Evacuation Landfall Error Complacency Perception 

References

  1. Baker EJ (1979) Predicting response to hurricane warnings: a reanalysis of data from four studies. Mass Emerg 4:9–24Google Scholar
  2. Baker EJ (1980) Public response to hurricane Frederic: variation within the warning area. Environmental Hazards Center, Florida State University, TallahasseeGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker EJ (1981) Evacuation of Galveston in Hurricane Allen. Environmental Hazards Center, Florida State University, TallahasseeGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker EJ (1986) Warning and evacuation in Hurricanes Elena and Kate in Panama City, Florida and Pinellas County, Florida. Environmental Hazards Center, Florida State University, TallahasseeGoogle Scholar
  5. Baker EJ (1990) Evacuation decision making and public response in Hurricane Hugo in South Carolina. Natural Hazards Research Center, University of Colorado, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  6. Baker EJ (1991) Hurricane evacuation behavior. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 9:287–310Google Scholar
  7. Barnes LR, Gruntfest EC, Hayden MH, Schultz DM, Benight C (2007) False alarms and close calls: a conceptual model of warning accuracy. Weather Forecast 22:1140–1147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blake ES, Rappaport EN, Landsea CW (2007) The deadliest, costliest, and most intense tropical cyclones from 1851 to 2006 (and other frequently requested hurricane facts) NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS TPC-5Google Scholar
  9. Broad K, Leiserowitz A, Weinkle J, Steketee M (2007) Misinterpretations of the “cone of uncertainty” in Florida during the 2004 hurricane season. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 88(5):651–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dixit VV, Pande A, Radwan E, Abdel-Aty M (2008) Understanding the impact of a recent hurricane on mobilization time during a subsequent hurricane. Transp Res Record 4:9–57Google Scholar
  11. Dow K, Cutter SL (1998) Crying wolf: repeat responses to hurricane evacuation orders. Coast Manage 26:237–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dow K, Cutter SL (2000) Public orders and personal opinions: household strategies for hurricane risk assessment. Global Environ Change Part B: Environ Hazards 2(4):143–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Keim BD, Muller RA, Stone GW (2007) Spatiotemporal patterns and return periods of tropical storm and hurricane strikes from Texas to Maine. J Clim 20(14):3498–3509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Killian LM (1954) Evacuation of Panama city before hurricane Florence. National Research Council Disaster Study, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  15. Landsea CW (2005) Meteorology—hurricanes and global warming. Nature 438(7071):E11–E13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Moore H, Bates F, Layman M, Parenton V (1963) Before the wind: a study of the response to hurricane Carla. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. National Hurricane Center Season Archives (2008) http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastall.shtml. Accessed 20 October 2008
  18. National Weather Service New Orleans Hurricane Gustav Radar Images (2008) http://www.srh.noaa.gov/lix/html/Gustav08/Radar/. Accessed 20 October 2008
  19. Pielke R (1997) Reframing the US hurricane problem. Soc Nat Res 10(48):5–499Google Scholar
  20. Regnier E (2008) Public evacuation decisions and hurricane track uncertainty. Manage Sci 54:16–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sadowski NC, Sutter D (2008) Mitigation motivated by past experience: prior hurricanes and damages. Ocean Coast Manage 51:303–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Senkbeil JC, Sheridan SC (2006) A postlandfall hurricane classification system for the United States. J Coastal Res 22:1025–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. United States Army Corps of Engineers Post Storm Assessment Archive (2004) 2004 Hurricane assessments. http://chps.sam.usace.army.mil/USHESdata/Assessments/2004Storms/2004_hurricane_season_page.htm. Accessed 15 April 2009
  24. Urdan TC (2005) Statistics in plain english. Routledge ISBN: 0805852417, 9780805852417, 184 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Wang X, Kapucu N (2008) Public complacency under repeated emergency threats: some empirical evidence. J Pub Admin Res Theory 18:57–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Webster PJ et al (2005) Changes in tropical cyclone number, duration, and intensity in a warming environment. Science 309(5742):1844–1846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wilkinson KP, Posey EI, Ross PJ, Spencer BG (1970) Citizens’ response to warnings of hurricane Camille. Social Sciences Research Center, Mississippi State University, MississippiGoogle Scholar
  28. Williams L (2008) Nagin orders evacuation in face of ‘mother of all storms’. New Orleans Times, PicayuneGoogle Scholar
  29. Windham GO, Posey EI, Ross PJ, Spencer BG (1977) Reactions to storm threat during hurricane Eloise. Social Sciences Research Center, Mississippi State University, MississippiGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhang F, Coauthors (2007) An in-person survey investigating public perceptions of and responses to hurricane Rita forecasts along the Texas Coast. Weather Forecast 22:1177–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. C. Senkbeil
    • 1
  • D. M. Brommer
    • 1
  • P. G. Dixon
    • 2
  • M. E. Brown
    • 2
  • K. Sherman-Morris
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of GeographyUniversity of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA
  2. 2.Department of GeosciencesMississippi State UniversityMississippiUSA

Personalised recommendations