Advertisement

Economic Principles, Issues, and Research Priorities in Hazard Loss Estimation

  • Adam Rose
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)

Abstract

The quantification of economic losses from natural and manmade hazards is necessary to gauge individual and community vulnerability, evaluate the worthiness of mitigation, determine the appropriate level of disaster assistance, improve recovery decisions, and inform insurers of their potential liability. Several notable studies dealing with hazard loss estimation have recently been undertaken. These include chapters in surveys by the National Research Council (NRC, 1999; Mileti, 1999) and Heinz Center (2000), as well as various case studies (see, e.g., Cole, 1995; Tierney, 1997; Shinozuka et al., 1998; Gordon et al., 1998; Chang et al., 2001).

Keywords

Natural Hazard Computable General Equilibrium Loss Estimation Economic Principle Federal Emergency Management Agency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Applied Technology Council. 1991. ATC-25: Seismic Vulnerability and Impact of Disruption on Lifelines in the Conterminous United States. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Applied Technology Council, CA.Google Scholar
  2. Batey, P. and A. Rose. 1990. “Extended Input-Output Models: Progress and Potential,” International Regional Science Review, 13: 27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boadway, R. and N. Bruce. 1985. Welfare Economics. Oxford, UK; Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  4. Boisvert, R. 1992. “Direct and Indirect Economic Losses from Lifeline Damage,” in Indirect Economics Consequences of a Catastrophic Earthquake, Final Report by Development Technologies to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.Google Scholar
  5. Boisvert, R. 1995. “Computer General Equilibrium Modeling Approach to Natural Hazard Loss Estimation,” Final Report to FEMA, Department of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  6. Boyle, K. and J. Bergstrom. 1992. “Benefit Transfer Studies: Myths, Pragmatism, and Idealism,” Water Resources Research, 29: 657–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bram, J., J. Orr, and C. Rappaport. 2002. “The Impact of the World Trade Center Attack on New York City: Where Do We Stand?” Federal Reserve Bank of New York, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  8. Brooke, A., D. Kendrick, and A. Meeraus. 1992. GAMS: A User’s Guide. San Francisco, CA; Scientific Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brookshire, D. and M. McKee. 1992. “Other Indirect Costs and Losses from Earthquakes: Issues and Estimation,” in Indirect Consequences of a Catastrophic Earthquake, Final Report by Development Technologies to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.Google Scholar
  10. Brookshire, D., S.E. Chang, H. Cochrane, R. Olson, A. Rose, and J. Steenson. 1997. “Direct and Indirect Economic Losses from Earthquake Damage,” Earthquake Spectra, 13: 683–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brundtland Commission. 1984. Our Common Future. Cambridge, UK; Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bruneau, M. et al. 2002. “A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance Seismic Resilience of Communities,” MCEER, Buffalo, NY.Google Scholar
  13. Burby, R. ed. 1999. Cooperating with Nature: Confronting Natural Hazards with Land Use Planning for Sustainable Communities. Washington, DC; Joseph Henry Press.Google Scholar
  14. Chang, S., A. Rose, M. Shinozuka, and K. Tierney. 2001. “Modeling Earthquake Impact on Urban Lifeline Systems: Advances in Integration,” in B. Spencey and Y. Hu eds. Earthquake Engineering Frontiers in the New Millennium, Lisse, The Netherlands; Balkema.Google Scholar
  15. Chang, S.E. 1998. “Direct Economic Impact,” in M. Shinozuka et al. eds. Engineering and Socioeconomic Impacts of Earthquakes: An Analysis of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions in the New Madrid Area. Buffalo, NY; MCEER.Google Scholar
  16. Chang, S.E. 2001. Structural Change in Urban Economies: Recovery and Long-Term Impacts in the 1995 Kobe Earthquake, The Kokumin Keizai Zasshi (Journal of Economics and Business Administration), 183: 47–66.Google Scholar
  17. Chang, S.E., H.A. Seligson, and R.T. Eguchi. 1996. Estimation of the Economic Impact of MultipleLifelineDisruption Memphis Light, Gas, and Water Division Case Study. Buffalo, NY; NCEER.Google Scholar
  18. Cho, S., P. Gordon, J. Moore, H. Richardson, M. Shinozuka, and S.E. Chang. 2001. “Integrating Transportation Network and Regional Economic Models to Estimate the Cost of a Large Urban Earthquake,” Journal of Regional Science, 41: 39–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cochrane, H. 1974. “Predicting the Economic Impact of Earthquakes,” in H. Cochrane et al. eds. Social Science Perspectives on the Coming San Francisco Earthquake, Natural Hazards Research Paper No. 25, NHRAIC, Boulder, CO; University of Colorado.Google Scholar
  20. Cochrane, H. 1975. Natural Hazards and Their Distributive Effects. Boulder, CO; Natural Hazards Research Applications Information Center.Google Scholar
  21. Cochrane, H. 1997. “Forecasting the Economic Impact of a Mid-West Earthquake,” in B. Jones ed. Economic Consequences of Earthquakes: Preparing for the Unexpected. Buffalo, NY; MCEER.Google Scholar
  22. Cochrane, H., M. Laub, and J. Barth. 1992. “The Effect of Earthquakes on Banking and Financial Markets,” in Indirect Economics Consequences of a Catastrophic Earthquake, Final Report by Development Technologies to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.Google Scholar
  23. Cole, S. 1988. “The Delayed Impacts of Plant Closures in a Reformulated Leontief Model,” Papers of the Regional Science Association, 65: 135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cole, S. 1995. “Lifelines and Livelihood: A Social Accounting Matrix Approach to Calamity Preparedness,” Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 3: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cole, S. 1998. “Decision Support for Calamity Preparedness: Socioeconomic and Interregional Impacts,” in M. Shinozuka et al. eds. Engineering and Socioeconomic Impacts of Earthquakes: An Analysis of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions in the New Madrid Area. Buffalo, NY; MCEER.Google Scholar
  26. Cole, S. 1999. “The Phantom of the Matrix: Inverting the Case on Closure in Cole’s Model,” Papers in Regional Science, 78: 429–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Comfort, L. 1999. Shared Risk: Complex Systems is Seismic Response, New York, NY; Pergamon.Google Scholar
  28. Dacy, E. and H. Kunreuther. 1969. The Economics of Natural Disasters: Implications for Federal Policy. New York, NY; The Free Press.Google Scholar
  29. Davis, H.C. and E.L. Salkin. 1984. “Alternative Approaches to the Estimation of Economic Impacts Resulting from Supply Constraints,” Annals of Regional Science, 18: 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Eguchi, R. and S. Pelmulder. 1992. “Indirect Economic Impacts of Energy Network,” in Indirect Economic Consequences of a Catastrophic Earthquake, Final Report by Development Technologies to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.Google Scholar
  31. Ellson, R., J. Milliman, and R. Roberts. 1984. “Measuring the Regional Economic Effects of Earthquakes and Earthquake Prediction,” Journal of Regional Science, 24: 559–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2001. Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology (HAZUS). Washington, DC; National Institute of Building Sciences.Google Scholar
  33. Fisher, A. et al. 2000. Preparing for a Changing Climate: The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change in the Mid-Atlantic Region. University Park, PA; The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
  34. Freeman, A.M. 1993. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods. Washington, DC; Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  35. Friesema, P. et al. 1979. Aftermath: Communities and Natural Disasters. Beverly Hills, CA; Sage.Google Scholar
  36. Giarratani, F., and R. Garhart. 1991. “Simulation Techniques in the Evaluation of Regional Input-Output Models,” in J. Dewhurst, G. Hewings, and R. Jensen eds. Regional Input-Output Modeling: New Developments and Interpretations. Aldershot, UK; Avebury.Google Scholar
  37. Glickman, N. 1971. “An Economic Forecasting Model for the Philadelphia Region,” Journal of Regional Science, 11: 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gordon, P., H. Richardson, and B. Davis. 1998. “Transport-Related Impacts of the Northridge Earthquake,” Journal of Transportation and Statistics, 1: 22–36.Google Scholar
  39. Guimaraes, P., F. Hefner, and D. Woodward. 1993. “Wealth and Income Effects of Natural Disasters: An Econometric Analysis of Hurricane Hugo,” Review of Regional Studies, 23: 97–114.Google Scholar
  40. Hammitt, J., J.T. Liu, and J.L. Liu. 2001. “Contingent Valuation of a Taiwanese Wetlands,” Environment and Development Economics, 6: 259–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hanson, K. and A. Rose. 1997. “Factor Productivity and Income Inequality: A General Equilibrium Analysis,” Applied Economics, 29: 1061–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Heinz Center for Science, Economics and the Environment. 2000. The Hidden Costs of Coastal Hazards: Implications for Risk Assessment and Mitigation. Washington, DC; Island Press.Google Scholar
  43. Hewings, G.J.D. and R. Mahidhara. 1996. “Economic Impacts: Lost Income, Ripple Effects, and Recovery,” in S. Changnon ed. The Great Flood of 1993. Boulder, CO; Westview Press.Google Scholar
  44. Howard, R. and J. Matheson. 1989. Readings on the Principles and Applications of Decision Analysis. Menlo Park, CA; Strategic Decisions Group.Google Scholar
  45. Howe, C., and H. Cochrane. 1993. Guidelines for the Uniform Definition, Identification and Measurement of Economic Damages from Natural Hazard Events. Program on Environment and Behavior Special Publication No. 28, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  46. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2000. Climate Change 2000. New York, NY; Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Jensen, R. 1980. “The Concept of Accuracy in Regional Input-Output Models,” International Regional Science Review, 5: 139–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kawashima, K. and T. Kanoh. 1990. “Evaluation of Indirect Economic Effects Caused by the 1983 Nihonkai-Chubu, Japan, Earthquake,” Earthquake Spectra, 6: 739–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kirchhoff, S., B. Colby, and J. LaFrance. 1997. “Evaluating the Performance of Benefit Transfer: An Empirical Inquiry,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 33: 75–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kunreuther, H. and G. Heal. 2002. “Interdependent Security: The Case of Identical Agents,” Columbia University.Google Scholar
  51. Kunreuther, H. et al. 2001. “Using Cost-Benefit Analysis to Evaluate Mitigation for Lifeline Systems,” Research Progress and Accomplishments, Buffalo, NY: MCEER.Google Scholar
  52. Lahr, M. 2001. “A Strategy for Producing Hybrid Regional Input-Output Tables,” in M. Lahr and E. Dietzenbacher eds. Input-Output Analysis: Frontiers and Extensions. London, UK; Palgrave.Google Scholar
  53. Law, A. and W. D. Kelton. 1991. Simulation Modeling and Analysis. New York, NY; McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  54. Learner, E. 1983. “Let’s Take the Con Out of Econometrics,” American Economic Review, 73: 31–43.Google Scholar
  55. Li, P.C., A. Rose, and B. Eduardo. 1999. “Construction of an Input-Output Income Distribution Matrix for the U.S.,” in G.J.D. Hewings et al. eds. Understanding and Interpreting Economic Structure, Heidelberg, Germany; Springer.Google Scholar
  56. Mileti, D. 1999. Disasters by Design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States. Washington, DC; Joseph Henry Press.Google Scholar
  57. Miller, R.E. and P.D. Blair. 1985. Input-Output Analysis: Foundations and Extensions. Englewood Cliffs, NJ; Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  58. Minnesota IMPLAN Group (MIG). 1999. Micro IMPLAN: A User’s Guide, Stillwater, MN; MIG.Google Scholar
  59. Mitchell, R. and R. Carson. 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, DC; Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  60. National Research Council. 1999. The Impacts of Natural Disasters: A Framework for Loss Estimation. Washington, DC; National Academy of Sciences Press.Google Scholar
  61. Newnan, D., J. Lavelle, and T. Eschenbach. 2001. Essentials of Engineering Economic Analysis, Second Edition. New York, NY; Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Okuyama, Y., G.J.D. Hewings, and M. Sonis. 1999a. “Economic Impacts of an Unscheduled, Disruptive Event: A Miyazawa Multiplier Analysis,” in G.J.D. Hewings et al. eds. Understanding and Interpreting Economic Structure. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  63. Okuyama, Y., G.J.D. Hewings, and M. Sonis. 2000. “Sequential Interindustry Model (SIM) and Impact Analysis: Applications for Measuring Economic Impact of Unscheduled Events,” Regional Economics Applications Laboratory, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL.Google Scholar
  64. Okuyama, Y., G.J.D. Hewings, T. Kim, D. Boyce, H. Ham, and J. Sohn. 1999b. “Economic Impacts of an Earthquake in the New Madrid Seismic Zone: A Multiregional Analysis,” in W. Elliott and P. McDonough eds. Optimizing Post-Earthquake Lifeline System Reliability.Google Scholar
  65. Oladosu, G. 2000. “A Non-Market Computable General Equilibrium Model for Evaluating the Economic Impacts of Climate Change in the Susquehanna River Basin,” Ph.D. Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  66. Partridge, M.D. and D.S. Rickman. 1998. “Regional Computable General Equilibrium Modeling: A Survey and Critical Appraisal,” International Regional Science Review, Vol. 21, No. 3: 205–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Perroni, C. and T. Rutherford. 1993. “Regular Flexibility of Nested CES Functions,” European Economic Review, 39: 335–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Porter, K., J. Beck, H. Seligson, C. Scawthorn, L. Tobin, and T. Boyd. 2002. Improving Loss Estimation for Woodframe Buildings. Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, Richmond, CAx.Google Scholar
  69. Resnick, M. 1987. Choices: An Introduction to Decision Theory, Minneapolis, MN; University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  70. Rose, A. 1981. “Utility Lifelines and Economic Activity in the Context of Earthquakes,” in J. Isenberg ed. Social and Economic Impact of Earthquakes on Utility Lifelines. New York, NY; American Society of Civil Engineers.Google Scholar
  71. Rose, A. 1995. “Input-Output Economics and Computable General Equilibrium Models,” Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 6: 295–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rose, A. 2000. “Natural Hazard Loss Estimation: Fundamentals and Complications,” Department of Energy, Environmental, and Mineral Economics, the Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  73. Rose, A. and D. Lim. 2002. “Business Interruption Losses from Natural Hazards: Conceptual and Methodological Issues in the Case of the Northridge Earthquake,” Environmental Hazards, 4: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rose, A. and G. Guha. 2004. “Computable General Equilibrium Modeling of Electric Utility Lifeline Losses from Earthquakes,” in this volume.Google Scholar
  75. Rose, A. and J. Benavides. 1998. “Regional Economic Impacts,” in M. Shinozuka et al. eds., Engineering and Socioeconomic Impacts of Earthquakes: An Analysis of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions in the New Madrid Area. Buffalo, NY; MCEER.Google Scholar
  76. Rose, A. and J. Benavides. 1999. “Optimal Allocation of Electricity After Major Earthquakes: Market Mechanisms Versus Rationing,” in K. Lawrence et al. eds. Advances in Mathematical Programming and Financial Planning. Greenwich, CT; JAI Press.Google Scholar
  77. Rose, A. and S. Liao. 2002. “Modeling Regional Economic Resiliency to Earthquakes: A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis of Water Service Disruptions,” inProceedings of the 7th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Oakland, CA; EERI.Google Scholar
  78. Rose, A. and W. Miernyk. 1989. “Input-Output Analysis: The First Fifty Years,” Economic Systems Research, 1: 229–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Rose, A., B.K. Stevens, and G. Davis. 1988. Natural Resource Policy and Income Distribution. Baltimore MD, Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Rose, A., B.K. Stevens, and G. Davis. 1989. “Assessing Who Gains and Who Loses From Natural Resource Policy: Distributional Information and the Public Participation Process,” Resources Policy, 15: 282–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Rose, A., G. Guha, S. Y. Liao and R. Ranjan. 2002. “Recalibrating CGE Models on the Basis of Empirical Data: An Application to Estimating Losses from Natural Hazards,” Department of Energy, Environmental, and Mineral Economics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  82. Rose, A., G. Oladosu, and D. Salvino. 2003. “Regional Economic Impacts of Electricity Outages in California: A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis,” Working Paper, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  83. Rose, A., J. Benavides, S.E. Chang, P. Szczesniak, and D. Lim. 1997. “The Regional Economic Impact of an Earthquake: Direct and Indirect Effects of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions,” Journal of Regional Science, 37: 437–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Rose, A., J. Carmichael, G. Oladosu, and D. Abler. 1999. “Modeling the Economics of Natural Hazard Impacts and Policy Responses Using Computable General Equilibrium Analysis,” Department of Energy, Environmental, and Mineral Economics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  85. Rose, A., S.E. Chang, and M. Shinozuka. 1998. “Direct and Indirect Infrastructure User Costs of Natural Hazards,” in Proceedings of the Structural Engineers World Congress, New York, NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  86. Shinozuka, M., A. Rose, and R. Eguchi eds.. 1998. Engineering and Socioeconomic Impacts of Earthquakes: An Analysis of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions in the New Madrid Area. Buffalo, NY; MCEER.Google Scholar
  87. Shoven, J. and J. Whalley. 1992. Applying General Equilibrium. New York, NY; Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  88. Taylor, C., S. Werner, and S. Jakubowski. 2001. “The Walkthrough Method for Catastrophe Decision-Making,” Natural Hazards Management, Inc., Torrance, CA.Google Scholar
  89. Tierney, K. 1997. “Impacts of Recent Disasters on Businesses: The 1993 Midwest Floods and the 1994 Northridge Earthquake,” in Barclay Jones ed. Economic Consequences of Earthquakes: Preparing for the Unexpected. Buffalo, NY; NCEER.Google Scholar
  90. Tierney, K. and J. Dahlhamer. 1998. “Earthquake Vulnerability and Emergency Preparedness Among Businesses,” in M. Shinozuka et al. eds., Engineering and Socioeconomic Impacts of Earthquakes: An Analysis of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions in the New Madrid Area. Buffalo, NY; MCEER.Google Scholar
  91. Tierney, K., J. Nigg, and J. Dahlhamer. 1996. “The Impact of the 1993 Midwest Floods: Business Vulnerability and Disruption in Des Moines,” in R. T. Sylves and W.L. Waugh, Jr. eds., Cities and Disaster: North American Studies in Emergency Management. Springfield, MA; Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
  92. Treyz, G. 1993. Regional Economic Modeling: A Systematic Approach to Economic Forecasting and Policy Analysis. Dordrecht, The Netherlands; Kluwer.Google Scholar
  93. Webb, G., K. Tierney, and J. Dahlhamer. 2000. “Business and Disasters: Empirical Patterns and Unanswered Questions,” Natural Hazards Review, 1: 83–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. West, C.T. and D.G. Lenze. 1994. “Modeling the Regional Impact of Natural Disaster and Recovery: A General Framework and an Application to Hurricane Andrew,” International Regional Science Review, 17: 121–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. West, G.R. 1986. “A Stochastic Analysis of an Input-Output Model,” Econometrica, 54: 363–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. White, G. and J. E. Haas. 1975. Assessment of Research on Natural Hazards. Cambridge, MA; MIT Press.Google Scholar
  97. White, J., K. Case, D. Pratt, and M. Agee. 1997. Principles of Engineering Economic Analysis, 4th Edition. New York, NY; John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  98. Zerbe, R. and D. Dively. 1994. Benefit-Cost Analysis Theory and Practice. New York, NY; HarperCollins.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adam Rose
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Geography and Natural Hazards Research CenterThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations