Drowning pp 1033-1038 | Cite as

Towards Resilient Organisation of Recovery and Care after Disaster



It is sometimes said that ‘water comes in three kinds: too little (drought), too much (floods) or too dirty (polluted)’. Floods are the most widespread disaster on land and can be generated by excessive precipitation coupled with saturation of the ground, very rapid rainfall which generates flash floods, rapid snowmelt, storm surges, tsunamis, the breaching of volcanic crater lakes or anthropogenic causes such as dam bursts. The devastating power of water necessitates precautionary and protective measures. Examples of risk assessment, spatial planning, capacity management and specific lessons drawn from past disasters are described elsewhere in this book. While emphasising their relevance, in this section we consider what happens after protective barriers fail and floods occur.


Service Worker Flood Disaster Critical Infrastructure Local Capacity Indian Ocean Tsunami 
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.


  1. 1.
    Alexander DE (1993) Natural disasters. UCL Press/Chapman & Hall, London/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hoijtink LM, Te Brake JHM, Dückers MLA (2011) Resilience Monitor: Development of a measuring tool for psychosocial resilience. Impact, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dalziell EP, McManus ST (2004) Resilience, vulnerability, and adaptive capacity: implications for system performance. 1st international forum for engineering decision making (IFED), StoosGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Roche KM, McAneney KJ, van den Honert RC (2010) Policy options for managing flood insurance. Environ Hazards 9:369–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Te Brake H, Dückers M, De Vries M et al (2009) Early psychosocial interventions after disasters, terrorism, and other shocking events: guideline development. Nurs Health Sci 11:336–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Parker CF, Stern EK, Paglia E et al (2009) Preventable catastrophe? The Hurricane Katrina disaster revisited. J Contingencies Crisis Manag 17:14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alexander D (2010) The L’Aquila earthquake of 6 April 2009 and Italian government policy on disaster response. J Nat Resour Policy Res 2:325–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bier V (2006) Hurricane Katrina as a bureaucratic nightmare. In: Daniels R, Kettl D, Kunreuther H (eds) On risk and disaster: lessons from Hurricane Katrina. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp 243–254Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eisinger P (2006) Imperfect federalism: the intergovernmental partnership for homeland security. Public Adm Rev 66:537–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Singer L, Howell J (2006) A continuing storm: the on-going struggles of Hurricane Katrina evacuees. Appleseed Foundation 2006. Available at
  11. 11.
    Telford J, Cosgrave J, Houghton R (2006) Joint evaluation of the international response to the Indian Ocean Tsunami: synthesis report. London: Tsunami Evaluation Coalition, ALNAP, London 2006. Available at
  12. 12.
    IASC (2010) Response to the humanitarian crisis in Haiti following the 12 January earthquake. Inter-Agency Standing Committee.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Landy M (2008) Mega-disasters and federalism. Public Adm Rev 68:s182–s198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (2008) The first year after Hurricane Katrina: what the federal government did. DHS, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cooper C, Block R (2006) Disaster: Hurricane Katrina and the failure of homeland security. Times Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Arq Psychotrauma Expert GroupDiemenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.UCL Institute for Risk and Disaster ReductionUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations