Definition
Community management of natural hazards. Community-based participation in identification, mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery and reconstruction activities related to potential and/or experienced natural hazards.
Introduction
Natural hazard management strategies typically include several broad categories of management. They include hazard identification and mitigation, preparedness (or planning), response, and recovery and reconstruction. These strategies can be viewed as a continuum, with recovery and reconstruction activities ideally resulting in increasingly effective mitigation strategies in advance of the next hazard event.
Historically, the management of natural hazards has been viewed primarily as one of response and recovery, with the responsibility resting largely on state or national government, and with direct planning and participation at the community level largely neglected (e.g., Laughy, 1991). However, as the Organization of American States has noted in its policy series on managing natural hazard risk, natural hazard risk management efforts are most effective when they are explicitly addressed at every level, including at the community level (OAS, 2004). The strengthening of stakeholder and community involvement is viewed by some as the greatest need in the evolving area of hazard management and mitigation (King, 2008). It has become increasingly clear that there is an ongoing shift from a response and recovery approach toward a mitigative approach in the management of natural hazards, which requires the integration of management practices at the community level in order to be successful and sustainable (Pearce, 2003).
There are many challenges to implementing successful community-based participation in the management of natural hazards. Among them is the influence of previous experience with a specific hazard (or lack thereof) on how local government and community members perceive risk from that hazard, which can determine the level of public participation in preparedness and mitigation strategies (Tierney et al., 2001). The effect of previous experience on how an individual responds to future participation in mitigative programs can often be counterintuitive, and has implications for the management of hazards (McGee et al., 2009). Another challenge is the difficulty of conveying concepts of hazard risk to the public, given the often very imprecise nature of the business of hazard prediction (Alexander, 2007). Additionally, individuals may not participate in mitigative strategies due to a lack of accurate information, or the perception that a hazard is a political or ideological creation rather than a reality. They also may be moved to nonparticipation as a means to avoid unpleasant emotions about the issue or in the belief, especially in the case of global threats such as climate change, that there is really nothing they can really do about it (Norgaard, 2006). Studies showing relationships between individuals’ risk-taking propensity and attitudes toward preparation for natural hazards (e.g., McClure et al., 1999), as well as the role that media portrayal of natural disasters has in influencing future social behavior and attitudes (e.g., McClure et al., 2001) have significant implications for how community management strategies may help alleviate fatalism and improve hazard preparedness. Drawing on community empowerment and engagement strategies can significantly enhance the ability of communities to promote and sustain participation in hazard preparedness (e.g., Frandsen et al., 2011).
Those living in the developing world as well as those living in poverty are particularly vulnerable to the effects of natural disasters (World Bank, 2001), largely as a result of the combination of underdevelopment, poor building construction and siting, and economic inability to adequately respond to and recover from a major disaster. The earthquake that struck the impoverished nation of Haiti on January 12, 2010 provided a stark example of the confluence of these attributes in the face of a major natural disaster. Well over 200,000 people had lost their lives as a result of this event, and at least 1.5 million were homeless. In the face of warnings from scientists as recently as 2008 that Haiti was at significant risk for a major earthquake (Manaker et al., 2008), mitigative measures to prepare were lacking, with economics likely a major factor in the lack of community preparedness for such a disaster.
Hazard identification and mitigation
Mitigation includes activities that eliminate or reduce the chance of occurrence or the effects of a disaster. Identification of potential hazards and potential vulnerabilities to hazards is the first step in this process. Communities’ response to recommendations for mitigative measures may be predicated on previous personal experience with specific hazards (McGee et al., 2009). Community mitigation and preparedness for hazards that are perceived to be of low risk may not be implemented, in spite of the fact that occurrence of such hazards can result in very high consequence events (e.g., 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami). Pre-hazard mitigation programs such as those offered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the United States have shown that, while communities may not necessarily be able to prevent disasters, they can take many proactive steps that can reduce the effects of hazards upon communities and their residents (e.g., Volunteer Florida, 2004). For example, requiring structural reinforcements to homes in areas prone to seismic activity will reduce property damage and loss of life from earthquakes. Similarly, the implementation of Early Warning Systems (e.g., Zschau and Küppers, 2003; Momani and Alzaghal, 2009) at the community level has the potential to save hundreds of thousands of lives in extreme cases, such as that which occurred as a result of the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami. Haque (2005) provides a range of experiences in the mitigation and management of natural hazards from an international perspective. It is important to distinguish between mitigation strategies themselves and a community’s capacity to respond to them in a timely and effective manner. Assessing a community’s ability to adapt and respond favorably to these strategies is key to effective implementation, whether in advance of or in response to a natural hazard (e.g., Paton and Tang, 2009).
Preparedness
Preparedness, the next aspect of hazard management, involves planning how to respond in the advent of a natural hazard, and how to activate community resources to respond effectively. Careful advance planning can help save lives and minimize property damage by preparing community members to respond in a prescribed manner when a hazard occurs. In a community-based approach, this phase involves significant public informational and educational components.
Ensuring public participation in the process of hazard management planning can be problematic at times for a variety of reasons (e.g., Chen et al., 2006). However, the importance of continued public involvement throughout the entire management cycle has direct bearing on whether or not mitigative strategies can be sustained until they are needed (e.g., Tanaka, 2009). Promoting community involvement in all aspects of preparedness can result in greater post-disaster resilience, particularly in segments of the population who are likely to be most affected by the occurrence of a natural disaster, such as children and their families (Ronan and Johnston, 2005). However, it is important to note the need to distinguish between providing information on hazards preparation and people’s general ability to interpret and use such information. For example, Lindell et al. (2009) note that hazard experience, risk perception, and population demographics, among others, all can have effects on attributes related to hazard preparation adjustments. Additionally, community risk management strategies are to some extent socially constructed, and how people may act to manage their risk often encompasses both social and cultural issues (e.g., Paton et al., 2010). Finally, trust in the purveyor of the information related to hazard mitigation can influence how effective resultant strategies are (e.g., Paton, 2008).
Response
Response covers the period immediately prior to (if the hazard can be predicted in advance), during, and immediately following a disaster. Responders typically include entities such as the fire and police departments, and medical services. Depending on the magnitude of the event, however, the usual responders and local government may be ill-equipped to manage the response phase without significant assistance from the state or national government, or the international community. Involvement of local community members in the aspects of disaster awareness training can influence hazard-related cognitions and preparedness behaviors (Karanci et al., 2005), resulting in the ability of the general community to participate in the response actions completely and in more beneficial effects (e.g., Paton et al., 2001).
Recovery and reconstruction
Recovery and reconstruction represent the final part of the management cycle, though it can also be viewed as the precursor to the improvement of mitigation procedures. Recovery and reconstruction continue until community functions have returned to normal. In the early part of this phase, critical community services are restored to minimum operating conditions. Depending on the severity of the hazard’s impact, recovery may go on for months or even years, as in the case of disasters with major loss of life or property. Ironically, the impact of a major disaster on a community presents the opportunity for significant improvement of infrastructure and construction practices, resulting in the incorporation of features that are less likely to be affected by future events. While the process of recovery can provide opportunities to mitigate future disasters, successful implementation of such strategies requires an understanding of changes in community contributions to recovery and rebuilding efforts over time (Paton, 2006).
The recovery and reconstruction phase following a significant natural disaster often requires significant economical resources in order to succeed, and the resilience of a community may depend largely on the strength of pre-hazard mitigative strategies that are already in place at the time of the event. Just as important as the resources that contribute to the physical recovery of a community are the services that are in place to address emotional health needs, which can often be quite severe following a natural disaster. Psychiatric disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorders can be common, and while most people are resilient and will recover, some populations may be at higher risk for more serious mental health problems (Watanabe et al., 2004; Wickrama and Wickrama, 2008). A critical aspect of community management of hazards involves planning for both physical and emotional injury that could potentially result from a natural hazard, and communities can use methods such as the formation of innovative self-help groups to ensure recovery in both areas (e.g., Kuppuswamy and Rajarathnam, 2009). While the enabling of participatory planning after the occurrence of a natural disaster bears some beneficial aspects, earlier involvement of stakeholders in the mitigation process is indicated, since many may be ill-equipped emotionally immediately following a disaster (e.g., Ganapati and Ganapati, 2009).
The role of internet technology in community management of hazards
Just as radio and television in the earlier days, the Internet has become an increasingly important resource for communities marching toward active engagement in hazard management. The ability to provide near-real-time hazard-related data (Dimitruk, 2007) and interface with Geographical Information Systems (GIS) (Raheja et al., n.d.), Global Positioning Systems (GPS), and other communications technologies aid in all areas of hazard management. As early as 1998 following the advent of Hurricane Mitch’s landfall in Central America, the Internet was used intensively to post regular updates on information such as epidemiological reports and public health guidelines on topics ranging from household water quality to the prevention of measles (Bittner, 2000).
For the community in the early stages of hazard management planning, the Internet is a tremendous source of ready information on all aspects of hazard management, with some sites functioning as warehouses for relevant links, such as a site hosted by Keele University in Britain (http://www.keele.ac.uk/depts/por/disaster.htm). The added benefit of being able to store relevant information and databases on computer servers far removed from the community that they will serve in the advent of a natural disaster means that the information will still be potentially accessible to communities, responders, and other critical parties even if communications infrastructure is initially disabled or destroyed at the site of the event. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina’s landfall near New Orleans on the south coast of the United States in 2005, and also following the earthquake that struck Haiti in early 2010, the Internet was a critical resource in aiding community members at home and abroad to track down information on the status of missing loved ones (http://guides.library.msstate.edu/content.php?pid=16013&sid=107538; http://www.google.com/relief/haitiearthquake/). Finally, the Internet has become a critical component for the affected communities in the conduct of outreach to the global community to raise funds during the response and recovery phases following the advent of a natural hazard.
Selected examples of community management of hazards
The following are examples of different types of strategies of community management of various natural hazards:
Earthquakes
Tokai Earthquake Preparedness in Shizuoka Prefecture, Japan http://www.e-quakes.pref.shizuoka.jp/english/earthquakepreparedness_in_shizuoka.pdf
This entry discusses in detail the history behind, formation of, and plans for implementing highly integrated management of a potential earthquake hazard in Shizuoka Prefecture, Japan, including community education and participation.
A Novel Strong-Motion Seismic Network for Community Participation in Earthquake Monitoring (Cochran et al., 2009) http://qcn.stanford.edu/ (Quake-Catcher Network).
This is an innovative approach to passive community-based volunteer participation in seismic data gathering and analysis through use of distributed computing techniques, with a goal of increasing the awareness of various aspects of seismic activity to aid with the aspects of earthquake preparedness planning.
Hurricanes, coastal erosion, and coastal flooding
Sustainable Coastal Communities and Ecosystems (SUCCESS) http://seagrant.gso.uri.edu/ecosystems/hazards.html
Based out of the University of Rhode Island in the United States, this program works with governments, the private sector, and community organizations to ensure that coastal communities face and recover from hurricanes, floods, and coastal storms. The goal is to help communities achieve economic growth while reducing the potential impacts of natural hazards and maximizing public safety and public access to the shore. The SUCCESS program works to help develop strategies to prepare for natural disasters, educate disaster preparedness and response professionals, enhance evacuation preparations, and plan for expediting recovery efforts.
Landslides
Landslide Management by Community-Based Approach in the Republic of Armenia (Mori et al., 2007) http://www.n-koei.co.jp/library/pdf/forum16_017.pdf
Report discussing community-based approach toward landslide hazard identification and management.
Natural radioactivity, radon hazard
The Community Environmental Monitoring Program http://cemp.dri.edu/
While this program concentrates on the potential of releases of man-made radioactivity as a result of the past testing of nuclear weapons at the Nevada Test Site, an understanding of the potential hazards of natural radioactivity, including radon, as well as concepts of dose, is an important component of the program. The program provides a hands-on role for community members in the monitoring process and equips them with the knowledge to communicate information on the subject to their neighbors (Hartwell and Shafer, 2011). This program also provides an example of how the Internet can be an effective tool for communication data dissemination.
Tornadoes
Tornado Tabletop Exercise: Engaging Youth in Community Emergency Management http://www.unce.unr.edu/publications/files/cy/2009/cm0908.pdf
An example of a classroom curriculum designed to educate students about community emergency management, including training them to use geospatial technology to create maps with shelter locations and evacuation routes, and simulating a tornado event.
Volcanoes
Maximizing Multi-stakeholder Participation in Government and Community Volcanic Hazard Management Programs: A Case Study from Savo, Solomon Islands (Cronin et al., 2004). Report on attempt at multi-level integration of volcanic risk management strategies and challenges of involvement of certain sectors of the community populations.
Cross-references
Casualties Following Natural Hazards
Communicating Emergency Information
Community Management of Hazards
Costs (Economic) of Natural Hazards and Disasters
Damage and the Built Environment
Earthquake Prediction and Forecasting
Education and Training for Emergency Preparedness
Epidemiology of Disease in Natural Disasters
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Frequency and Magnitude of Events
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Natural Hazards
Global Change and Its Implications for Natural Disasters
Global Positioning System (GPS) and Natural Hazards
Information and Communications Technology
Integrated Emergency Management System
International Strategies for Disaster Reduction: The IDNDR and ISDR
Internet, World Wide Web and Natural Hazards
Misconceptions About Natural Disaster
Monitoring and Prediction of Natural Hazards
Mortality and Injury in Natural Disasters
Natural Hazards in Developing Countries
Perception of Natural Hazards and Disasters
Planning Measures and Political Aspects
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
Psychological Impacts of Natural Disasters
Recovery and Reconstruction After Disaster
Remote Sensing of Natural Hazards and Disasters
Risk Perception and Communication
Bibliography
Alexander, D., 2007. Making research on geological hazards relevant to stakeholders’ needs. Quaternary International, 171–72, 186–192.
Bittner, P., 2000. Disaster management in the digital age: the case of Latin America. Humanitarian Exchange Magazine (16). Britain: Overseas Development Institute. http://www.odihpn.org/report.asp?id=1033
Chen, L. C., Liu, Y. C., and Chan, K. C., 2006. Integrated community-based disaster management program in Taiwan: a case study of Shang-An village. Natural Hazards, 37(1–2), 209–223.
Cochran, E., Lawrence, J., Christensen, C., and Chung, A., 2009. A novel strong-motion seismic network for community participation in earthquake monitoring. IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Magazine, 12(6), 8–15.
Cronin, S. J., Petterson, M. G., Taylor, P. W., and Biliki, R., 2004. Maximising multi-stakeholder participation in government and community volcanic hazard management programs; a case study from Savo, Solomon Islands. Natural Hazards, 33(1), 105–136.
Dimitruk, P., 2007. Disaster management using Internet-based technology: Internet-based disaster management technology can help lighten operational challenges and financial burdens. Healthcare Financial Management. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17366722. Accessed 6 June, 2012.
Frandsen, M., Paton, D., and Sakariassen, K., 2011. Fostering community bushfire preparedness through engagement and empowerment. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 26, 23–30.
Ganapati, N. E., and Ganapati, S., 2009. Enabling participatory planning after disasters: a case study of the World Bank’s housing reconstruction in Turkey. Journal of the American Planning Association, 75(1), 41–59.
Haque, C. E. (ed.), 2005. Mitigation of Natural Hazards and Disasters: International Perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer.
Hartwell, W. T., and Shafer, D. S., 2011. Community Environmental Monitoring Program: a case study of public education and involvement in radiological monitoring. Health Physics, 101(5), 606–617.
Karanci, A. N., Aksit, B., and Dirik, G., 2005. Impact of a community disaster awareness training program in Turkey: does it influence hazard-related cognitions and preparedness behaviors. Social Behavior and Personality, 33(3), 243–258.
King, D., 2008. Reducing hazard vulnerability through local government engagement and action. Natural Hazards, 47(3), 497–508.
Kuppuswamy, S., and Rajarathnam, S., 2009. Women, information technology and disaster management: tsunami affected districts of Tamil Nadu. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 4, 206–215.
Laughy, L., 1991. A Planner’s Handbook for Emergency Preparedness. Vancouver: Centre for Human Settlements, University of British Columbia.
Lindell, M. K., Arlikatti, S., and Prater, C. S., 2009. Why people do what they do to protect against earthquake risk: perceptions of hazard adjustment attributes. Risk Analysis, 29, 1072–1088.
Manaker, D. M., Calais, E., Freed, A. M., Ali, S. T., Przybylski, P., Mattioli, G., Jansma, P., Prepetit, C., and de Chabalier, J. B., 2008. Interseismic Plate coupling and strain partitioning in the Northeastern Caribbean. Geophysical Journal International, 174, 889–903.
McClure, J., Walkey, F., and Allen, M., 1999. When earthquake damage is seen as preventable: attributions, locus of control and attitudes to risk. Applied Psychology, 48(2), 239–256.
McClure, J., Allen, M. W., and Walkey, F., 2001. Countering fatalism: causal information in news reports affects judgements about earthquake damage. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23(2), 109–121.
Mcgee, T. K., McFarlane, B. L., and Varghese, J., 2009. An examination of the influence of hazard experience on wildfire risk perceptions and adoption of mitigation measures. Society and Natural Resources, 22(4), 308–323.
Mercer, J., Kelman, I., Taranis, L., and Suchet-Pearson, S., 2010. Framework for integrating indigenous and scientific knowledge for disaster risk reduction. Disasters, 34(1), 214–239.
Momani, N., and Alzaghal, M. H., 2009. Early warning systems for disasters in Jordan: current and future trends. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 6(1), Art. No. 75.
Mori, M., Hosoda, T., Ishikawa, Y., Tuda, M., Fujimoto, R., and Iwama, T., 2007. Landslide management by community based approach in the Republic of Armenia. Japan International Cooperation Agency, Government of Armenia.
Norgaard, K. M., 2006. “People want to protect themselves a little bit”: emotions, denial, and social movement nonparticipation. Sociological Inquiry, 76(3), 372–396.
Organization of American States, 2004. Managing natural hazard risk: issues and challenges. Policy Series 4.
Paton, D., 2006. Disaster resilience: building capacity to co-exist with natural hazards and their consequences. In Paton, D., and Johnston, D. (eds.), Disaster Resilience: An integrated approach. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas, pp. 3–10.
Paton, D., 2008. Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: how trust influences its effectiveness. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 8, 2–16.
Paton, D., and Tang, C. S., 2009. Adaptive and growth outcomes following tsunami: the experience of thai communities following the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. In Askew, E. S., and Bromley, J. P. (eds.), Atlantic and Indian Oceans: New Oceanographic Research. New York: Nova, pp. 125–140.
Paton, D., Millar, M., and Johnston, D., 2001. Community resilience to volcanic hazard consequences. Natural Hazards, 24, 157–169.
Paton, D., Sagala, S., Okado, N., Jang, L., Bürgelt, P. T., and Gregg, C. E., 2010. Making sense of natural hazard mitigation: personal, social and cultural influences. Environmental Hazards, 9, 183–196.
Pearce, L., 2003. Disaster management and community planning, and public participation: how to achieve sustainable hazard mitigation. Natural Hazards, 28, 211–228.
Raheja, N., Ojha, R., and Mallik, S. R., n.d. Role of internet-based GIS in effective natural disaster management. GIS Development web site: http://www.gisdevelopment.net/technology/gis/techgi0030.htm. Accessed 6 June, 2012.
Ronan, K. R., and Johnston, D. M., 2005. Promoting Community Resilience in Disasters: The Role for Schools, Youth, and Families. New York: Springer.
Tanaka, N., 2009. Vegetation bioshields for tsunami mitigation: review of effectiveness, limitations, construction, and sustainable management. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 5(1), 71–79.
Tierney, K., Lindell, M. K., and Perry, R. W., 2001. Facing the Unexpected: Disaster Preparedness and Response in the United States. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
Volunteer Florida, 2004. Disaster Mitigation: A Guide for Community-Based Organizations. Florida: Florida Department of Community Affairs, Division of Emergency Management, Tallahassee. http://www.tallyredcross.org/library/DisasterMitigation-AGuideForCommunityBasedOrganizations.pdf
Watanabe, C., Okumura, J., Chiu, T. Y., and Wakai, S., 2004. Social support and depressive symptoms among displaced older adults following the 1999 Taiwan earthquake. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 17(1), 63–67.
Wickrama, K. A. S., and Wickrama, K. A. T., 2008. Family context of mental health risk in Tsunami affected mothers: findings from a pilot study in Sri Lanka. Social Science & Medicine, 66(4), 994–1007.
World Bank, 2001. World Development Report 2000/2001, Chapter 9. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zschau, J., and Küppers, A. N. (eds.), 2003. Early Warning Systems for Natural Disaster Reduction. Berlin/New York: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this entry
Cite this entry
Hartwell, W.T. (2013). Community Management of Natural Hazards. In: Bobrowsky, P.T. (eds) Encyclopedia of Natural Hazards. Encyclopedia of Earth Sciences Series. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4399-4_72
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4399-4_72
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-8699-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-4399-4
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceReference Module Physical and Materials ScienceReference Module Earth and Environmental Sciences