DEALING WITH GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS Table 1: Benefit-cost ratio by hazard type and mitigation measure3
Mitigation Measure
Overall Hazard
Benefit-Cost Ratio
Riverine Flood Hurricane Surge Wind Earthquake
Wildland-Urban Interface Fire
4:1 5:1 7:1 5:1 4:1 4:1 11:1 6:1 N/A 10:1 12:1 N/A
yielding the most return on investment for surpassing building codes but also having the least data available to determine the most effective mitigation strategies.
NIBS and Hazard Legislation
Money, expert guidance, and public support are three constraints that legislators operate under when considering hazard mitigation. The Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves: 2018 Interim Report helps guide federal, state, and local decision-makers in their disaster mitigation considerations and, given limited available funds, may help focus their efforts on the most effective hazard mitigation measures. The interim report shows that by implementing beyond code requirements and federal grants alone, over 600 deaths and 1 million cases of nonfatal injuries would be prevented within a span of 23 years. According to David Applegate, associate director for natural hazards at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the federal government has made significant strides in prioritizing natural hazard legislation in the last several years. He gives the disaster recovery reform portion of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (H.R. 302) as an example of one such effort. Applegate believes that this bill “shows how we can invest in avoiding future disasters, which potentially has very significant implications for how federal dollars can be invested in future mitigation efforts,” and notes that “the NIBS report is coming out at a good time to bolster the case for various investments.” The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 includes a provision on natural disaster recovery reform, providing funding for both pre-disaster mitigation efforts and post-disaster assistance for communities to maintain building code standards.
Sometimes, mitigation means having more information,
faster. The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) Reauthorization Act of 2018 (H.R. 6650) provides funding for seismic activity monitoring, earthquake impact studies, and community earthquake resilience improve- ments. Section 6 of the bill states that the USGS must pro-
3. Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves: 2018 Interim Report, National Institute of Building Sciences (2019, 33).
www.aipg.org Jul.Aug.Sep 2019 • TPG 15 4:1 8:1 N/A 7:1 3:1 N/A 6:1 7:1 Too few grants 5:1 3:1 3:1
vide Congress with a five-year plan to manage the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS), which provides emergency- response teams with live updates during emergency situations. Applegate believes that this is crucial because of the difficulty and importance of effective communication during large seis- mic events. A strong ANSS will help provide the best possible situational awareness for response teams so they can focus and prioritize their responsibilities.
The Future of Hazard Mitigation
The future of natural hazard mitigation is unclear, but it is becoming increasingly clear that proactive mitigation methods yield results. Applegate stressed that “it is easy for [legisla- tors] to focus on the response side of disasters; that’s where everyone’s focus is. There is an increasing recognition that we cannot simply respond our way out of disasters. Mitigation is an important part of the overall resiliency equation, and there is a lot more to be done.” Gabe Maser, vice president of federal relations at ICC, echoes these sentiments while noting that U.S. natural disaster mitigation efforts are improving.
Beyond Code Requirements
Adopting I-Code Requirements
Infrastructure Federal Grants
Continued on p. 17
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64
