Transcript STRATEGIES FOR BECOMING DISASTER RESILIENT DURING

STRATEGIES FOR BECOMING
DISASTER RESILIENT
DURING 2013
Walter Hays, Global Alliance for
Disaster Reduction, Vienna,
Virginia, USA
PART 3: MAKE THE
MEGACITIES MORE
DISASTER RESILIENT
MEGACITIES FACE HUGE
DISASTERS FROM …
• EARTHQUAKES
• FLOODS
• SEVERE
WINDSTORMS
• LANDSLIDES
• VOLCANIC
ERUPTIONS
• WILDFIRES
• TSUNAMIS
• DROUGHTS
WHAT HISTORY TEACHES
• CITIES AND
MEGACITIES EXIST
BY GEOLOGIC,
HYDROLOGIC, AND
ATMOSPHERIC
CONSENT, WHICH
CAN BE
WITHDRAWN
WITHOUT NOTICE.
A DISASTER OCCURS WHEN
THE MEGACITY’S PUBLIC
POLICIES ALLOW IT TO BE …
UN—PREPARED
UN—PROTECTED
UN--WARNED
UN—ABLE TO RESPOND EFFECTIVELY
UN (NON)—RESILIENT IN RECOVERY
QUESTION
• WHAT IS A MEGACITY AND WHAT
VULNERABILITY REDUCTION
MEASURES WILL MAKE IT LESS
VULNERABLE TO THE POTENTIAL
DISASTER AGENTS OF A
NATURAL HAZARD?
MEGACITIES IN 1900
WORLD POPULATION:
1.6 BILLION
•
•
•
•
•
TOKYO: 21.9 M
NEW YORK: 15.6 M
MEXICO CITY: 13.9 M
SAO PAULO: 12.5 M
SHANGHAI: 11.7
•
•
•
•
•
•
OSAKA: 10.0 M
BUENOS AIRES: 9.9 M
LOS ANGELES: 9.5 M
CALCUTA 9.0 M
BEIJING 9.0 M
SOURCE: THE
POPULATION
INSTITUTE 2/3/01
MEGACITIES IN 2000
WORLD POPULATION:
6 BILLION
•
•
•
•
•
TOKYO: 25.4 M
BOMBAY: 18.6 M
MEXICO CITY: 18.3 M
SAO PAULO: 18.0 M
NEW YORK: 16.7 M
•
•
•
•
•
LAGOS: 14.1 M
CALCUTA 13.2 M
LOS ANGELES: 13.2 M
SHANGHAI: 13.0 M
BUENOS AIRES: 12.7
M
• SOURCE: THE
POPULATION
INSTITUTE 2/3/01
MEGACITIES IN 2020
WORLD POPULATION:
10 BILLION
•
•
•
•
•
BOMBAY: 28.5 M
TOKYO: 27.3 M
LAGOS: 26.5 M
DHAKA: 24.0 M
KARACHI: 21.7 M
•
•
•
•
•
•
SAO PAULO: 21.3 M
MEXICO CITY: 19.6 M
JAKARTA: 19.4
CALCUTA 18.8 M
NEW DEHLI: 18:4 M
SOURCE: THE
POPULATION
INSTITUTE 2/3/01
TOKYO IS A MEGACITY AT RISK
FROM NATURAL HAZARDS
CAIRO IS A MEGACITY AT RISK
FROM NATURAL HAZARDS
ISTHANBUL IS A MEGACITY AT
RISK FROM NATURAL HAZARDS
ISTHANBUL: CAUSES OF
VULNERABILITIES
• SIZE
• FRAGILITY OF
EXISTING BUIDINGS/
INFRASTRUCTURE
• INADEQUATE
PROTECTION
MEASURES
• CONSTRUCTION
MATERIALS AND
PRACTICES
SAN FRANCISCO: DEPENDENT
ON TRANSPORTATION
• DAMAGE TO ONE
SPAN OF THE BAY
BRIDGE IN 1989
CHANGED THE LIVES
OF MILLIONS AND
DISRUPTED MANY
BUSINESSES.
• NO ONE KNOWS THE
TRUE COST.
LOS ANGELES: DEPENDENT ON
UTILITY SYSTEMS
• DAMAGE TO A
UTILIYY CORRIDOR
CAUSED
WIDESPREAD
OUTAGES OF POWER,
GAS, WATER, AND
WASTE CENTERS.
• OUTAGES LED TO
LOSSES IN THE
BILLIONS.
SAN FRANCISCO: SUSCEPTIBLE
TO FIRE
RISK ASSESSMENT
•NAT. HAZARDS
•INVENTORY
•VULNERABILITY
•LOCATION
ACCEPTABLE RISK
RISK
UNACCEPTABLE RISK
VULNERABILITY
REDUCTON
DATA BASES
AND INFORMATION
MEGACITY
DISASTER
RESILIENCE
HAZARDS:
GROUND SHAKING
GROUND FAILURE
SURFACE FAULTING
TECTONIC DEFORMATION
TSUNAMI RUN UP
AFTERSHOCKS
•PREPAREDNESS
•PRPTECTION
•EARLY WARNING
•EMERGENCY RESPONSE
•RECOVERY
•EDUCATIONAL SURGES
QUESTION
• CAN WE MAKE
MEGACITIES MORE
RESILIENT TO
NATURAL HAZARDS?
YES
BUT, IT IS A TIME-, PEOPLE-,,
AND STAPLE- DEPENDENT
PROCESS!
INTERLOCKING CONCEPTS ON
MEGACITIES AND NATURAL HAZARDS
• NATURAL HAZARDS,
GENERATE POTENTIAL
DISASTER AGENTS
WHICH CREATE RISK
TO THE BUILT
ENVIRONMENT.
• THE CHOICE: LIVE
WITH UNACCEPTABLE
RISK OR ACCEPTABLE
LEVELS OF RISK.
INTERLOCKING CONCEPTS ON
MEGACITIES AND NATURAL HAZARDS
• UNACCEPTABLE
RISK CALLS FOR
PUBLIC POLICIES
TO REDUCE
VULNERABILITIES.
INTERLOCKING CONCEPTS ON
MEGACITIES AND NATURAL HAZARDS
• VULNERABILITIES
REFLECT POLICY
FLAWS WITH
RESPECT TO
PREPAREDNESS,
PROTECTION, EARLY
WARNING,
EMERGENCY
RESPONSE, AND
RECOVERY
INTERLOCKING CONCEPTS ON
MEGACITIES AND NATURAL HAZARDS
• PREPAREDNESS,
PROTECTION,
RESPONSE, AND
RECOVERY ARE THE
MOST EFFECTIVE
MEASURES.
• BUT, THEY ARE HARD
TO SELL TO THE
PUBLIC AND TAKE
TIME TO IMPLEMENT.
MEGACITY DISASTER RESILIENCE
WHAT’S NEEDED: A COMMON AGENDA
(CA) OF TECHNICAL
AND POLITICAL SOLUTIONS
POLITICAL
SOLUTIONS
TECHNICAL
SOLUTIONS
CA
THE EFFECTIVE SOLUTION FOR
GREATER DISASTER RESILIENCE
FACT: BUILD ON EACH MEGACITY’S
UNIQUE STAPLE FACTORS
POLITICAL
SOLUTIONS
TECHNICAL
SOLUTIONS
CA
STAPLE
FACTORS
S
O
P
T
A COMMUNITY’S STAPLE
FACTORS ARE UNIQUE
•
•
•
•
•
•
SOCIAL
TECHNICAL
ADMINISTRATIVE
POLITICAL
LEGAL
ECONOMIC