October 25-26, 2001 Urban Risk Management for Natural Disasters 1 Urban Risk Management for Natural Disasters: Goals and Desired Outcomes Arthur Lerner-Lam Columbia University Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Center for Hazards and Risk Research

October 25-26, 2001 Urban Risk Management for Natural Disasters 2 Workshop Rationale l Urban vulnerability is a focus area for natural hazard studies. –Wealth and assets of urban centers are unique. –Fine-scaled interdependencies within cities require complex approaches. –Natural hazards are city-scale physically; country- or global-scale culturally, socially, politically. l Cities represent important scale of decision- making, management, and response.

October 25-26, 2001 Urban Risk Management for Natural Disasters 3 Workshop Rationale (cont.) l Turkish institutions have been exposed recently to disastrous earthquakes. l Geo-dynamics and kinematics of deformation along the North Anatolian Fault system, both on-land and marine, are areas of intense national and international research interest. l Some models of NAF deformation suggest enhanced earthquake probabilities near Istanbul. l Uncertainties related to tectonics require basic research in geology and geophysics.

October 25-26, 2001 Urban Risk Management for Natural Disasters 4 Workshop Rationale (cont.) l WTC disaster has shifted focus to “extreme events”. l “Extreme events” are effectively one class of phenomena. Scale and scope have implicit relationship to national security. l Mitigation for one type of extreme event may build resiliency for other types. Fundamentals of resiliency related to sustainability. l Necessary to quantify probabilities and uncertainties for “worst possible”, not just “probable”. l Worst-case outlook affects cost-benefit analysis of mitigation.

October 25-26, 2001 Urban Risk Management for Natural Disasters 5 Desired Outcomes l Principles and prototypes for science-based risk management for urban centers. l Research agenda consistent with policy needs. l Partnerships for research, education, and implementation. l Implementation of risk management strategies incorporating: –Worst-case scenarios –Cost-benefit analysis –Shifting tolerances –Application to Istanbul pilot –Portability to other localities

October 25-26, 2001 Urban Risk Management for Natural Disasters 6 Discussion Goals l Physical science and social science research agenda: near term and long term. –Probabilities, uncertainties, tolerances, cost-benefit l Community-building for applications and implementation. l Data sources and needs. l Other resource needs. l Impediments to research and education initiatives. l Impediments to community interactions.

October 25-26, 2001 Urban Risk Management for Natural Disasters 7 Discussion Goals (cont.) l Partnership models and opportunities l Funding opportunities l Education and outreach –Formal and informal educational initiatives –Joint degree programs, certificates –Specific course opportunities –Public awareness l Technology transfer –Research/stakeholder interaction model l Community interaction models –Mitigation –Emergency response

October 25-26, 2001 Urban Risk Management for Natural Disasters 8 Discussion Goals (cont.) l Project focus areas –Pilot project –“vertical” integration (not “horizontal” geographic scope) –Participant commitment l Partnership for Urban Risk Management –Structural and funding models –Scope, including data and resource needs –Membership, including agencies, NGO’s, academic, international –Portability –Information systems underlie communication –Interoperability standards for information sharing.