Geography 312 (Natural Hazards) Instructor: Ian Hutchinson (RCB7226) ph: Course TAs: Elizabeth Baird & Andrew Perkins

Geography Lecture 1  Course outline - schedule, lectures, assignments, - text, grades  Term project  Course themes

Lecture schedule zThe course schedule and all the Powerpoint lecture slides are available on the web. Go to: z“Thumbnail” versions are available for purchase. zThe lectures are NOT taped.

Tutorials/Assignments zTo preview the assignments go to the course web site. Printed versions of each assignment will be handed out prior to each tutorial. zSuggested readings for each tutorial are available on the web site as pdf’s zTutorial grades are based on participation in workshops and discussion groups. Assignments are for educational purposes; they are not graded.

Text, Grading…. Text - Keller, E.A., Blodgett, R.H. & Clague, J.J “Natural Hazards”. Pearson Canada Grading Tutorial participation: 20% Term project 30% Midterm exam 20% Final exam 30%*

Term project  Choose a topic (check with TA);  Keep a journal (notes, lists of sources, etc.);  Prepare a poster in Powerpoint;  Copy the poster to a CD (along with your journal)

The concept of “natural” hazards Definition: “Events associated with normal* geophysical and biological processes that cause death, injury or loss of home, property or income”. * the intensity of the hazard may be influenced by human modifications of the landscape (e.g. deforestation and urbanization influence flood frequency and magnitudes) or climate (e.g. heat waves in urban areas).

Source: Emmanuelle Bournay; UNEP/GRID-Arendal

Concept of hazard thresholds [ ] (e.g. fatalities/damage per earthquake) Earthquake magnitude Deaths Damage ($M) 1 …………………………………………

Natural Hazards From the preceding it follows that: Natural hazards are associated with extreme events in the normal operation of the planet’s geological, hydrological and ecological systems. Natural hazards are limited to inhabited areas (i.e. vulnerable settlements or economic infrastructure).

Concept of vulnerability (e.g. fatalities in two contrasting societies) Deaths 1 ………………………………………… Earthquake magnitude e.g. Peru, Iran? e.g. California?

The concept of risk RISK = HAZARD X VULNERABILITY Hazard = natural processes capable of causing death and/or destruction; Vulnerability = social or economic sensitivity to the effects of hazards

Calculating risk Example 1: same hazard; contrasting vulnerabilities Magnitude 6.5 earthquake in south-central California, on Dec. 22, 2003: 7 dead, ~50 injured because the event occurred in a thinly inhabited area (low risk event) Magnitude 6.5 earthquake in city of Bam (Iran) on Dec. 26, 2003: ~40,000 dead, ~30,000 injured; much of the city destroyed (very high risk event)

Calculating risk Example 2: contrasting hazards; same risk Severe snowfall in the Lower Mainland Annual risk ($) = P blizzard X Cost* = 0.1 X $10 M? = $1 M Annual risk ($) = P impact X Cost* = X $100 G? = $1 M? “Tunguska” asteroid impact in the Lower Mainland *Costs = deaths, injuries, building collapse, rescue, cleanup, lost production, rebuilding, etc.; (often very difficult to assign a dollar value).

five Combating risk: the five steps Assess: characterize the hazard regime ; Assess: characterize the hazard regime ; Mitigate: reduce vulnerability; Prepare: educate; warn; evacuate; Respond: remove bodies, locate and treat survivors, destroy unstable structures; Recover: rebuild communities and infrastructure Effectiveness Time Pre- Post-

Combating risk: roles Assessment: natural and social scientists, (GEOG 312) Assessment: natural and social scientists, (GEOG 312) Mitigation: engineers, etc. Preparation: emergency managers, etc. Initial Response: medics, etc. Recovery: planners, etc.

Assessment: types of risk  “physical” = living in a hazardous area  “personal” = your age/gender/education influences your risk  “economic” = poverty reduces your options  “structural” = poor quality buildings and lifelines  “political” = limited access to information and/or resources  “institutional” - your local, state or national government does not enforce regulations all of these may apply!

Hazard assessment Natural scientists analyse the physical risks:

Assessing individual hazards: e.g. hurricanes in Atlantic Canada Damage resulting from the high winds and heavy rain of Hurricane Juan in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Sept. - Oct Photos: CBC News archives

Hazard assessment: causes Hurricane Juan, Sept. 28, Juan was an exceptional storm. Why did it track directly northward?

Juan was forecast to reach Nova Scotia as a 65- to 70-knot hurricane, but intensified to 85 knots (a “category 2” hurricane). Why? Hazard assessment: magnitude Answer at:

Halifax last suffered a direct hurricane strike in Do hurricanes in the Atlantic provinces therefore recur about once every 100 years on average? Sources of information: Instrumental records (~100 yr record) Explorers’ logs, settlers’ diaries (~400 yr record?) Micmac oral traditions (?) Biological evidence (e.g. downed trees; several centuries?) Geological evidence (e.g. overwash deposits; several millennia?) Hazard assessment: recurrence

Hazard assessment: will the future differ from the past? Graph: Munich Re, 2004 Tropical storms and hurricanes in the NW Atlantic

Hazard assessment: focusing on place, not process Case studies of individual hazards do not reveal the hazardousness of a particular place multiple risks in any area risk assessment must integrate all of these = local “geography of danger”

A “geography of danger” for Halifax, Nova Scotia might look like this: blizzards and ice storms extreme temperatures fogs droughts pests and diseases hurricanes tsunamis High risk Low risk

Towards a global geography of danger: the complexity of the task 20% of Earth’s land surface exposed to severe hazards; >30% of North American population live in hazard-prone areas; Many areas (e.g. Indonesia, Taiwan, Guatemala) exposed to multiple severe hazards.

N.B. excludes epidemics

Earthquakes, eruptions Storms Droughts, wildfires Floods A global geography of danger: natural catastrophes [2005-7] Source: Munich Re Annual Reports 2005

A geography of danger: natural hazard fatalities [ ] Data: EM-Dat Annual number of deaths (thousands) Mortality rate / M population

A geography of danger: the known (e.g. Indonesia [data ]) cyclone landslide drought flood volcano ‘quake Source: Center for Hazards and Risk Research, Columbia University

And the unexpected! “the global analysis undertaken in these projects is clearly limited by issues of scale as well as by the availability and quality of data.” Arthur Lerner-Lam (Columbia U.) Tsunamis 2004/ / /07

Nimble systems: anticipating unexpected hazards ALL the earthquakes in California in the 1990’s occurred on previously unknown faults! “On January 17, 1994, the costliest earthquake in the history of the United States struck the Los Angeles region, killing 57 people, leaving 20,000 homeless, and causing more than $20 billion in damage to homes, public buildings, freeways, and bridges. This magnitude 6.7 quake occurred 10 miles beneath the town of Northridge on a previously unknown ramp-like ("thrust") fault not visible at the Earth's surface.” USGS Fact-Sheet

Source: The Economist (February 7, 2004) Assessing vulnerabilty

Vulnerability assessment Social scientists analyze the vulnerability matrix Environmental processes Perception Social impacts Mitigation and education Disaster response

Investigating personal vulnerability: perception Hewitt & Burton (1974) London, Ontario

Investigating personal vulnerability: fatalities by age Indian Ocean tsunami Age group Bay of Bengal storm surge Hurricane Katrina (2005)

Investigating personal vulnerability: fatalities by gender ratio of female:male deaths Sumatra India Data from Indian Ocean tsunami (2004) WHY? differing strength? stamina? cultural behaviours? (e.g. taboos - swimming? climbing trees?) However, the female fatality rate during Hurricane Katrina was only slighter higher (4%) than that of the male population, and this was likely a product of the greater number of women in the over-60’s age group.

Investigating economic vulnerability Deaths from typhoons ( ) wealth = greater preparedness

Investigating economic vulnerability (Hurricane Charley, Fla., 2004; Hurricane Katrina, La., 2005) poverty = greater exposure to risk; wealth = greater preparedness & more flexible response? (Photo: Associated Press)

Changing patterns of vulnerability in the developed world

Structural-institutional vulnerability (e.g. Marmara earthquake, Turkey, 1999) ~17,000 dead; 15% of buildings collapsed near epicentre (CA code but ~70% illegal - amnesty for illegal buildings; little professional liability; corruption ubiquitous; widespread on- site modifications, e.g. extra floors, of approved buildings); communications cut off; nationwide power outage; failure of political leadership. Photos: Damaged buildings in the vicinity of Gölcük

Investigating personal responses: flight or fight? KR (aged 22) said that she’d never build in a forest again after her Kettle Valley home was reduced to ash KR (aged 35) said he’d rebuild in an instant. His family’s home was razed. “It was a fluke” …“If you live on the ocean and a tidal wave comes, they’d say we shouldn’t live on the ocean.” Quoted in The Province, Aug. 25, 2003 (p. A5) Reactions to the Okanagan Mountain Park fire of August, 2003

Investigating the agencies: (e.g. post-Hurricane Katrina)  were the evacuation orders effective?  were rescue efforts well-organized?  did everyone in need find the shelters or aid centres?  was aid distribution effective?

Post-disaster recovery? (Hurricane Katrina ) 2006: population of New Orleans ~ 50% of that prior to hurricane; 45% fewer hospital beds; ~1/3 of schools still shut; Rents increased by 40% in one year because of housing shortage; suicide rate in city quadrupled; almost 90% of ‘refugees’ in Houston still unemployed; Port of NO (#1 port in US) operating at less than 50% capacity 3 months after hurricane. August 2008 survey of residents of New Orleans: 55% feel that there has been little or no progress in rebuilding neighborhoods. 59% feel that there has been little or no progress in making medical facilities and services more available. 72% said federal recovery money has been "mostly misspent." 58% said NO had a ”very serious" problem with political corruption. 84% face continuing health problems, and 65% reported some sort of chronic condition or disability, up from 45% in 2006.

Increasing global vulnerability? US $ G (Data: Munich Re, 2001) Losses from natural disasters

Source: Emmanuelle Bournay; UNEP/GRID-Arendal

Information and perception ( reported volcanic eruptions, ) Has there been an overall increase in activity?

“How horrible it is to have so many people killed! And what a blessing that one cares for none of them!” Jane Austen writing to her sister on news of the Peninsular War (May 13, 1811) 1 …………………. 13 ….. week Blessings? Personal vulnerability? - residence, workplace Career path? - community vulnerability Empathy? - global vulnerability Your command of nat.haz information GEOG 312