1. Socio-Economic Research on Hurricane Forecasts and Warnings Jeffrey K. Lazo Societal Impacts Program National Center for Atmospheric Research Interdepartmental Hurricane Conference March 2, 2010 Picture “borrowed” from http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~houze/

2. Overview “Understanding Hurricane Response for Improved Stakeholder / User Reaction.” My Presentation Part 1: Hurricane Forecast Socio-Economic Working Group Part 2: Benefits of Improved Hurricane Forecasting Part 3: Current Research –Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project –Communicating Hurricane Information –Warning Decisions: Extreme Weather Events

3. Part 1: Hurricane Forecast Socio- Economic Working Group “The Group will recommend research initiatives and projects that can be supported through interagency cooperation, funding for public and private sector academic and commercial research enterprises, and partnerships with private sector information consumers.” Hurricane Isabelle - September 18 2003

4. Hurricane Forecast Socio-Economic Working Group Focal Areas 1.Warning Process 2.Decision Making 3.Evacuation Response Behavior 4.Societal Impacts and Valuation Plan to develop: applied research agenda to generate short-term immediate benefits basic research agenda addressing fundamental theoretical and exploratory research designed to generate long-term improvements methods to enable the social science research community to gather and further develop research priorities and future agendas concept for a long-term, multidisciplinary, institutional approach to undertaking identified research priorities.

5. Hurricane Forecast Socio-Economic Working Group

6. Part 2: Benefits of Improved Hurricane Forecasting Purpose: exploring methods for deriving household values for improved hurricane forecasts –Non-market valuation approach –Small sample implementation –Evacuation decision making –Benefit estimation Forthcoming in Weather and Forecasting

7. Benefits of Improved Hurricane Forecasting Evacuation decision making

8. Hurricane Mean Likelihood of Evacuation by Hurricane Category Standard deviation reported in parenthesis. 1 = “Not at all likely” to 5 = “Extremely likely” n = 80

10. WTP Calculation: Improve Baseline to Intermediate on All Attributes Attribute Baseline (all 48 hours in advance) Intermediate Improvement Diff. Marg. WTP WTP Time of expected landfall ± 8 hours± 6 hours2$2.18$4.36 Maximum wind speed ± 20 mph± 15 mph5$0.26$1.30 Projected location of landfall ± 100 miles± 80 miles20$0.23$4.60 Expected storm surge ±8’ of height above sea level ± 6’ of height above sea level 2$2.04$4.08 Total WTP$14.34

11. Part 3: Current Research Societal Impacts Program / NCAR – with multiple co-PIs 1.Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project 2.Communicating Hurricane Information 3.Hurricane and Flood Warning Decisions 4.Storm Surge

12. Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project Post-Katrina AssessmentsHFIP

13. Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project HFIP Metrics –Reduce average track error by 50% for Days 1 through 5. –Reduce average intensity error by 50% for Days 1 through 5. –Increase the probability of detection (POD) for rapid intensity change to 90% at Day 1 decreasing linearly to 60% at Day 5, and decrease the false alarm ratio (FAR) for rapid intensity change to 10% for Day 1 increasing linearly to 30% at Day 5. –Extend the lead time for hurricane forecasts out to Day 7 10-year program – multiple team research areas –About $20m/yr for 10 years –Current social science – about $150k

14. Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project Socio-Economic Impacts Assessment –Assessment of Emergency Managers - Betty Morrow  in-depth focused interviews  emergency managers  stakeholder communities (hospitals / transportation / etc) –Household valuation – Jeff Lazo  non-market stated choice assessment  adapted Benefits of Improved Hurricane Forecasting  attribute set from HFIP  400 sample across the vulnerable region

15. Communicating Hurricane Information Examining the Hurricane Warning System: Content, Channels, and Comprehension –NSF-NOAA joint announcement of opportunity Research foci –How is the content of hurricane forecast and warning messages generated, and what products result? –What are the channels through which hurricane forecast and warning information is communicated, and what drives channel selection and use? –How does the public (including vulnerable populations) comprehend and react to specific components of the forecast and warning messages?

16. Communicating Hurricane Information

17. All text and graphical products at Days 4, 3, 2, and 1 prior to landfall Parallel studies in Miami and Houston areas Mock hurricane hitting these areas Communicating Hurricane Information

18. Methods: –interviews and observations of message development with forecasters, broadcast media, emergency managers –survey examining how members of the public access information and their comprehension of and reactions to different messages –focus groups with vulnerable populations (Miami only) –laboratory tests of sample messages with members of the public –multi-method synthesis of public component and feedback to forecast and emergency management communities through Expert Advisory Board

19. 1)Message content – decisions, factors that influence the content of messages provided to others 2)Forecast/job mechanics – steps, actions, factors affecting mechanics of forecasters, EMs, and broadcasters 3)Interactions – content & channels of information (a) among partners, and (b) provided to recipients 4)Message development – data & information influencing process of what information is used in creating warnings 5)Interpretations – challenges of and factors influencing how to analyze and consider the data and/or message content 6)Uncertainty – data or messages that include or reference some ambiguity about the current state or future situation Communicating Hurricane Information

20. Hurricane and Flood Warning Decisions Warning Decisions in Extreme Weather Events: An Integrated Multi-Method Approach –Funding from NSF Human and Social Dynamics program –3 year project Research foci –How are hurricane / flash flood warnings communicated, obtained, interpreted, and used in decision making by participants in the warning process? –Challenges for decision making in the face of risk and uncertainty

21. Hurricane and Flood Warning Decisions

22. Parallel studies –Flash floods in Boulder, Colorado –Hurricanes in Miami, Florida Methods –interviews, focus group discussions with forecasters, media, public officials –mental models with forecasters, media, public officials, members of public –stated-preference survey with members of public (Miami only) –multi-method synthesis –stakeholder workshop

23. Likelihood of flash flooding occurring in BOU during warning or watch?

24. ResearchersAdvisors Ann Bostrom – Risk Communication Julie Demuth – Meteorology / Communication Gina Eosco – Communication Somer Erickson – Emergency Management Brandi Gilbert – Sociology Hugh Gladwin – Sociology Jennifer Hudson – Public Administration Matthew Jensen – Mgmt. Information Systems Jeff Lazo – Economics Claude Miller – Communication Betty Morrow – Sociology Rebecca Morss – Meteorology Dan O’Hair – Communication Kathleen Tierney – Sociology Jennifer Thacher – Economics Don Waldman – Economics David Bernard Frank Billingsley Luis Carrera Christopher Davis Mark DeMaria Kelvin Droegemeier Gene Hafele Tim Heller Greg Holland Chuck Lanza Max Mayfield Bryan Norcross Frank Redding Jamie Rhome