Enhancing Local Level Emergency Management: the Influence of Disaster Experience and the Role of Households and Neighbourhoods
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Enhancing Local Level Emergency Management: The Influence of Disaster Experience and the Role of Households and Neighbourhoods Brenda Murphya (principal investigator), Leanna Falkinerb, Gordon McBeanc, Holly Doland and Paul Kovacse a. Wilfrid Laurier University, Brantford Campus, Brantford ON., N3H 4R7, [email protected] b. Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction, Toronto ON, [email protected] c. Departments of Geography and Political Science, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, N6A 5B9, [email protected] d. Department of Geography, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC V8W , [email protected] e. Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction, Toronto ON, [email protected] July 2005 ICLR Research Paper Series – No. 43 ISBN # 0-9733795-9-6 Abstract: This report summarizes the research findings of a two-year project funded by the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction (ICLR). In July 2000 the Pine Lake, Alberta area was severely affected by an F3 tornado – 12 people were killed and over 140 seriously injured. Following an extensive review of the available literature, the study compares emergency preparedness levels and perceptions between two communities: Pine Lake and North Dumfries, Ontario, of which only the former has experienced a serious natural disaster. It also assesses the role that gender plays in risk perception and preparedness. Emergency preparedness and attitudes were measured using a variety of indicators including household safety activities, economic and insurance factors, views and knowledge of the tornado warning system, levels of community social capital, community knowledge of local vulnerability and perceptions of government emergency management activity. The study also summarizes information about tornadoes, forecasting and early warning systems and assesses the impact of the tornado on the residents of Pine Lake. Methodologically, the two communities were matched across several characteristics to isolate the effect of the disaster experience. Both qualitative interview and document information as well as quantitative survey data was collected and assessed. Devastation at Green Acres, Pine Lake, Alberta Source: http://www.redcross.ca/ TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose and Objectives ...............................................................................................................1 2 EXTREME WEATHER AND TORNADOES ........................................................................................4 2.1 Natural Disasters .........................................................................................................................4 2.2 Warnings......................................................................................................................................5 2.3 Tornadoes ....................................................................................................................................7 2.4 Observing Systems for Detection of Tornadoes..........................................................................8 2.4.1 Warning Communication and the Media............................................................................9 2.5 Pine Lake Tornado ....................................................................................................................11 3 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS.........................................................................................................13 3.1 Hazard Response Cycle.............................................................................................................13 3.2 Emergency Preparedness and Insurance....................................................................................15 3.3 Household-Level Preparedness .................................................................................................15 3.4 Neighbourhood-Level Preparedness..........................................................................................18 3.5 Municipal-Level Emergency Preparedness ...............................................................................19 4 RISK PERCEPTION ..............................................................................................................................21 4.1 Risk Perception and Economics ................................................................................................22 4.2 Risk Perception, Preparedness and Education...........................................................................22 5 VULNERABILITY AND CAPACITY..................................................................................................23 5.1 Vulnerability..............................................................................................................................23 5.2 Capacity and Social Capital.......................................................................................................25 6 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................27 6.1 Research Proposal .....................................................................................................................27 6.2 Community Selection ................................................................................................................28 6.3 Sample Size...............................................................................................................................30 6.4 Research Instrument Design......................................................................................................31 6.5 Data Collection and Processing.................................................................................................32 7 EMPIRICAL RESULTS.........................................................................................................................33 7.1 Socio-Demographic Statistics....................................................................................................33 7.2 Perception of Risk .....................................................................................................................34 7.3 Household-Level Emergency Preparedness ..............................................................................37 7.3.1 General Preparedness........................................................................................................37 7.3.2 Economic Aspects of Preparedness ..................................................................................40 7.3.3 Information and Emergency Preparedness .......................................................................44 7.3.4 Emergency Preparedness and Level of Tornado Knowledge ...........................................46 7.4 Perception of Disaster Science and Warnings...........................................................................47 7.5 Perceptions of Government-Level Emergency Management....................................................48 7.6 Perceptions of Vulnerability......................................................................................................52 7.7 Community Networks and Relationships ..................................................................................55 7.8 Impact of the Tornado on Pine Lake Residents.........................................................................57 7.8.1 Impact ...............................................................................................................................57 7.8.2 Local Capacity..................................................................................................................59 8 DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................................................................64 9 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................67 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Categories of Incentives .............................................................................................. 16 Table 6.1: Community Characteristics ......................................................................................... 29 Table 7.1: Survey Sample Demographic Characteristics ............................................................. 34 Table 7.2: Index, Perception of Natural Disasters and Associated Damage ................................ 35 Table 7.3: Seriousness of Most Recent Disaster........................................................................... 36 Table 7.4a: Perception of Disaster versus Experience.................................................................. 37 Table 7.4b: Perception of Disaster versus Gender........................................................................ 37 Table 7.5: Nexus of Household Level Responsibility .................................................................. 39 Table 7.6: Why Would you be Willing to Invest in Home Improvements?................................. 43 Table 7.7: Why Wouldn't you be Willing to Invest? .................................................................... 43 Table 7.8a: Sources of Emergency Preparedness Information ..................................................... 44 Table 7.8b: Sources of Emergency Preparedness Information - Gender...................................... 45 Table 7.9: How Accurate do you Think the Science