DOC PREVIEW
MIT 11 941 - Disaster Vulnerability and Resilience

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 7 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Lecture Notes: Disaster Vulnerability and Resilience Session 5 Lecturer: Rutherford H. Platt, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Learning from Disasters: The Synergy of Law and Geography This lecture was prepared for the University of San Diego School of Law “A Nation on Edge” series. Introduction I. The Fire of London a. London in the Elizabethan era, ca. 1580 i. The quintessential medieval London ii. Built of wood, densely built up in walled area iii. Very little sanitation or access to fresh water or water for firefighting b. 1665 Plague i. Swept through the city, killed thousands of people ii. Tremendous, reeling disaster c. 1666 Fire i. Hit the city in September, after heavy drought and accompanied by strong winds ii. Most damage was within the Roman walls in the core of the city. iii. London’s response marked the beginning of the enlightened approach of learning from disasters in the Western world. 1. Act for Rebuilding London, 1667 a. Leading citizens approach King to learn from disaster and prevent future occurrences. b. King Charles issues a Royal Proclamation on September 13, 1666 c. Act is based on this Proclamation 2. Details addressed: a. Exterior materials b. Width of streets c. Overhangs banned d. Area along Thames opened for access e. Hazardous materials banned from central city f. Provision to pay owners whose land could not be rebuilt because land was needed for widening streets, etc.The Land Use and Society Model I. 3 Sets of Spatial Data: a. Physical Environment i. Land ii. Water iii. Climate iv. Biodiversity b. Legal/Political Authorities i. Spatial jurisdictions overlie physical environment ii. Private ownership iii. Court system iv. Social context also impacts geospatial data 1. Economics 2. Technology 3. ? 4. ? c. Human Landscapes i. Resulting pattern of land uses for rural/urban purposes, whatever imprint humans make on the physical environment ii. Result from the collective impact of land-use decisions that determine how we use land and water. II. Natural Disasters a. Definition: Catastrophic events that result from the interaction of natural hazards and human presence. i. Capricious Natural Hazards – Climate Based 1. These are not place-specific, though they may be regionally specific. ii. Place-selective Natural Hazards – Geology Based 1. Types: a. Earthquakes b. Floods – riverine, coastal, dam-breaks c. Coastal Erosion d. Landslides, mudslides, e. Tsunamis f. Volcanoes 2. These are not completely site-specific; many places may be vulnerable to hazards, though the people are not as conscious of it (i.e. Connecticut River Bed Fault line). iii. Example: Local public-help (San Francisco) 1. In the early 20th century, the U.S. Government relied mostly on individual and local self-help response to disasters, not much government involvement. 2. City officials immediately refer to San Francisco Earthquake and Fire of 1906 as the “San Francisco Fire”a. They want to minimize the probability that it might recur. 3. Societal response to fire: develop new external fresh water supply a. Reached across Central Valley to Sierra Nevada in Hechechee Valley to build dam and aqueduct (Gifford Pinchot: need to use public resources for the greatest good for the greatest number of people). b. John Muir objects to plan due to his devotion to wilderness (founded Sierra Club), lost battle. iv. Example: Individual self-help. (1889 Brighton Beach Hotel) 1. The Hotel was owned by a railroad company, which responded to the natural hazard on its own. 2. Railroad laid out tracks, elevated hotel, hitched locomotives with cables, and hauled it inland. v. Example: Federal public-help (1927 Lower-Mississippi Flood) 1. Landmark Event in Federal Policy (marks turning point from self-help model to federal-help model) 2. Alternative to building flood-control structures proposed in National Resources Board: Harland Barrows: “cultural engineering,” concept not appealing to the main stream. Hazard Mitigation versus the Takings Issue I. Police Power a. The power of Government to establish rules for private behavior b. No compensation is available to the private party: there is an issue of whether it is justified or not. II. Holmes Formulation (source of “the Takings Issue”) a. The word “Taking” comes from the 5th Amendment which says, “nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” b. In Holmes Formulation, decision states that regulation might amount to a “taking” if it goes too far. c. How does harm to be prevented weigh against the loss of private owners to do as they wish? III. Structural Flood Control a. Little was done about flood-plain zoning through the 1950s b. Rivers being channeled, lined with levees, (e.g. the Salt River and the Los Angeles River) creating ugly, utilitarian rivers c. Gilbert White challenges the structural approach to floods in his dissertation; he and colleagues determine that flood-control projects cause more high-level damage than if the projects did not exist. IV. Dunham’s Rationale a. Dunham translates White’s findings into legalese b. Argues that floodplain regulation under the police power is only constitutional as a means to 3 endsi. Protect unwary investors and tenants, ii. Protect owners of nearby property from increased flood levels, and iii. Protect the public from the costs of emergency response and disaster relief. c. Dedham case, which cites Dunham, becomes a precedent for other cases, including a California State Supreme Court case, which recognizes the geography of the situation and the need to restrict human presence to avoid further disasters. d. Coastal Erosion: i. Lucas vs. South Carolina Coastal Council. 1. What drives the process of building on sites under Coastal Erosion conditions? a. Building owners are eligible for the Federal flood insurance program b. Insurance premiums do not go up, homeowners are not dropped, in flood-insurance programs. c. Members of Congress from the state where the disaster occurred are eager to get as much for their constituents as possible. i. Politics of the program’s administration makes it difficult for the Federal Government to establish new rules and put limits on how much risk it will cover. 2. Supreme Court overturns California State Supreme Court decision. ii. Case Study: Fire Island ca. 1995. 1. Island parallel to Long


View Full Document
Download Disaster Vulnerability and Resilience
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Disaster Vulnerability and Resilience and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Disaster Vulnerability and Resilience 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?