Help with assignment
TheMatrix
HM510Unit4DQ.docxHM510
Unit 4 DQ
TOPIC #1: Land Utilization
In many areas that are prone to recurrent natural hazards (i.e., coastal communities), land utilization continues to be at issue. Many of these areas are prime development sites and assure a high profitability margin for developers and investors. Given such locations what do you believe the balance should be in developing and implementing hazard mitigation strategies?
Please address the following as part of your discussion:
1. Should areas of vulnerability (recurring coastal storms/erosion, wildfires) be allowed to be developed? Why, or why not?
2. Should the government at any level (federal, state, or local) be the lead agency for development and funding of mitigation strategies and projects?
3. Based on the previous question, what role if any should the private sector play in such projects?
4. Given the frequency and severity of natural hazards in these areas what land use strategies should be employed?
Respond Kindly to Student #1
Calvin Parker
In one's opinion, areas of vulnerability should be allowed to develop under certain circumstances. Having better material should be used on the community for each type of reoccurring disaster. Better materials built on every structure within the community. The problem with that would be the funding with such project. If funding was provided then this would mean it would be more expensive to live in such area. Although, the areas were disasters are the most common is just a waiting game, no one should restrict anyone from living where they would like to live. The government should not be the lead agency when it comes to funding and mitigation. Having the government the lead agency would put a lot of "red tape" on everything dealing with funding and mitigation. This would limit productivity. Although, the government and out agencies should partner with each other to decide what's best for funding and mitigation. The private sector should have many roles in funding and mitigation. This will give the community a better chance at mitigation as a whole. More companies involved means better materials and mitigation tactics used. Mitigation goals, mitigation actions and implementation are some of land use strategies (Melecha et al., 2019).
References
Malecha, M., Masterson, J.H., Yu, S. & Berke, P. (2019). Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard™ Guidebook: Spatially evaluating networks of plans to reduce hazard vulnerability
Respond Kindly to Student #2
Shuree Spencer Johnson
When it comes to areas that have frequent emergency situations it should depend on the area of the development project and the disaster. If the area is almost impossible to be developed on without completely ruining the area or cause high risk of harm to those near it then it should be off limits to build on and instead should be used for other projects such as a wildlife area instead. If its a solid area that's just in a town that has frequent disaster such as Tornado Alley or frequent earthquakes sadly that is unavoidable if the whole state or area has those issues so instead the development should be able to withstand those disasters for safety reasons and maintained accordingly for safety and regulations.
1. When it comes to mitigation methods the sole responsibility should be the state and the private sector developer that wants to build in that area or disaster strong area as its the developers idea to do that and the states approval that is allowing it. So they should be working hand in hand to ensure that development is specific and follows all mitigation methods. Then it can be the federal government that helps touch base to ensure the mitigation methods are maintained for the communities safety. Such as checks and frequent maintenance.
2. The private sector should ensure they are well aware of the risks and are building accordingly and specific codes for the project to be able to withstand these disasters and have a plan for safety to meet all mitigation methods and if they do not follow these specific guidelines then their project and development needs to be denied by the state and community.
3. Strategies should include escape routes, supplies in building for the disasters that are frequent, building structure able to withstand these specific disasters, and scheduled maintenance that is checked on frequently, a plan in place that everyone is aware of.
Sometimes building in or on areas that are higher risks of various emergencies is avoidable so ensuring that buildings and projects can withstand these disaster and have a plan in place for such things is essential. If its too high risk and building or having a project in that place just risks human life too much then the project should be denied for builders and community safety.
Respond Kindly to Student #3
Travis Reed
Good Morning Y’all
In many regions that are vulnerable to natural hazards, land utilization has always been a critical issue of debate in the local, state, and federal governments. The dilemma of whether to put such areas into developmental use arises since most of these areas are characterized by high-profit margins. However, these areas of vulnerability, such as some parts of Houston, Texas that are highly vulnerable to hurricanes, should not host development projects (Bodenreider et al., 2019). Because once these development projects are established, they attract more individuals into those areas, a move that skyrockets the vulnerability of these areas to impending and potential natural hazards. Besides, life is a precious gift, and unlike properties, life cannot be rekindled. Therefore, there is no need to risk life when there are other safe areas where similar projects can be executed successfully.
On the other hand, governments are the richest entities in the world. Therefore, they should lay a well-structured approach and be the lead agencies for an effective and less risky project as well as funding mitigation actions. Moreover, the central government should shift more power to the local government in terms of availing hazard mitigation funds to the affected communities to the positive outcome of any undertaken mitigation measure. The private sector is the major contributor to success in any development project they take in the country. In these projects undertake in vulnerable areas, the role of the private sector is to develop the development of innovations, which assist in achieving the specific needs of the communities residing in those areas. Based on the frequency of natural hazard occurrence, one of the land use strategies that should be embraced is the minimization of development in regions where the likelihood of natural hazard impact is high (Berke et al., 2014). Additionally, the construction of more resistant structures to hazard impact should be employed to limit the physical vulnerability.
References
Berke, P. R., Lyles, W., & Smith, G. (2014). Impacts of federal and state hazard mitigation policies on local land use policy. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 34(1), 60-76.
Bodenreider, C., Wright, L., Barr, O., Xu, K., & Wilson, S. (2019). Assessment of social, economic, and geographic vulnerability pre-and post-Hurricane Harvey in Houston, Texas. Environmental Justice, 12(4), 182-193.
v/r
Reed
TOPIC #2: Current Topics
Please research some current events related to private sector mitigation and post at least one of these events to the Discussion Board. Within your posting, describe how your chosen item ties into a review of the topics in this unit. You may use the Library or any other outside resource for your research. Be sure to use proper citation. Please remember to review your fellow students' postings and respond to at least three events posting throughout the week.
Respond Kindly to Student #1
Travis Reed
Good morning Y’all
There are several essential current events associated with private sector mitigation in the United States. One of the most current events is the enhancement of cross-sector collaboration by integrating the private sector to enhance effective hazards mitigation measures. The federal government has realized the importance of engaging the private sector actively in mitigation measures. Hurricane Harvey is an instance of how private sector collaboration has the potential to augment disaster response as well as recovery efforts to attain exceptional impact (Amadeo, 2018). Emergency preparedness teams heed to incorporate new strategies to improve the effectiveness and efficiency by involving the private sector, thus meeting the rising mitigation demand. Worth noting is that there is a need for all mitigation actors, including the private sector, such as the insurance companies, to collaborate more before the occurrence of any disaster.
To facilitate cross-sector collaboration, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance is conducting some tests on new strategies to enhance the successful integration of the private sector. These pilot programs that are conducted by USAID are aimed at aiding the humanitarian community to comprehend the manner in which the private sector can invest to enhance the mitigation of disasters (Cozzolino, 2021). Besides, the private sector can invest in increasing businesses related to participation in any community-based disaster planning and preparedness. Additionally, the private sector, through its investment, can reduce the economic and social impact experienced following the occurrence of a disaster. All the above actions are co-established by the private sector in conjunction with the local actors to enhance the identification of the most relevant and effective solutions and support the sustainability of the partnerships before and after a disaster. Generally, this event is based on the realization of involving the private sector in the process of formulation of hazard mitigation measures.
References
Amadeo, K. (2018). Hurricane Harvey facts, damage and costs. The Balance.
Cozzolino, A. (2021). Platforms Enhancing the Engagement of the Private Sector in Humanitarian Relief Operations. Sustainability, 13(6), 3024.
v/r
Reed
Respond Kindly to Student #2
Calvin Parker
President Biden approved a $3.46 billion to increase resilience to the impacts of climate change (Fema, n.d). These funds are for the natural hazard mitigation measures due to the global pandemic. With climate change being a priority this will provide funding to states, tribes, and territories for mitigation projects to reduce the impacts of climate change (Fema, n.d). Those who received a declarations from Covid may be able to receive up to 4% of those disaster costs to invest in mitigation projects that reduce risks from natural disasters. This will help underserved communites as it relates to mitigation and have a more resilient future (Fema, n.d).
References
Biden Administration Commits Historic $3.46 Billion in Hazard Mitigation Funds to Reduce Effects of Climate Change. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/press-release/20210805/biden-administration-commits-historic-346-billion-hazard-mitigation-funds.
Respond Kindly to Student #3
Antonio Custodio
Within my region of Northern California, the private sector power company pacific gas and electric (PG&E) has been under a lot of scrutiny within the past five years especially after being responsible for two large wildfires that resulted in whole communities destroyed and lives lost due to their faulty equipment. As a lot of lawmakers and politicians called for PG&E to be held accountable they have started to increase their efforts in emergency mitigation tactics specifically wildfires mitigation. Although PG&E’s solution itself has been getting a lot of negative press in the news due to their out of date technology and faulty equipment that they claim they do not have the money to fix. Their latest hazard mitigation solution is shutting down power to communities when there is a red flag warning in the region of high winds and low humidity which increases the danger of and likelihood of wildfires starting. This solution however has received a lot of negative backlash as pg&e Is now shutting off power with little to no warnings so their faulty equipment will not spark fires. The public and certain lawmakers are calling for PG&E to just replace this equipment which in reality would take years and the company is unfortunately claiming they do not have the money to replace their equipment. This is an example in my community of one private sector attempting hazard mitigation tactics as they have become the reason within the past few years fires have been occurring, however their mitigation method is in my opinion not an ideal long term solution. ( Stetson, G. et al. 2021)
Stetson, G., Chun, M., Zain, H., (2021) Lookout Santa Cruz, PG&E addresses community concerns over increased, prolonged outages across county. Retrieved from:
https://lookout.co/santacruz/civic-life/government/story/2021-09-22/pge-power-outages-santa-cruz-to-hold-meetings-to-address-frequent-unplanned-outages
UNIT 4 READING
This unit’s reading focuses on hazard-mitigation strategies at the private sector level. This includes an overview of economic-resiliency strategies and community sustainment through the maintenance of the economy. The concept of risk assessment as it relates to hazards, land ownership/development, and investments will also be explored.
Visit the following:
· Emergency Management Institute
· Improving Fire Hazard Assessment at the Urban-Wildland Interface
· Economic Analysis of Natural Hazard Mitigation Projects
· Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Planning
· Coastal Resilience Coalition Looks for New Ways to Shape Baldwin County
· Voluntary Private Sector Preparedness
