The "All Hazards Approach"
Historically, geographers and other scholars tended to think in terms of "natural hazards" such as floods, tornados, hurricanes, and earthquakes, and "technological hazards" such as nuclear power plant accidents, chemical spills, or the consequences of a terrorist attack. Geographers have used geographic information science techniques to assist in preventing, planning for, responding to, and recovering from these natural and technological hazards since the advent of cartography.
While in graduate school at the University of South Carolina for my doctorate, I was introduced to the extraordinary work of Dr. Susan Cutter. Dr. Cutter at that time was newly arrived from Rutgers University and had just accepted the position of Chair of the Department of Geography. Her real love, however, was her brand new Hazards Research Lab (HRL pronounced "hurl"). Dr. Cutter, her faculty colleagues, and her entourage of graduate students went on to do cutting edge work on the integration of geographic information science and hazards research.
Much of Dr. Cutter's work was focused on issues of social justice. While many disasters are natural in origin, the risk to different communities is different based on how vulnerable they are to the effects of the hazard. In many cases, communities increase their vulnerability and risk by making questionable choices about what they build and where they build it. Consider these examples:
- Houses built in flood plains or on geologic faults
- Communities built on barrier islands susceptible to the winds and storm surge of hurricanes
- Neighborhoods built near toxic industrial facilities
- The clearing of wetlands for development
- The construction of whole neighborhoods in a city nine feet below sea level
In many cases, there are issues of race, class, gender, and age that increase or decrease both the vulnerability of populations to these risks, and the ability of affected groups to recover from a disaster. Wealthy, predominantly white people, for example, can afford to live on barrier islands vulnerable to hurricanes because they can afford the risk of losing their home, and have government subsidized flood insurance to rebuild their homes should they be damaged or destroyed. On the other hand, many poor, pre-dominantly minority families (many with a single mother as head of household) have no choice but to live in areas of high risk to both technological and natural hazards. Thus there is the significant issue of social justice that must be addressed when studying the geography of hazards, risks, and vulnerability. The social justice issue is also a significant factor for emergency management professionals as they plan to prevent and mitigate hazards, and respond to and recover from disasters.
Susan Cutter was among the first scholars to recognize the intimate relationship between natural hazards and technological hazards. She identified early on that many disasters originating with a natural event would create a greater hazard as technological disasters occurred in response to the original natural disaster. A classic example would be a hurricane that causes massive damage through wind and storm surge to include flooding the local wastewater treatment plant, and destroying and exposing toxic wastes from industrial storage facilities. These human engineered hazards thus create a spiraling cascade of hazards exponentially increasing the risk to affected populations. The social justice issue arises again as economically poorer populations (often minorities) often live in closer proximity to the technological hazards and have fewer resources to utilize to evacuate or safely shelter in place. This phenomenon was locally evident in every hurricane to hit the southeastern United States, and only became nationally evident during Hurricane Katrina. The recognition in academic and governmental circles of the synergy between natural and technological hazards resulted in what is now referred to as "The All Hazards Approach." This approach now dominates thinking in the emergency management community about how to prepare, respond, and recover from emergencies. In academic circles this approach is often referred to as the "Cutter School."
Dr. Cutter's 25 years of scholarship were recently collected in a volume entitled Hazards, Vulnerability, and Environmental Justice published in 2006 by Stylus Publishing. (http://styluspub.com/Books/BookDetail.aspx?productID=130311)
The publisher describes the book this way:
In a world of increasingly prominent hazards and disasters, from those with their genesis in natural events such as the South Asian tsunami, to human-induced atrocities and terrorist attacks, and the profound effects of climate change, this collection provides a timely assessment of these critical themes. Presenting the top selections from Susan L. Cutter's twenty-five years of scholarship on hazards, vulnerability, and environmental justice, this collection brings together powerful and difficult-to-find literature, framed by a fresh introduction that maps out the terrain and draws out the salient themes and conclusions. This essential collection is ideal for academics and students studying hazards, risk, disasters, and environmental justice across a range of disciplines.
Susan L. Cutter is a Carolina Distinguished Professor of Geography and Director of the Hazards Research Lab at the University of South Carolina. She was formerly President of the Association of American Geographers.
Dr. Cutter had opportunity to testify to the Research Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representative's Committee on Science on "The Role of Vulnerability Science in Disaster Preparedness and Response" on 10 November 2005 in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. You now have the opportunity to read her testimony.
Reading
Read Dr. Cutter's testimony to the Research Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representative’s Committee on Science "The Role of Social Science Research in Disaster Preparedness and Response"As you read Dr. Cutter's testimony, do some critical thinking and ask yourself:
- Dr. Cutter conducted research in the Katrina damage zone shortly after the Hurricane. She was interviewed on National Public Radio and was highly critical of the governmental response. Given her research interests, academic position, and recent experience, what was her agenda in testifying before the US Congress?
- Dr. Cutter is a geographer, an expert in the geography of hazards, risks, and vulnerability, and an important player in the emerging inter-disciplinary field of "Vulnerability Science." What other disciplines might have a contribution to make to vulnerability science? How might scholars from those other disciplines have testified differently to congress?
- Dr. Cutter implicitly includes the contribution of GIScience in her testimony and the contribution is explicit in her examples. How can GIScience contribute to reducing risk and vulnerability? Does geospatial intelligence have a role here, and, if so, in what way?
- Based on what we have studied, much of the application of GIScience to emergency management is applied geospatial intelligence. Why do academics like Dr. Cutter never make reference to geospatial intelligence in their work or public statements? Why do they seldom make reference to the NGA or other Department of Defense elements?