Shelter, Housing and Recovery: A Comparison of U.S. Disasters

Bolin, Robert; Stanford, Lois

doi:10.1111/j.1467-7717.1991.tb00424.x

Cited by 172 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mobile homes are particularly susceptible to damage from high winds and are generally less resilient in disasters than standard housing (Bolin and Stanford 1991;Chakraborty et al 2005;Cutter et al 2000;Heinz Center 2000). These structures, therefore, warrant special attention.…”

Section: Background Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this context, mobile home residents located in high-risk coastal areas are distinctly vulnerable populations because of the limited protection afforded by their dwellings and their socio-economic status. Research has shown, for instance, that age, gender, household size, education, income, health, pet ownership, and structural conditions of homes all influence disaster outcomes (e.g., Bolin and Stanford 1991;Cutter and Finch 2008;Enarson and Scanlon 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Disaster vulnerability and evacuation readiness: coastal mobile home residents in Florida

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines disaster preparedness in a highly vulnerable population, mobile home park residents in hurricane-prone areas. The vulnerabilities of this population mandate evacuation as the only viable disaster response strategy, but this does not always happen. In order to explore evacuation decision making, interviews were conducted with 75 mobile home park residents in Ruskin, Florida. Descriptive results build on a conceptualization of physical, structural, socio-economic, and ''residual'' disaster vulnerability; the latter is defined as a combination of experiences, perceptions, and preparations that inhibit the willingness and abilities of respondents to protect themselves. While residents generally prepared for disasters, evacuation plans were troubling. Barriers to evacuation based on measured vulnerabilities remained unclear, and analysis of responses failed to explain respondents' varying evacuation preparations. Future research needs to address differential evacuation behaviors among mobile home park residents. We further conclude that disaster preparation and education need to address the special risks of this and other vulnerable populations better.

show abstract

Section: Background Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disaster vulnerability and evacuation readiness: coastal mobile home residents in Florida

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This perspective highlights the social construction of vulnerability. A wide variety of variables are examined as indicators of such social vulnerability, including gender (Enarson & Morrow 1998), age (Bolin & Klenow 1983), disability (Parr 1987), family structure and social networks (Drabek & Key 1986), housing and built environment (Bolin & Stanford 1991, Quarantelli 1991, income and material resources (Bolin & Stanford 1991), and race and ethnicity (Bolin & Bolton 1986, Fothergill et al 1999. As pointed out by Cutter (1996), although the vulnerability indicators are often single variables, they are manifestations of multidimensional factors such as institutional development, social relations, or political power.…”

Section: Meanings Of Vulnerabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Vulnerability of coastal communities to sea-level rise: a case study of Cape May County, New Jersey, USA

Wu¹,

Yarnal²,

Fisher³

2002

Clim. Res.

338

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study demonstrates how sea-level rise increases the vulnerability of coastal communities to flooding associated with coastal storms. The case study applies a GIS-based methodology to assess the vulnerability of Cape May County, New Jersey, to flood hazards caused by both riverine flooding and coastal storm surges. For storm events of differing intensities, it first identifies areas that will be inundated and how they will change with projected sea-level rise. It then assesses the social vulnerability of the county, taking into account factors such as age, gender, race, income and housing conditions. Finally, it combines physical and social vulnerabilities to create a picture of the county's present overall vulnerability, as well as how this will change with projected sea-level rise. To account for uncertainties in projections, possible ranges of both population growth and sea-level rise are incorporated in low, medium and high scenarios. The results show that sea-level rise will increase the vulnerability of the county to flood hazards considerably by increasing the areas that are exposed to the highest flood risk, hence increasing the number of critical facilities, properties, and people to the risk of flooding. Comparing the upper-and lower-bound scenarios indicates that poorly managed development could increase the county's vulnerability to flooding. These results suggest that decision-makers could reduce vulnerability by making choices that steer development away from highrisk areas.

show abstract

“…Additionally, various stakeholders such as not only landowners but also renters and merchants were involved in community management before the EJET, however, opinions from such stakeholders except land owners are not reflected on community recovery if target to participate in the consultation limits only landowners. Involving local citizen groups in coalition with government and private disaster organizations will improve the effectiveness of a program (Bolin and Stanford 1991). It is needed to make reconstructed community resilient by involvement of multi-stakeholders at the stage of making community recovery plan and by being conducted as actors or supporters of the plan.…”

Section: Resilience Building In the Recovery Process By Involvement Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Community Recovery in Tsunami-Affected Area: Lessons from Minami-Kesennuma

Ueda

Shaw

2014

Disaster Risk Reduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many people who lived in affected areas by the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami have been forced to live separately after the event. In some tsunami-affected areas, reconstruction of houses has been restricted since the disaster happened until reconstruction projects for safety finish because sea walls were destroyed and high risk of a future tsunami remains. These areas were designated as two separated zones; prohibited area of housing reconstruction and land leveling area. Survivors who lived in either zone can also choose to move out from the area they lived and to reconstruct their house by themselves. Therefore, community recovery plan makes an impact for affected people to decide where they reconstruct, consequently, it is considered to make an effect on community recovery process. For this reason, this chapter attempts to analyze problems of community recovery plan and characteristics of residents who have a will to reconstruct their house in tsunami-affected area in case of Minami-Kesennuma, a devastated area by the tsunami. From the analysis, lessons of community recovery is emphasized as following; early concept-making and consensus-building for recovery, housing reconstruction support in terms of re-building community and resilience building in the recovery process by involvement of multi-stakeholders.

show abstract

Shelter, Housing and Recovery: A Comparison of U.S. Disasters

Cited by 172 publications

References 6 publications

Disaster vulnerability and evacuation readiness: coastal mobile home residents in Florida

Disaster vulnerability and evacuation readiness: coastal mobile home residents in Florida

Vulnerability of coastal communities to sea-level rise: a case study of Cape May County, New Jersey, USA

Community Recovery in Tsunami-Affected Area: Lessons from Minami-Kesennuma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About