PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15748017

Disasters and development: Part 2: Understanding and exploiting disaster-development linkages.

Abstract

This lesson is a continuation of Disasters and Development: Part 2: Understanding and Exploiting Disaster-Development Linkages published in Prehospital and Disaster Medicine in Volume 17, Number 3. It identifies the goals of a specific damage mitigation project that can be incorporated into a regular development project and the mechanisms for obtaining the mitigation component of such a project. Mechanisms for assessing the success of such a project are discussed. It stresses the importance of the application of building codes, associated training programs, and more extensive use of zoning regulations in urban development that decrease the population at risk and the likelihood of damage to industrial facilities. Disasters can elevate the development potential of a society at risk for damage from a hazard. The political impact of damage and disruption can be a catalyst for change. Development opportunities often are compromised because of an excessive focus on relief assistance. Interventions designed to mitigate the damage from a given hazard are particularly effective when they focus on areas at particularly high risk for actualization of the hazard. Support from the private sector, including the non-formal sector, is a key element of successful reconstruction management. The period of recovery is an opportunity for general assistance to government with administrative procedures, including enhanced management training programs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Rob S Stephenson, Charles DuFrane. Disasters and development: Part 2: Understanding and exploiting disaster-development linkages.. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049023x00002168

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Evaluation of two commercially available portal monitors for emergency response.

The Human Monitoring Laboratory has compared two types (the P3 and the MiniSentry) of portal monitors that can be field deployed in response to an emergency. They can be used to screen persons for internal or external radioactive contamination by fission activation products (neither unit is capable of detecting alpha or beta radiation, and the amount of material required to alarm the monitors is unacceptably high for low energy x rays or gamma rays) following an incident involving the release of radioactive material (accidental or intentional). It was found that the P3 benefits from simplicity but requires slightly more activity to alarm than the MiniSentry, although for emergency response, the amount of activity that can be detected is far below a level where significant health effects will occur. The MiniSentry was found to have more capability than the P3, but these benefits also bring their own disadvantages. It was also found that the MiniSentry would be difficult to deploy in an outdoor setting whereas the P3 is well designed for a field setting. Despite the differences found, the HML has concluded that both have a distinct place in emergency monitoring. In the future, the HML plans to have both instruments ready for field deployment.

Disaster Planning↗