CARRI and the Center for Policy and Resilience of the University of Southern Mississippi, Gulf Park Campus hosted a “Ghosts of Katrina” workshop on June 5 and 6. The workshop brought together a number of scholars who are working on issues surrounding Hurricane Katrina and its impact on the Gulf Coast of Mississippi as well as community leaders, activists and volunteers. Results from that workshop will be published soon and available on the CARRI web site.
It was very interesting that of the many topics and issues discussed, two themes were constant in the research results and in the community discussions. One theme can be best described as “Katrina fatigue” and the other theme is a strong desire to know when the community recovery is over. “When will we know that we are back to normal?” Clearly the two ideas are strongly linked.
The Mississippi Gulf Coast was devastated by Katrina. The recovery while dramatic has been long, slow and difficult. The communities have demonstrated great resilience, are coming back robustly, have accomplished much and will be stronger communities in the end. But they are tired. As a result of that tiredness, they want to know when they can consider themselves out of the recovery period and back into normal community growth and development. It’s a reasonable question that is undoubtedly conflicted by legal, political and social considerations. The question manifests itself in a number of ways from low attendance at community recovery events to the results of the recent local municipal elections.
Community resilience is all about getting back to normal but for a devastated community, what is normal? The CARRI team has been talking lately about the “new normal” for a resilient community. One of our proposed principles for a community framework is that resilience is ultimately about achieving a “new normal” level of functionality. This idea recognizes that a community that has been severely affected by a major disruptive event will be changed forever. The “old normal” is gone replaced by a new reality. The new normal will be different – it may be worse but in a truly resilient community it may be significantly better. Defining the “new normal” before the disruptive event – creating a resilience vision – will allow a better understanding of when recovery is over and day-to-day life has resumed. It may also help with the fatigue problem.
These ideas seemed to resonate with the audience at the conference.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
After reading this post and several others, I agree that one crucial part of rapid recovery is a pro-active stance in developing more resilience for our structures and thereby reducing as much damage as possible and increasing the speed of recovery efforts.
ReplyDeleteI would like to introduce these excerpts from various publications which identify a very significant problem:
- U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): Durability by Design Report: "From past scientific surveys of hurricane damage, it can be seen that damage to roofing and water damage to contents are the most frequent and costly repairs..... It can be seen that the most significant forms of damage were associated with roofing loss."
- Air Force News (US Army Corps of Engineer's Blue Roof Project):
"More than 81,000 roofs in Louisiana and more than 152,000 buildings within an 82,000-square-mile area stretching from Texas to Alabama received temporary roofing following the two hurricanes that pounded more than 500 miles of the Gulf Coast region.”
- Roofing Industry Committee on Weather Issues (RICOWI): The "Team 3" investigation and report begins on page 117 and explains their findings: "In many cases of roof damage, the frequency of fastener attachment was not adequate to resist Katrina’s winds."
-Asphalt Roofing Manufactures Association
80% of U.S. structures use asphalt shingles
- Air Force News (US Army Corps of Engineer's Blue Roof Project):
“A team of more than 700 engineers and other volunteers from throughout 41 Army Corps of Engineers districts worldwide wrapped up a seven-month mission to provide temporary repairs to both residential and public building roofs damaged by Hurricanes Rita and Katrina,…"
These publications and others, demonstrate the significance roofing can play in recovery and its importance in mitigation efforts.
I am the CEO of a very small (for profit) company in North Carolina that has conducted some simple, yet promising, proof of concept tests on the incorporation of hook and loop material (commonly referred to as Velcro™) as an alternative installation method for steep slope roofing.
By replacing the "nailing" and seal down strip method to affix roof coverings to a structure and replacing it with a method that does not require penetration of the exterior water barrier we can better protect the underlying structural components from the potential leakage which can be associated with nails and/or staples.
Additionally, the roof coverings will be provided with more areas of attachment to the structure and to one another, at all points with the exception of the exposed portion. This method can also interlock the entire roofing system together and to the structure, providing more resistance to uplift and/ or the peeling effect of high winds. Additionally this method can provide for a unique ability of reattachment, if winds are substantial enough to lift the roof coverings, during a lull in those forces.
We have built a collaborative network of companies, non-profits and a University to assist us with the research, development and testing of this technology and we are actively seeking Federal, State and other funding opportunities to continue forward with our research.
We are hopeful our project can play a role in "improved recovery through improved mitigation" and the "new normal".
Please feel free to review the information available on our website: http://naimcorporation.com/ and submit questions and/or comments to info@naimcorporation.com
Warren
ReplyDeleteAn excellent first draft that is to some extent broad in nature and would allow for additional research, clarifications of a few definitions i.e. measurable indicators and assessment of methodologies which can accurately assess 'normality'. There is no doubt that the emergency mangement field and the administration is recognizing and making this one of its primary goals, a resilient nation with resilient cities and communities. They have finally come to understand that any disaster whether natural or man-made is fundamentally and initially a local event and therefore should have a ground up, all embracing framework.
It would be prudent however to also understand that foreseeing and anticipating resilient communities which can be seen to be moderately achievable from an academic and theoretical standpoint, that in fact the realistic execution of the broad tactics and strategies needed to attain such admirable and much needed goals is much harder to pin down, as CARRI has researched and learned well. I strongly believe that we are moving in the right direction (with assistance from such organizations as CARRI etc.) however that it will be a slow, gradual change.
Warren's last sentence of his first draft that "assessment be translated into actions that increase a community's resilience" rings true to me and I ask my blog peers, 'to what degree can one intially expect that communities can truly begin to develop substainable and resilient uniqueness?'
There are so many obstacles and gaps that are unusual and jurisdiction specific, such as resources, capabilities, social economic diversity, poverty, religious and language barriers, just to mention a few. I enjoyed reading Faron's post and with pro-active thinking and improvements as such, I do believe CARRI's mission will be achieved.