PreventionWeb.net
Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2011
Revealing Risk, Redefining Development
  Previous  pageNext page 
 

Box 2.6 Extensive risk in the United States of America


Anyone looking for a safe place to live in the United States of America should consider moving to Prince of Wales – Outer Ketchikan County in Alaska, the only county that does not report disaster losses in the SHELDUS database.18  SHELDUS contains more than 640,000 local level disaster loss reports in the United States of America for the period 1960–2009 (Borden and Cutter, 2008

x

Borden, K.A. and Cutter, S.L. 2008. Spatial patterns of natural hazards mortality in the United States. International Journal of Health Geographics 7 (64).
.
) and provides a unique look at extensive risk in a high-income country.

Unlike low- and middle-income-countries, mortality due to disasters in the United States of America is extensively distributed. Most (89 percent) of the mortality since 1960 corresponds to extensive disasters (Figure 2.28). SHELDUS records 26,936 deaths between 1960 and 2008 compared with 18,273 in the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT). In contrast, two-thirds of the economic loss is intensively concentrated in only 0.4 percent of the reports.

Figure 2.28
Extensive and intensive mortality in the USA
Figure 2.28

Figure 2.29 shows that, compared with the other countries in the data universe, mortality in extensive disasters in the United States of America is falling. Figure 2.30, however, shows that even when normalized by GDP per capita, economic loss is rising.

Figure 2.29 (left)
Mortality per capita per year in extensive disasters: United States of America compared with Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East


Figure 2.23 (right)
Economic loss per capita, normalized by GDP
Figure 2.29

The highest extensive risk mortality rates are strongly associated with a wide geographical corridor that stretches from the north to the southwest of the United States of America, through the states of North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Arkansas (Figure 2.31).

Figure 2.31
Multi-hazard crude mortality rate (accumulated mortality per million per year) per county, United States of America, 1960–2009
Zoom
Figure 2.31
(Sources: mortality rates from SHELDUS (without Hurricane Katrina); population (year 2006) from the US Census Bureau)


As Figure 2.32 shows, 220 out of the 302 counties (73 percent) with annual mortality rates greater than 15 per million had average annual household incomes of less than US$40,000. Many are sparsely populated counties in the north-to-southwest corridor mentioned above.

Figure 2.32
Counties with low average annual income and high mortality rates, United States of America, 1960–2009
Figure 2.32
(Sources: income and population (2006) from the US Census Bureau; loss data from SHELDUS. Mortality due to Hurricane Katrina not included)

(Source: GAR 11 paperSerje, 2010a

x

GAR11 Serje, J. 2010. Extensive and intensive risk in the USA: A comparative with developing economies. Case study prepared for the 2011 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.

Click here to view this GAR paper.
)

Note
18 SHELDUS uses different attributes to the other disaster loss databases analysed in GAR11, and contains data on mortality and economic losses at the county level in all 50 states in the United States of America, but does not record other attributes such as housing damage and destruction. Data for this case study were drawn from the Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States, Version 8.0. Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute (2010). Columbia, University of South Carolina, www.sheldus.org.


GAR 11 Background documents
  x 
Close!

GAR11GAR 2011 Contributing Papers

Cepeda, J., Smebye, H., Vangelsten, B., Nadim, F. and Muslim, D. 2010. Landslide risk in Indonesia. . Prepared by the International Centre for Geohazards, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute. [View]

Corrales Leal, W. 2010. Overcoming trade and development limitations associated to climate change and disaster risk. . [View]

ERN-AL, 2011. Probabilistic modelling of disaster risk at global level: Development of a methodology and implementation of case studies. Phase 1A: Colombia, Mexico, Nepal. Prepared by the Consortium Evaluación de Riesgos Naturales – América Latina. [View]

Freire, C. 2011. Extensive Risk of the Impact of Disasters. Prepared by Macroeconomic Policy and Development Division Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)[View]

Gupta, M. 2011. Filling the governance ‘gap’ in disaster risk reduction. Background Paper prepared by the Asian Disaster Reduction and Response Network (ADRRN). [View]

Herold C.; Pedduzzi P., 2011. Testing the GAR risk methodology at the national level : the case of earthquakes in Indonesia. Prepared by the Global Change & Vulnerability Unit UNEP/GRID-Europe[View]

Hobbs, C. 2010. Current and future risks posed by unprotected radioactive waste sites in Central Asia. [View]

IDMC (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre). 2010. Using disaster data to monitor disaster-induced displacement. . [View]

Kent, R. 2010a. Disaster risk reduction and changing dimensions and dynamics of future crisis drivers. [View]

Mansilla, E. 2010. Riesgo urbano y políticas públicas en America Latina: La irregularidad y el acceso al suelo. [View]

Moreno, A. and Cardona, O.D. 2011. Efectos de los desastres naturales sobre el crecimiento, el desempleo, la inflación y la distribución del ingreso: Una evaluación de los casos de Colombia y México. [View]

Nhu, O.L, Thuy N. T. T., Wilderspin, I. andd Coulier, M. 2011 A preliminary analysis of flood and storm disaster data in Viet Nam. UNDP CO, Hanoi, Viet Nam.[View]

O'Donnell, I. 2010. Addressing the grand challenges of disaster risk: A systems approach to disaster risk management. [View]

OSSO (Southwestern Seismological Observatory). 2011b. Análisis de manifestaciones de riesgo en America Latina: Patrones y tendencias de las manifestaciones intensivas y extensivas de riesgo. . [View]

OSSO (Southwestern Seismological Observatory). 2011a. Extensive risk analysis for the 2011a Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: Metodología para la identification de Umbrales. [View]

Serje, J. 2010a. Extensive and intensive risk in the USA: A comparative with developing economies. [View]

Serje, J. 2010b. Preliminary extensive risk analysis for the Global Assessment Report 2011. [View]

Sparks, S., 2011. Global Volcanic Risk. Bristol University, UK. [View]

Tarazona, M. and Gallegos, J. Children and disasters: Understanding differentiated risk and enabling child-centered agency. Brighton, UK: Children in a Changing Climate Research. [View]

Tonini, M., Vega Orozco, C., Charrière, M., and Tapia, R. 2010. Relation between disaster losses and environmental degradation in the Peruvian Amazon. Lausanne, Switzerland:Institute of Geomatics and Risk Analysis, University of Lausanne. [View]
  Previous  pageNext page 
Contact us  |  Disclaimer  |  Our Sponsors  |  References  |  Acknowledgements  |  PreventionWeb |  The Global Platform  |  © United Nations 2011.