Benefit-Cost Analysis of FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grants

Rose, Adam; Porter, Keith; Dash, Nicole; Bouabid, Jawhar; Huyck, Charles; Whitehead, John C.; Shaw, Douglass; Eguchi, Ronald T.; Taylor, Craig; McLane, Thomas R.; Tobin, L. Thomas; Ganderton, Philip T.; Godschalk, David R.; Kiremidjian, Anne S.; Tierney, Kathleen J.; West, Carol Taylor

doi:10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2007)8:4(97)

Cited by 182 publications

(141 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

136

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…46 Reductions in ozone precursors reduce illness and death related to air pollution, as well as associated costs. Another study-of a sample of grants to mitigate hazard losses 47 -has demonstrated that the benefits of reducing climate-related hazards are considerable and outweigh the costs by a factor of 5.0:1 for flooding and 3.9:1 for wind.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Six Climate Change–Related Events In The United States Accounted For About $14 Billion In Lost Lives And Health Costs

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The future health costs associated with predicted climate change-related events such as hurricanes, heat waves, and floods are projected to be enormous. This article estimates the health costs associated with six climate change-related events that struck the United States between 2000 and 2009. The six case studies came from categories of climate change-related events projected to worsen with continued global warming-ozone pollution, heat waves, hurricanes, infectious disease outbreaks, river flooding, and wildfires. We estimate that the health costs exceeded $14 billion, with 95 percent due to the value of lives lost prematurely. Actual health care costs were an estimated $740 million. This reflects more than 760,000 encounters with the health care system. Our analysis provides scientists and policy makers with a methodology to use in estimating future health costs related to climate change and highlights the growing need for public health preparedness. C limate change endangers public health. Rising atmospheric temperatures increase the frequency, intensity, duration, and geographic extent of heat waves, air pollution episodes, wildfires, activity of infectious disease vectors, rising sea levels, storms, extreme rainfall, and flooding. 1,2Prior studies have estimated future health costs related to climate change.3-6 However, these figures are not specific enough to form the basis of health policy decisions. No US study has evaluated specific health outcomes associated with a set of events related to climate change. 7,8 There is currently no well-accepted structure for quantifying the costs of the human health effects of climate change, in part because of the challenges of identifying comprehensive health impact data and a lack of consensus on health cost valuation methods. Some methods estimate health costs in monetary terms; others use physical units such as the number of lives saved or the number of cases of illness avoided. Another approach is to use indicators such as quality-adjusted life-years, a measure that incorporates both mortality and morbidity effects. 9Estimating the health costs of climate change is important for informing health policy decisions. Evaluating health-associated costs using a common method and then aggregating the costs can allow us to compare the various effects of climate change-once normalized, to account for geographic and other differences-with regard to magnitude or importance. Case studies can also help us gauge the progress of climate change-related health preparedness policies over time under different adaptation scenarios. 9These scenarios present a range of possible regional climate effects, varying health vulnerabilities, and changing social and economic conditions that can help or hinder these policies' effectiveness.The objective of this study was to provide a cost calculation of health effects associated with events related to climate change over the past

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Six Climate Change–Related Events In The United States Accounted For About $14 Billion In Lost Lives And Health Costs

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the new HAZUS model was released by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 2004. Originally, only capable of modeling earthquake loss, the latest version of HAZUS-MH (MH stands for multi-hazard) also includes tools for flood and wind loss estimation, runs on a ArcGIS platform and provides default data so that standardized risk assessment can be performed [Beckmann and Simpson, 2006;Rose et al, 2007].…”

Section: Flood Loss Estimationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To reduce future flood losses in a sustainable manner, flood risk management has to be built upon a sound analysis and assessment of the flood hazard, potential losses and the effectiveness of different mitigation measures. In fact, risk analyses and risk-oriented design, in which the cost-effectiveness of flood defense schemes is evaluated, are gaining more and more attention in water and planning agencies [e.g., ResendizCarrillo and Lave, 1990;USACE, 1996;Olsen et al, 1998;Al-Futaisi and Stedinger, 1999;Ganoulis, 2003;Rose et al, 2007]. Moreover, risk analyses quantify the risks and thus enable communities and people to prepare for disasters [e.g., Takeuchi, 2001;.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of damage caused by high groundwater inundation

Kreibich

Thieken

2008

Water Resources Research

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] In several cities around the world, problems with rising groundwater levels were reported, but up to now, losses caused by high groundwater levels have been neglected in loss assessment studies. However reliable loss assessments are necessary to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of mitigating measures like groundwater withdrawal and drainage. To improve the knowledge about flood losses and the loss-influencing factors, 1697 households affected by the Elbe and Danube floods in 2002 in Germany were interviewed. Cases affected by a high groundwater level were identified and analyzed in comparison with cases affected by riverine flooding. Inundations due to high groundwater show significantly different impact and damage characteristics in comparison with riverine floods. Most common loss models tested were as such not suitable to estimate losses due to high groundwater. Therefore, new loss models have to be developed. One step in this direction is the development of loss models just on basis of loss data from groundwater flooding. From all such models tested, the multifactorial model FLEMOps+ performed best, confirming that the uncertainty in loss estimation can be reduced if more predictive variables, besides the water level, are taken into consideration. However further research is necessary to investigate the main factors influencing the losses due to groundwater flooding and to develop specific models for their assessment.

show abstract

“…Generating such research requires a commitment to applying the lessons learned to measure and design high-performing public health systems. One future research endeavor could be to conduct a cost-benefit savings analysis in public health response costs, or in mortality or morbidity averted, similar to the work of Rose et al 22 Taken together, the research described in this supplement has the potential to transform the public health preparedness field in significant ways and to inform PHPR decision making while highlighting the collaborative efforts of academic researchers, public health officials and their partners, and CDC. The PERRC research presented in this supplement and elsewhere 18 has demonstrated that using PHSSR methods can identify effective interventions and practices that improve PHPR systems and services.…”

Section: Continuous Improvement Designed Within the Interventionmentioning

confidence: 98%