Understanding and Mitigating the Impacts of Massive Relocations Due to Disasters

Abstract

We have grown used to thinking of displaced persons as a developing-world problem. However, Hurricane Katrina and the Japanese tsunami/nuclear disaster made clear that even in the developed world people may need to leave their homes due to natural or manmade disasters. This can occur for reasons ranging from nuclear accidents, to natural disasters (e.g., hurricanes), to terrorism (e.g., a major anthrax attack), to climate change (e.g., coastal flooding). In addition to the social consequences of forced relocation, massive relocation can have significant economic costs, including not only property damage, but also business interruption, loss of housing services, and decline of property values. Economic consequences can be expected to be highly nonlinear in both magnitude and duration of relocation. With regard to duration, a brief evacuation may be minimally disruptive, if people are able to return to their homes within a few days. A relocation of a few months or a year would be much more disruptive per day, but eventually, costs per day would diminish or approach zero. By contrast, costs can be expected to increase monotonically but non-linearly in the number of people needing to be relocated. Costs may also vary greatly depending on the nature of the assets that are interdicted. Unfortunately, disasters in populated areas can easily result in the need to relocate a million people or more. This argues for the need for research on interventions to encourage relocation before a disaster in areas under significant threat, and to increase resilience after massive relocations.

Return Migration and Decontamination After the 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Disaster

“…Due to their relative infrequence, migration behavior in response to nuclear accidents has not been investigated as much as other types of disasters (Bier, ). With regard to the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident, the government of Belarus implemented a massive relocation program through 2000 for 13,616 people who lived in the highly contaminated area, with the entitlement of a new house and financial benefits such as an allowance and compensation for property loss.…”

Cap. 20. Sistemas sociales y justicia. En: La Quinta Evaluación Nacional del Clima

“…Estos obstáculos para la recuperación pueden tener efectos generacionales a largo plazo relacionados con pérdida de ahorros, inseguridad de la vivienda y desplazamiento. Por ejemplo, a las personas que emigraron a California desde el sur del Medio Oeste durante la Gran Depresión les fue peor que a los californianos nativos durante al menos una generación 84 . La ausencia de datos y de recopilación de datos, como datos demográficos y sobre peligros, agrava los problemas de la gobernanza equitativa durante los desastres.…”

Rebuilding after Displacement: A Skills Competency Audit of Built Environment Professional Documentation

“…More than three quarters (76%) of them remain displaced in excess of five years [6]. There are "massive economic and social costs" [7] (p. 181) associated with this displacement, and the built environment, by which we mean our human-constructed surroundings, and its management, is at the heart of the response to these. The built environment, the way communities are designed and constructed, directly impacts physical and mental health [8].…”