Suchergebnisse

Land-use planning tools have been extensively applied in the U.S. to achieve environmental sustainability and disaster resiliency for local communities. An important issue related to land-use planning tools is planners' beliefs about the ways in which these tools differ from each other and, thus, how planners choose among these tools for environmental hazard mitigation. A web-based survey collected data from planners in counties (or boroughs) in the five U.S. Pacific states (where county land-use planning is limited to unincorporated areas). The results indicate that planners substantially, but not completely, agreed in their perceptions of planning tools, that planners' perceptions of planning tools are minimally related to their personal characteristics and those of their jurisdictions, and that planners' perceptions of planning tools are significantly correlated with the capacity of their planning agencies. Planners viewed effectiveness (a desirable attribute) as positively correlated with economic costs and other impediments (which are undesirable attributes) so they must make trade-offs among these attributes and choose the most appropriate tool when formulating a growth management strategy.

AbstractBuilding an interdisciplinary team is critical to disaster response research as it often deals with acute onset events, short decision horizons, constrained resources, and uncertainties related to rapidly unfolding response environments. This article examines three teaming mechanisms for interdisciplinary disaster response research, including ad hoc and/or grant proposal driven teams, research center or institute based teams, and teams oriented by matching expertise toward long‐term collaborations. Using hurricanes as the response context, it further examines several types of critical data that require interdisciplinary collaboration on collection, integration, and analysis. Last, suggesting a data‐driven approach to engaging multiple disciplines, the article advocates building interdisciplinary teams for disaster response research with a long‐term goal and an integrated research protocol.

This study was designed to determine if respondents in the United States (Texas State) and China (Anhui province) differed in their perceptions of three stakeholder types (authorities, news media, and peers) with respect to three stakeholder characteristics (expertise, trustworthiness, and protection responsibility) and if these stakeholder perceptions were significantly correlated with protective actions for influenza. Both Texas and Anhui respondents rated expertise, trustworthiness, and protection responsibility as highest for public health authorities and lowest for Internet/social media. However, the differences between ratings for authorities and peers were greater in Texas than in Anhui and the correlations of stakeholder characteristics with protective action were quite different between Texas and Anhui. These results suggest that public health authorities should recognize that there are differences across countries in people's perceptions of authorities, news media and peers. These differences are important because people's perceptions of different stakeholders are significantly correlated with their protective actions in response to pandemic influenza.

AbstractBuilding community resilience has become a national imperative. Substantial uncertainties in dynamic environments of emergencies and crises require real‐time information collection and dissemination based on big data analytics. These, in turn, require networked communities and cross‐sector partnerships to build lasting resilience. This viewpoint article highlights an interdisciplinary approach to building community resilience through community‐engaged research and partnerships. This perspective leverages existing community partnerships and network resources, undertakes an all‐hazard and whole‐community approach, and evaluates the use of state‐of‐the‐art information communication technologies. In doing so, it reinforces the multifaceted intergovernmental and cross‐sector networks through which resilience can be developed and sustained.