Session No. 3

Course Title: Theory, Principles and Fundamentals of Hazards, Disasters,
and U.S.

Emergency Management

Session Title: Hazard Categories or Taxonomies

Time: 1 Hour

**Objectives:**

1.  Discuss and explore taxonomies put forward to classify hazards.

2.  Acquaint student with hazard categorization disagreements.

3.  Acquaint student with hazard categorization relationships.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Scope:**

[The professor introduces this session by asking the students to list
and categorize the hazards that they think are of concern to emergency
managers. He or she then traces the categorization of hazards from the
early days of U.S. civil defense efforts through the three- and fourfold
taxonomies that have been developed by scholars to the present day. The
focus then turns to the disagreements among scholars---that is, the
trends either to expand or reduce hazard classifications. The professor
elicits student viewpoints as to the value of making distinctions
between types of hazards and provides the class with several reasons to
support the continuation of distinctions. The discussion continues with
an overview of relationships between hazards in different categories,
during which the professor seeks student input on additional possible
examples. The session concludes with a brief reinforcement of the point
that the students' effectiveness as emergency managers will be
influenced by their ability to understand hazard categories and the
relationships among them.]{.mark}

**Suggested Student Homework Reading Assignment:**

Pearce, Laurie. 2000. Chapter 2, pp. 10-11, in *An Integrated Approach
for Community*

*Hazard Impact, Risk and Vulnerability Analysis:* *HIRV*. Doctoral
Dissertation, University of British Columbia.

Tobin & Montz. Chapter 1, "Natural Hazards and Disasters: When Potential
Becomes

Reality," pp. 10--26.

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

#### 

#### General Requirements:

PowerPoint slides have been prepared to support this session. The
session is not dependent upon the utilization of these visual aids. They
are provided as a tool that the instructor is free to use as PowerPoints
or overhead transparencies. Students should be provided with the
Appendix, [*Select Emergency Management-Related Terms and
Definitions*.]{.mark}

**Objective 3.1 -- Discuss and explore taxonomies put forward to
classify hazards.**

**Note:** *Ask the students to list all of the hazards that the
emergency manager should be concerned with. You may want to note their
responses on the blackboard or on chart paper.*

*When the students have finished giving their responses, ask them to
seek to categorize their listing.*

*Seek to relate the students' listings to the material [that]{.mark}
follows.*

**[(Visual Aid 1)]{.mark}**

-   Back in the **early days of U.S. civil defense**, hazards were more
    often than not thought of in two categories**:**

(1) **Attack, and**

(2) **Natural hazards.**

-   Later, as **hazardous materials** began to be more of a problem, the
    term **"technological"** hazard began to be found more often in the
    literature.

    **[(Visual Aid 2)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Thus, Quarantelli wrote in 1984 (p. 1) that:

    "To the category of natural hazards...has been added the relatively
    new category of technological accidents and mishaps. These are the
    disasters brought about by human error and the collective mistakes
    of groups."

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   This led to a [threefold]{.mark} hazard categorization:

(1) **Attack**

(2) **Natural**

(3) **Technological**

    Sometimes the term **"man-made"** hazards or disasters would be used
    **synonymously** with **"technological**" hazards or disasters.

-   Some advocated that the term "technological" be replaced with
    "man-made," arguing that the term "technological" hazard sounded too
    innocent and hid corporate responsibility, and thus should be
    replaced:

    **[(Visual Aid 3)]{.mark}**

    "Miller and Fowlkes (1984)[^1] have argued that the term
    **'technological disaster' renders such events too impersonal in
    origin**. They believe that such 'accidents' are due mainly to the
    **excessive priority given to industrial profits** and advocate the
    term **'man-made disaster' to indicate corporate responsibility."**
    (Smith 1996, 14.)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   As **terrorism** began to be more widely recognized as a hazard (or
    threat), the two terms "technological" and "man-made" began to be
    separated more frequently and used synonymously less frequently.

    For many people it simply did not make sense to refer to terrorism
    as a technological hazard.

    **[(Visual Aid 4)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Thus, since the end of the Cold War, a three-fold taxonomy (or way
    of classifying hazards) has tended to predominate in the [United
    States]{.mark}:

(1) **Natural**

(2) **Technological**

(3) **Man-made**

-   Today, as a growing awareness of the complexity of hazards, risks
    and vulnerabilities has taken hold in [this country]{.mark}, a
    plethora of categorization schemes have been proposed.

    **[(Visual Aid 5)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Dr. David McEntire of the University of North Texas** has listed
    hazards in the following 5 categories:

+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| -   **Natural**                 | -   **Technological**              |
|                                 |                                    |
| -   **Environmental**           | -   **Human-Induced/Civil**.[^2]   |
|                                 |                                    |
| -   **Biological**              |                                    |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+

He further breaks down his major categories into the following
sub-categories:

+------------+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| #          |              |             |             |             |
| #### Natur |              |             |             |             |
| al Hazards |              |             |             |             |
+------------+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Atm      | ##### Geol   | **H         | *           | *           |
| ospheric** | ogic/Seismic | ydrologic** | *Volcanic** | *Wildfire** |
+------------+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| •          | • Landslides | • Floods    | • Eruptions | (Note that  |
| H          |              |             |             | lightn      |
| urricanes/ | • Land       | • Storm     | • Lava      | ing-induced |
|            | subsidence/  | surges      | flows       | wil         |
| Tropical   |              |             |             | dfires---as |
| storms     | sinkholes    | • Coastal   |             | well as     |
|            |              | erosion     |             | avala       |
| • Thunder- | • Expansive  |             |             | nches---can |
| storms     | soils        | • Droughts  |             | be          |
|            |              |             |             | categorized |
| •          | •            |             |             | as          |
| Lightning/ | Earthquakes  |             |             | "           |
|            |              |             |             | Atmospheric |
| hail       | • Tsunamis   |             |             | Hazards" or |
| storms     |              |             |             | the more    |
|            |              |             |             | broadly     |
| •          |              |             |             | termed,     |
| Tornadoes/ |              |             |             | "Met        |
|            |              |             |             | eorological |
| other wind |              |             |             | Hazards.")  |
| storms     |              |             |             |             |
|            |              |             |             |             |
| • Winter   |              |             |             |             |
| storms/    |              |             |             |             |
|            |              |             |             |             |
| Avalanches |              |             |             |             |
|            |              |             |             |             |
| • Heat     |              |             |             |             |
| waves      |              |             |             |             |
|            |              |             |             |             |
| • Fog      |              |             |             |             |
+------------+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| ## Environmental Hazards          |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| **(Degradation of nature and      |                                   |
| depletion of resources)**         |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| • Pollution of soil, water, or    | • Global warming (due to          |
| air                               | pollutants)                       |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Desertification (loss of        | • Deforestation                   |
| productive soils)                 |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| ## Biological Hazards             |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| **Disease Outbreaks**             | **Infestations**                  |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| • Chickenpox                      | • Locust swarms                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Measles                         | • Killer bees                     |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Smallpox                        | • Lyme Disease (spread by         |
|                                   | infestation of ticks)             |
| • AIDS (HIV)                      |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| ###### Technological Hazards      |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| • Computer failures               | • Infrastructure Failures         |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Fires                           | -- Bridges                        |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Hazardous materials incidents   | -- Tunnels                        |
|                                   |                                   |
| -- Fixed facility                 | -- Dams                           |
|                                   |                                   |
| -- Transportation                 | • Nuclear/Radiological Accidents  |
|                                   |                                   |
| -- Hazardous waste                | -   Nuclear Power Plant Accident  |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Power Failures                  | > (fixed facility)                |
|                                   |                                   |
|                                   | -- Transportation                 |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
|                                   |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| ## Human Induced/Civil Hazards    |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| • Business and industry accidents | • Terrorism                       |
| and incidents                     |                                   |
|                                   | • Transportation accidents        |
| • Mass shootings                  |                                   |
|                                   | Aircraft accidents                |
| • Riots/civil disorder            |                                   |
|                                   | Road and rail accidents           |
| • Sabotage                        |                                   |
|                                   | • War                             |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

**[(Visual Aid 6)]{.mark}**

-   John Carroll, (Farazmand 2001, 466) of Florida Atlantic University,
    suggests the following as disaster categories and types:

+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| **        | #######   | **        | ######    | **Major   | #####     |
| Weather** |  Man-Made | Transport | # Medical | Dist      | ## Energy |
|           |           | and       |           | urbance** |           |
|           |           | Commun    |           |           |           |
|           |           | ication** |           |           |           |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| • Floods  | •         | •         | •         | • Civil   | • Fuel    |
|           | Structure | Telephone | Epidemic  | di        | shortage  |
| •         | fire      | system    |           | sturbance |           |
| Tornadoes |           |           | • Mass    |           | • Nuclear |
|           | •         | • EDP     | poisoning | •         | accident  |
| •         | Hazardous | failure   |           | Su        |           |
| H         | materials |           | •         | bversion/ | • Major   |
| urricanes |           | • Major   | Contamin- |           | power     |
|           | •         | road      |           | sabotage  | failure   |
| • Heavy   | Building  | accidents | ated      |           |           |
| snow      | collapse  |           | water     | • Labor   |           |
|           |           | • Rail    | supply    | unrest    |           |
| •         | • Power   | system    |           |           |           |
| E         | failure   |           | • Major   | • Bomb    |           |
| arthquake |           | /train    | accidents | threats   |           |
|           | •         | crash     |           |           |           |
| • Forest  | E         |           | •         | •         |           |
| fire      | xplosions | •         | Multiple  | Disturbed |           |
|           |           | Aircraft  | victims   | people    |           |
| • Volcano | •         | crash     |           |           |           |
|           | Terrorism |           |           |           |           |
| • Severe  |           |           |           |           |           |
| cold/heat |           |           |           |           |           |
|           |           |           |           |           |           |
| • Tidal   |           |           |           |           |           |
| wave      |           |           |           |           |           |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+

*Source:* From Joint Committee on Information Technology Resources,
Florida Legislature, 1993.

**[(Visual Aid 7)]{.mark}**

-   **Laurie Pierce** in the homework reading assignment, suggests the
    use of the following [threefold]{.mark} hazard categorization
    scheme:

(1) **Natural**

(2) **Diseases, epidemics, and infestation**

(3) **Person-induced**

-   **Gerard Hoetmer** (1991, xxi) has suggested a [fourfold]{.mark}
    hazard categorization distinction:

(1) **Natural**

(2) **Technological**

(3) **Civil**

(4) **Environmental**

-   Hoetmer argued that such events as the destruction of rain forests
    and the extinction of species were disasters.

    Moreover, he argued that such events should not be considered in the
    same light as natural hazards in that:

    "These are events that are caused principally by human beings and
    that initially affect, in a major way, the earth, its atmosphere,
    and its flora and fauna, rather than human beings."

    In essence, Hoetmer argued for looking at the consequences as well
    as the source of hazard when devising categorization schemes.

    **[(Visual Aid 8)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The **United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction**
    (ISDR 2002, 44) employs a [threefold]{.mark} hazard categorization
    scheme:

(1) **Natural**

(2) **Technological**

(3) **Environmental Degradation**

    Wherein "Environmental Degradation" is defined as:

    "Processes induced by human behaviour and activities (sometimes
    combined with natural hazards), that damage the natural resource
    base or adversely alter natural processes or ecosystems. Potential
    effects are varied and may contribute to an increase in
    vulnerability and the frequency and intensity of natural hazards."

    **[(Visual Aid 9)]{.mark}**

    Examples would be such as:

+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| -   **Land degradation**        | -   **Pollution of land, water,    |
|                                 |     and air**                      |
| -   **Deforestation**           |                                    |
|                                 | -   **Climate change**             |
| -   **Wildland fires**          |                                    |
|                                 | -   **Sea-level rise**             |
| -   **Loss of biodiversity**    |                                    |
|                                 | -   **Ozone depletion**            |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+

**[(Visual Aids 10, 11)]{.mark}**

-   **Tobin and Montz**, in the homework reading assignment, argue for
    the incorporation of [**temporal** and **spatial**]{.mark}
    **components** to our hazard classification schemes (pp. 13-14).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   As an example of a relevant **time dimension** is **speed of onset**
    (p. 14).

-   Thus, one could categorize hazards as **Rapid Onset** or **Slow
    Onset**.

-   **Rapid onset** events would be such as **flash floods, tornadoes,
    and earthquakes**.

-   **Slow onset** events would be such as **droughts, heat waves, and
    cold waves**.

-   Though not specified by Tobin and Montz, one could devise a
    **Medium-Term Onset** category.

-   This could include such as **flooding and hurricanes**.

-   In terms of the **Spatial Dimension**, Tobin and Montz suggest the
    use of **"diffuse"** and **"concentrated"** categories.

-   **Diffuse** hazards, those spread over a large geographic area,
    would be such as **droughts and heat waves**.

-   **Concentrated** hazards would be such as **chemical spills** and
    **train derailments**.

    **[(Visual Aid 12)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Tobin and Montz** go on to note that in addition to the foregoing
    categorization possibilities, is that of **expected or possible
    human** and **material loss** (pp. 15-17).

    While Tobin and Montz do not elaborate on how one might label these
    categories, one could envision the creation of such schemes as

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Low**

-   **Medium, or**

-   **Heavy Losses**

    **[(Visual Aid 13)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Amongst the **problems** to be encountered in setting up and using
    such categories, however, they note, in particular, those of
    **serious data limitations**:

+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| -   **Vague or inaccurate**     | -   **Sketchy**                    |
|                                 |                                    |
| -   **Unavailable**             | -   **Exaggerated**                |
|                                 |                                    |
| -   **Poorly collected**        | -   **Underestimated**             |
|                                 |                                    |
| -   **Difficult to collect**    | -   **Minimized**                  |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+

-   Even with good data there is with the **economic dimension** the
    problem of deciding on **what kind of losses** to concern oneself
    with, such as:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Direct**

-   **Indirect**

-   **Intangible**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Tobin and Montz (p. 16) thus conclude that "...a reasonable
    assessment of impact is not always possible, and any economic
    statistics should be treated with extreme care."

    Other variations of these themes can be found in the academic
    disaster research literature.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   A **benefit** of such **expanded categorization schemes** is that
    they **better sensitize us** to:

(1) A **fuller range of hazards** that we ought to be concerned with,
    and

(2) A **broader range of** stakeholders emergency managers ought to be
    networking with.

-   The foregoing discussion is one that is taking place mostly within
    the academic and disaster research communities.

    Public and private sector emergency/crisis management practitioners
    tend, generally, to adhere to simpler formulations not much
    different than those of earlier years.

    []{.mark}

    []{.mark}

    []{.mark}

    []{.mark}

    []{.mark}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   It is not uncommon today to find a **threefold distinction**, with
    some variations of the individual words used:

    **[(Visual Aid 14)]{.mark}**

(1) **Natural**

(2) **Technological**

(3) **Man (or Human) Made (or Caused), Civil**[^3] **(or Civil
    Emergency**[^4]**), Willful**[^5]**, Intentional, Deliberate,**[^6]
    **Purposeful**

    Another such [threefold]{.mark} breakout is:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(1) **Natural**

(2) **Man-Made**

(3) **Hybrid**

    Wherein the "Hybrid" terminology refers to those events which
    combine natural and man-made events -- floods [that]{.mark} cause
    hazardous materials releases, for example. (Keller, 1990)

    Finally, a threefold classification similar to those above used at
    Duke University[^7] in North Carolina is:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(1) **Natural**

(2) **Accidental**

(3) **Purposeful**

(4) **Objective 3.2 -- Acquaint student with hazard categorization
    disagreements.**

    **[(Visual Aid 15)]{.mark}**

-   There are **two trends** today relating to **hazard classification**
    that are at odds.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   As noted earlier, **one trend is to expand earlier classification
    schemes** in a way that better sensitizes us to a fuller range of
    hazards -- thus the addition by some of such categories as
    environmental, biological, medical, transport and energy.

-   The **second trend is to reduce hazard classifications**.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   One of the many debates taking place today in the world of hazards,
    disasters, and what to do about them is one having to do with
    whether or not to maintain a **distinction between** **Natural and
    Technological** or **Man-Made Hazards**.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Susan Cutter,** for example**,** maintains that while natural
    hazards such as earthquakes and technological hazards such as
    chemical accidents are often described by **their origins, this type
    of classification is losing favor** among the research community
    **because many hazards have more complex origins**. She provides
    this example:

    **[(Visual Aid 16)]{.mark}**

    "For example, in many parts of the world, deforestation has resulted
    in increased runoff, which then leads to catastrophic downstream
    flooding. Is this a **natural** or a **socially induced** hazard? Or
    consider the use of technology to control nature, such as dams and
    levees. The levees may hold during normal-rainfall years, but they
    could fail during abnormally wet years. **Is a wet-year levee break
    and the subsequent flooding that follows a technological, natural,
    or environmental hazard?"**[^8]

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Enrico Quarantelli** raises points similar to those of Tobin and
    Montz cited earlier:

    **[(Visual Aid 17)]{.mark}**

    **". . . Although I stopped using the natural/technological disaster
    distinction long ago, I have always felt that there are other
    features that might be used to start to distinguish certain
    categories of disasters.** For example, some threats such as
    hurricanes and most nuclear plant radiation accidents **allow
    warnings**, while **others** such as earthquakes and most chemical
    explosions **do not provide forewarning**. Some impacts are **very
    localized** (many tornadoes, explosions), while **others are very
    diffuse** (most river floods, hurricanes, and many hazardous
    spills.) However, **no single dimension is enough on which to base a
    typology**.[^9]

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Dr. Quarantelli goes on to ask:

    "If a **nuclear winter** affecting the world is seen as basically in
    the same category as a **small scale tornado** striking a rural
    area, what is the rationale for such a treatment (or vice versa, if
    some sort of typology is used)?[^10]

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Quarantelli emphatically underscores the evolution that disaster
    classification is undergoing:

    **[(Visual Aid 18)]{.mark}**

    **"As we have done a number of times before, we want to restate that
    to pursue the current popular fad of distinguishing between
    so-called natural disasters and technological disasters is to pursue
    an unfruitful path.**

    *"There are differences between disasters*, but they do not result
    from their supposed source in nature or technology, **a simple
    minded common sense distinction at best.** Overall, **all disasters
    are basically natural** in that their consequences are socially
    rooted, and, indirectly, always stem from human and group actions.
    Put another way, there were no disasters before human beings evolved
    despite the cataclysmic physical upheavals in the evolution of the
    planet"[^11]

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   On the other hand, there are those who point out that **looking at
    the origins or sources** of hazards is **not the only way** to look
    at hazards and **not the only criteria** to use in categorizing
    hazards.

    **[(Visual Aid 19)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Tierney, Lindell and Perry** in their book *Facing the Unexpected*
    (2001, 15), for example, note that:

    "One body of research suggests that disasters caused by
    technological agents constitute a distinct genre because the
    **social and behavioral patterns** that occur in emergencies and
    disasters involving technological agents differ from those that are
    commonly observed in natural disasters, and because **the two types
    of events tend to differ in their short- and longer-term
    consequences."**

    **[(Visual Aid 20)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Laurie Pearce (2000, 10), in the homework reading assignment, citing
    Britton and Oliver[^12], notes that one differentiation between
    natural and technological hazards is that "natural hazards result
    from a *lack* of control, whereas technological hazards result from
    a *loss* of control."

    **[(Visual Aid 21)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   These authors have drawn our attention to three areas of distinction
    :

(1) **Causation** differs.

(2) **Reactions** differ.

(3) **Consequences** differ.

    [**Note:** *You may wish to seek viewpoints from the class as to the
    value of making distinctions between technological and natural
    hazards.*]{.mark}

    **[(Visual Aid 22)]{.mark}**

-   [In fact]{.mark}, there are **good reasons to support the
    continuation of distinctions** to be made

    between technological and natural hazards.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Assists in thinking about causes, sources and consequences.

-   Assists in thinking about differing reactions to hazard types.

-   Broadens awareness of fuller range of hazards possibly confronting a
    community.

-   Broadens awareness of a fuller range of stakeholders to network
    with.

-   Assists in moving forward in dealing with hazards in such areas as
    organizing risk

> assessments and communicating with the public.

**Objective 3.3 -- Acquaint students with hazard category
relationships.**

-   When hazards become events or disasters, categorization schemes
    become more complex.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Susan Cutter, Enrico Quarantelli, cited earlier, and others who
    dismiss or minimize the distinctions between natural and
    technological hazards have a point.

    If the use of distinct hazard categorization schemes encouraged
    emergency managers to think simplistically about the hazards
    confronting or potentially confronting their communities, that would
    be a problem.

    There are indeed relationships between many types of hazards and
    complexities that need to be borne in mind.

    **[(Visual Aids 23, 24)]{.mark}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Dr. McEntire, cited earlier, has suggested **relationships between
    hazards in differing categories**:

A.  **Natural hazards may initiate other natural hazards.**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  An earthquake may lead to landslides or a tsunami.

2.  A hurricane may produce tornadoes at landfall.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
B.  **Natural hazards may initiate other technological hazards.**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  A major flood may cause a dam to break.

2.  A lightning strike may result in a power failure.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
C.  **Technological hazards may initiate other natural/environmental
    hazards.**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  A hazardous materials explosion may create a wildfire.

2.  A nuclear accident will adversely affect the environment.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
D.  **Natural/environmental hazards may initiate other
    biological/natural hazards.**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  Excessive flooding may result in a rise of infectious disease.

2.  Deforestation may result in extreme flooding.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
E.  **Human-induced/civil hazards may initiate other
    technological/biological hazards.**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  A bombing may lead to fire.

2.  Computer sabotage may lead to a power failure.

3.  A terrorist attack may spread deadly disease.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
F.  **Other unique combinations:**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  An accident on the highway may cause a hazardous materials spill.

2.  Protests against environmental degradation could turn into a riot.

3.  The derailment of a train may produce a wildfire.

4.  Earthquakes may leave people without power, phones, and computer
    systems.

5.  A hijacking may lead to a plane crash and structural failure (e.g.,
    World Trade Center).

    [**Note***: You may wish to elicit additional examples from the
    class and then conclude the session by reinforcing the point that
    the way in which the students understand hazards will influence
    their effectiveness as emergency managers.*]{.mark}

    []{.mark}

    **References and Sources**

Comfort, Louise K. 2003. *Assessment of Homeland Security
Initiatives---Commonwealth of Pennsylvania* (A Century Foundation
Report). Paper developed for the Century Foundation's Homeland Security
Project Working Group on Federalism Challenges. 51 pages. Downloaded
from:
<http://www.tcf.org/publications/homeland_security/kettlpapers/comfort.pdf>

Cutter, Susan L. (ed). *American Hazardscapes: The Regionalization of
Hazards and Disasters*. Washington DC: Joseph Henry Press, 2001.

Hillsborough County, Florida. 2001. *Hillsborough County Comprehensive
Emergency Management Plan*. Hillsborough County, FL: September.
Downloadable from:
<http://www.hillsboroughcounty.org/emer_mgmt/CEMP_Final.pdf>.

Hoetmer, Gerard J. 1991. "Introduction." Pp. xvii-xxxiv, in *Emergency
Management: Principles and Practice for Local Government*, Thomas E.
Drabek and Gerard J. Hoetmer (eds.). Washington, DC: International City
Management Association.

ISDR (International Strategy for Disaster Reduction). 2002. *Living with
Risk -- A Global Review of Disaster Reduction Initiatives* (Preliminary
Version). Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations ISDR. Downloaded from:
<http://wwwunisdr.org/unisdr/Globalreport/htm>.

McEntire, David A. (in progress). Disaster Response Operations and
Management. Instructor Guide. FEMA: Emmitsburg, MD.

Pearce, Laurence Dominique Renee. *An Integrated Approach For Community
Hazard, Impact, Risk and Vulnerability Analysis: HIRV*. Doctoral
Dissertation, University of British Columbia, 2000.

Quarantelli, Enrico L. 1984. *Organizational Behavior in Disasters and
Implications for Disaster Planning*. Emmitsburg, MD: FEMA, National
Emergency Training Center Monograph Series.

Quarantelli, E.L. 1987. "What Should We Study? Questions and Suggestions
for Researchers About the Concept of Disasters." *International Journal
of Mass Emergencies and Disasters* (March), Vol. 5, No. 1, 7-32

Quarantelli, E.L. (ed.). 1998. *What Is A Disaster? Perspectives on the
Question*. London and NY: Routledge.

Tierney, Kathleen J, Michael K. Lindell and Ronald W. Perry. 2001.
*Facing the Unexpected: Disaster Preparedness and Response in the United
States.* Washington DC: Joseph Henry Press.

Tobin, Graham A. and Burrell E. Montz. 1997. *Natural Hazards:
Explanation and Integration*. New York and London: The Guilford Press.

[^1]: P.Y. Miller and M.R. Fowlkes. "In Defense of 'Man-Made' Disaster."
    *Natural Hazards Observer*, Vol. 9, 1984, p. 11.

[^2]: David A. McEntire (in progress). Disaster Response Operations and
    Management. Instructor Guide. FEMA: Emmitsburg, MD.

[^3]: Gerard Hoetmer. 1991. "Introduction." P.xxi in *Emergency
    Management: Principles and Practice for Local Government*. Thomas E.
    Drabek and Gerard J. Hoetmer (eds.). Washington, DC: International
    City Management Association.

[^4]: Florida Statute 252 defines a disaster as any natural,
    technological, or civil emergency that causes damage of sufficient
    severity and magnitude to result in a declaration of a state of
    emergency by a County, the Governor, or the President of the United
    States. (Pp. 14-15 in *Hillsborough County Comprehensive Emergency
    Management Plan*. Hillsborough County, Florida: September 2001.)

[^5]: The "Natural, Technological and Willful Hazards" categorization
    has been used by the Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction. See
    "First Executive Briefing and Strategic Planning Event -- An
    Activity of the Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction," University
    of North Carolina at Charlotte, April 10-12, 2002.

[^6]: Comfort 2003, 46.

[^7]: Duke Environmental Leadership Forum, Nicholas School of the
    Environment and Earth Sciences, Duke University, North Carolina,
    November 20-21 Conference on "Dealing With Disasters: Prediction,
    Prevention and Response."

[^8]: Susan L. Cutter (ed)*. American Hazardscapes: The Regionalization
    of Hazards & Disasters in the United States*. Washington, DC: Joseph
    Henry Press, 2001. pp. 2--3.

[^9]: E.L. Quarantelli (Ed.). 1998a. *What Is A Disaster? Perspectives
    on the Question*. London and NY: Routledge, 1998. p. 248.

[^10]: E.L. Quarantelli. "What Should We Study? Questions and
    Suggestions for Researchers About the Concept of Disasters."
    *International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters* (Vol. 5,
    No. 1, March 1987), pp. 9--15.

[^11]: Quarantelli, 1987, pp. 25--26.

[^12]: Neal Britton and John Oliver. 1991. "Introduction" The Meanings
    of Hazard." In *Sterling Offices Seminar Proceedings*, eds., Neil
    Britton and John Oliver, 1-10. Australia: Sterling Offices
    (Australia) Ltd.