5 ms·

I know that this is slightly off-topic so feel free to downvote if you feel so inclined: There's a lot of money that goes into disaster relief and recovery. I

I know that this is slightly off-topic so feel free to downvote if you feel so inclined: There's a lot of money that goes into disaster relief and recovery. I think that's great and very worthwhile, thoughts on charity accountability notwithstanding. What I wonder, though, is if there are any organizations that provide pre-relief (prelief?) for disasters. For instance, the comment in this discussion about the airlines overbooking for flights out of the Turks made me think, "we've known that this is a possibility for a while, could aid funds be provided to get folks to safety in advance?" I know that there are a lot of logistical problems to solve (where do they go? for how long will they stay? what about their lives/livelihoods at home? how does an organization maintain accountability with donations for a disaster that has yet to happen?) Anyway, it's just a thought. I didn't know if such an organization existed, or if it's even feasible.

Retric 9y ago
Yes, but the most common form is infrastructure. Schools for example are often over engineered so they can be used as evacuation shelters. Abstractly, the Red cross for examples also promotes disaster preparedness. http://www.redcross.org/get-help/how-to-prepare-for-emergencies/make-a-plan http://www.redcross.org/get-help/how-to-prepare-for-emergenc... Simple notification is another, huge but often overlooked step. More immediate things like providing busing to evacuate people is often considered part of the event.
zanny 9y ago
I think the general trick is there are always enough people in the world in need of charity to make pre-funding private disaster relief seem like wasted potential. This is supposed to be something governments account for. They budget for and provide the insurance on giant disasters of this scale. If we want to do anything about improving the preparation and recovery from natural disasters, it will have to be a political engagement. The total costs of some of these incidents push tens of billions of dollars for the whole recovery. If there is anything governments should be accountable for, it is acts of nature.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
bluGill 9y ago
It isn't feasible, but the reasons are weather prediction, not economics. Those who live in hurricane reasons are warned far enough in advance to evacuate 10 times every year. Many years not even one hurricane turns out big enough that an evacuation was required, and even when one does turn out that big, that vast majority of the land that was warned is never affected. When we can accurately predict 1 week in advance how big and where a hurricane will land it is easy to evacuate those people over that week. However we don't yet have enough information to do that. People living in those areas soon learn that most hurricanes are non-events: either they hit elsewhere, or they are small enough that their house can safely ride it out. Either way they can go years without evacuating. When a big one finally comes for them they don't realize until it is too late. Then the evacuation becomes a massive traffic jam of people trying to get out in not enough time. Note that even if weather prediction is good enough people will take years to undo their habit of ignoring the predictions until it is too late as they have learned that the warnings are not worth paying attention to. (For all I know prediction might already be good enough)
- importantbrian 9y ago
  I live in South Florida and this nails it. My friends who have lived here a short time are already planning to pack up and leave. My friends who have been here for 10+ years are all just going to stay and ride it out. I think even if they issued mandatory evacuations many of them would still not leave. They all speak longingly of having neighborhood "hurricane parties" while they wait for the power to come back on. They think of it as South Florida snow days. An inconvenience at worst, a fun few days off school and work at best. They just don't see the threat as being that serious.
  - JustSomeNobody 9y ago
    Florida native here. They must not remember Andrew. It was not fun and games. The media plays these storms up, yes, but they really are nothing to joke about. Even inland, as much rain as they produce, it only takes that one gust to push over a 200 year old oak and it can destroy a house. People should take these storms seriously. First responders' lives are put into jeopardy because of foolishness like that. Not trying to be all up on my soapbox here. I've just seen some stuff is all.
s-phi-nl 9y ago
FiveThirtyEight had an interesting piece on how politicians have stronger incentives to provide relief after disasters than prepare for them before hand. You can read it at https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/disaster-politics-can-get-in-the-way-of-disaster-preparedness/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/disaster-politics-can-g... .
KVFinn 9y ago
>There's a lot of money that goes into disaster relief and recovery. I think that's great and very worthwhile, thoughts on charity accountability notwithstanding. >What I wonder, though, is if there are any organizations that provide pre-relief (prelief?) for disasters. Future Aid: Why Prevention Efforts in Humanitarian Aid Often Fail https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZwFG63TNxQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZwFG63TNxQ http://aid.works/2016/10/billions-spent-why-isnt-haiti-ready/ http://aid.works/2016/10/billions-spent-why-isnt-haiti-ready... >Humanitarian response is reactive, in part, because funding is reactive. Giving is emotional and irrational. If people can’t see the problem, it isn’t likely to garner support. >Disaster preparedness is too abstract for people to take out their wallets. Even when someone says, “Hey, if you give $5 now, you’ll save more lives and money in the long run…” people just aren’t inclined to do it. Consider the slogan, “Build Back Better.” The emphasis is on what is already broken. A more pragmatic slogan would be, “Build Better.” It’s not likely to catch on.
- swasheck 9y ago
  Wow! Thanks for this. I think it directly confronts many of the thoughts that I'd been entertaining.
kozikow 9y ago
Not necessary pre-relief, but some companies assess risk of a damage prior to the disaster. E.g. at tensorflight we are assessing building insurance risk via computer vision and significant part of features we detect are useful for hurricanes (e.g. building construction type, potential windborne projectiles, trees dangerously close to the building). Although our business model is selling this data for insurance, we could offer an assessment to individual users close to the catastrophe. Do you think individual users would be interested in potential suggestions (e.g. trim the tree, move chairs in-house, or flee ASAP :P)

Retric 9y ago

Yes, but the most common form is infrastructure. Schools for example are often over engineered so they can be used as evacuation shelters. Abstractly, the Red cross for examples also promotes disaster preparedness. http://www.redcross.org/get-help/how-to-prepare-for-emergencies/make-a-plan http://www.redcross.org/get-help/how-to-prepare-for-emergenc... Simple notification is another, huge but often overlooked step. More immediate things like providing busing to evacuate people is often considered part of the event.

zanny 9y ago

I think the general trick is there are always enough people in the world in need of charity to make pre-funding private disaster relief seem like wasted potential. This is supposed to be something governments account for. They budget for and provide the insurance on giant disasters of this scale. If we want to do anything about improving the preparation and recovery from natural disasters, it will have to be a political engagement. The total costs of some of these incidents push tens of billions of dollars for the whole recovery. If there is anything governments should be accountable for, it is acts of nature.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

bluGill 9y ago

It isn't feasible, but the reasons are weather prediction, not economics. Those who live in hurricane reasons are warned far enough in advance to evacuate 10 times every year. Many years not even one hurricane turns out big enough that an evacuation was required, and even when one does turn out that big, that vast majority of the land that was warned is never affected. When we can accurately predict 1 week in advance how big and where a hurricane will land it is easy to evacuate those people over that week. However we don't yet have enough information to do that. People living in those areas soon learn that most hurricanes are non-events: either they hit elsewhere, or they are small enough that their house can safely ride it out. Either way they can go years without evacuating. When a big one finally comes for them they don't realize until it is too late. Then the evacuation becomes a massive traffic jam of people trying to get out in not enough time. Note that even if weather prediction is good enough people will take years to undo their habit of ignoring the predictions until it is too late as they have learned that the warnings are not worth paying attention to. (For all I know prediction might already be good enough)

importantbrian 9y ago
I live in South Florida and this nails it. My friends who have lived here a short time are already planning to pack up and leave. My friends who have been here for 10+ years are all just going to stay and ride it out. I think even if they issued mandatory evacuations many of them would still not leave. They all speak longingly of having neighborhood "hurricane parties" while they wait for the power to come back on. They think of it as South Florida snow days. An inconvenience at worst, a fun few days off school and work at best. They just don't see the threat as being that serious.
- JustSomeNobody 9y ago
  Florida native here. They must not remember Andrew. It was not fun and games. The media plays these storms up, yes, but they really are nothing to joke about. Even inland, as much rain as they produce, it only takes that one gust to push over a 200 year old oak and it can destroy a house. People should take these storms seriously. First responders' lives are put into jeopardy because of foolishness like that. Not trying to be all up on my soapbox here. I've just seen some stuff is all.

s-phi-nl 9y ago

FiveThirtyEight had an interesting piece on how politicians have stronger incentives to provide relief after disasters than prepare for them before hand. You can read it at https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/disaster-politics-can-get-in-the-way-of-disaster-preparedness/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/disaster-politics-can-g... .

KVFinn 9y ago

>There's a lot of money that goes into disaster relief and recovery. I think that's great and very worthwhile, thoughts on charity accountability notwithstanding. >What I wonder, though, is if there are any organizations that provide pre-relief (prelief?) for disasters. Future Aid: Why Prevention Efforts in Humanitarian Aid Often Fail https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZwFG63TNxQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZwFG63TNxQ http://aid.works/2016/10/billions-spent-why-isnt-haiti-ready/ http://aid.works/2016/10/billions-spent-why-isnt-haiti-ready... >Humanitarian response is reactive, in part, because funding is reactive. Giving is emotional and irrational. If people can’t see the problem, it isn’t likely to garner support. >Disaster preparedness is too abstract for people to take out their wallets. Even when someone says, “Hey, if you give $5 now, you’ll save more lives and money in the long run…” people just aren’t inclined to do it. Consider the slogan, “Build Back Better.” The emphasis is on what is already broken. A more pragmatic slogan would be, “Build Better.” It’s not likely to catch on.

swasheck 9y ago
Wow! Thanks for this. I think it directly confronts many of the thoughts that I'd been entertaining.

kozikow 9y ago

Not necessary pre-relief, but some companies assess risk of a damage prior to the disaster. E.g. at tensorflight we are assessing building insurance risk via computer vision and significant part of features we detect are useful for hurricanes (e.g. building construction type, potential windborne projectiles, trees dangerously close to the building). Although our business model is selling this data for insurance, we could offer an assessment to individual users close to the catastrophe. Do you think individual users would be interested in potential suggestions (e.g. trim the tree, move chairs in-house, or flee ASAP :P)