Friday, August 5, 2011

Floods in USA vs Earthquakes in NZ

I'm doing some lecturing in the Planning School of Auckland University at the moment and get to attend some interesting talks from visiting experts. Like Wayne Feiden from Northampton in the US of A. He talked about natural hazard management in the US. It was extremely interesting to learn what happens there. Especially when we know waht has actually happened here in Christchurch. This slide shows the relative incidence of natural disasters across the USA. It appears these statistics are signed at the highest level. Presidential Disaster Declarations. We were advised that flooding is the biggest single cause of natural disasters. I remember all the news about the Mississippi and how those people all just walked away from their houses when they got flooded. You might remember. And none of them were insured....

Wayne showed us a few images from the damage done at New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina. He explained that before the suburbs got built out in New Orleans, there had been large tracts of wetlands which had absorbed the energy of hurricanes in the past. These were the houses that copped the most damage because they were built on low lying land.

He explained how many of these houses were built on low cost low lying concrete foundations - with no room for flood waters to flow beneath - and no height above flood waters either.

Apparently after the flood a high amount of planning and regulation got forced through. Rushed through. Someone had the bright idea of trailer park housing (remember that George Wood), and people and families have been living that way for years. Very poor, damp, humid style of housing. Especially bad in winter. And pretty awful in hot summers also.

But it was Wayne's information about state coverage of flood damage that made me sit up. You can see in this slide that 1% chance of flooding areas are Federally mapped - ie the US of A does that mapping. Not even state governments. These are signed off at the very highest level. And - he said - you cannot get private flood insurance. The US of A has a National Flood Insurance program (sounds a bit like the Earthquake Commission....)

Apparently it is - in theory - a self-supporting fund. But it was the next bit that was very interesting. He described that what comes with the fund is a VERY large carrot (they will cover all the costs of flood damage), and a VERY large stick (you can't qualify for this national flood damage insurance unless local land use regulations and building codes comply with Federal Rules.)

This detail strikes at the heart of what has gone wrong in Christchurch with insurance and EQC cover it seems to me. The EQC pays $100,000 on every house (more or less) doesn't matter if it was built badly, or if it was build on land the Council knew would liquify. There was no incentive in Chch for council's to act appropriately, nor builders, nor developers. Sure some people had a private top up insurance - but they've run a mile now.

I like this slide. He explained that in a very short time, the earthquakes in Chricthcurch will be forgotten. So it is essential to make institutional changes now, while there is an appreciation of what is necessary, and what went wrong. But - as I've indicated before - I wonder whether the Canterbury Inquiry is ready to grasp that nettle.

No comments:

Friday, August 5, 2011

Floods in USA vs Earthquakes in NZ

I'm doing some lecturing in the Planning School of Auckland University at the moment and get to attend some interesting talks from visiting experts. Like Wayne Feiden from Northampton in the US of A. He talked about natural hazard management in the US. It was extremely interesting to learn what happens there. Especially when we know waht has actually happened here in Christchurch. This slide shows the relative incidence of natural disasters across the USA. It appears these statistics are signed at the highest level. Presidential Disaster Declarations. We were advised that flooding is the biggest single cause of natural disasters. I remember all the news about the Mississippi and how those people all just walked away from their houses when they got flooded. You might remember. And none of them were insured....

Wayne showed us a few images from the damage done at New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina. He explained that before the suburbs got built out in New Orleans, there had been large tracts of wetlands which had absorbed the energy of hurricanes in the past. These were the houses that copped the most damage because they were built on low lying land.

He explained how many of these houses were built on low cost low lying concrete foundations - with no room for flood waters to flow beneath - and no height above flood waters either.

Apparently after the flood a high amount of planning and regulation got forced through. Rushed through. Someone had the bright idea of trailer park housing (remember that George Wood), and people and families have been living that way for years. Very poor, damp, humid style of housing. Especially bad in winter. And pretty awful in hot summers also.

But it was Wayne's information about state coverage of flood damage that made me sit up. You can see in this slide that 1% chance of flooding areas are Federally mapped - ie the US of A does that mapping. Not even state governments. These are signed off at the very highest level. And - he said - you cannot get private flood insurance. The US of A has a National Flood Insurance program (sounds a bit like the Earthquake Commission....)

Apparently it is - in theory - a self-supporting fund. But it was the next bit that was very interesting. He described that what comes with the fund is a VERY large carrot (they will cover all the costs of flood damage), and a VERY large stick (you can't qualify for this national flood damage insurance unless local land use regulations and building codes comply with Federal Rules.)

This detail strikes at the heart of what has gone wrong in Christchurch with insurance and EQC cover it seems to me. The EQC pays $100,000 on every house (more or less) doesn't matter if it was built badly, or if it was build on land the Council knew would liquify. There was no incentive in Chch for council's to act appropriately, nor builders, nor developers. Sure some people had a private top up insurance - but they've run a mile now.

I like this slide. He explained that in a very short time, the earthquakes in Chricthcurch will be forgotten. So it is essential to make institutional changes now, while there is an appreciation of what is necessary, and what went wrong. But - as I've indicated before - I wonder whether the Canterbury Inquiry is ready to grasp that nettle.

No comments: