That task is being undertaken by the U.N.
Global Programme for the Integration of Public
Administration and the Science of Disasters. This
mouthful of a program was developed as part of the
International Decade for Natural Disaster
Reduction. Chu acts as a consultant to the program
and is helping its director, Jeanne-Marie Col, to
organize a workshop on earthquake management,
which will be held this December in Beijing. The
workshop will seek ways to improve the access of
local officials in developing countries to
information on earthquake hazards.
Challenges on the home
front
Without the barriers to information transfer faced
by developing countries, the United States has
made great strides in earthquake preparedness,
flood control, and volcano monitoring. But even
here, the translation of scientific advances into
improved public policy cannot be taken for
granted. Every success has a failure to match.
The Mississippi floods of 1993 and 1995,
for example, repeatedly demonstrated the value of
regional access to floodplain maps prepared using
Geographical Information Systems (GIS) technology
for coordinating emergency efforts. Despite this
success, many flood-prone counties still rely on
outdated floodplain maps that are only kept on
file locally and do not reflect recent
urbanization and land-use changes.
The challenge for the geoscience community
is to educate public administrators on the value
and benefits of geoscience information and natural
hazards research. The Federal Emergency Management
Agency's (FEMA) new emphasis on natural disaster
mitigation presents a great opportunity. Instead
of focusing only on cleaning up the mess after a
disaster strikes, FEMA's mission now includes a
strong emphasis on planning and preparedness. Last
December, the agency released its first national
mitigation strategy, reflecting that emphasis (see
"Political Scene," February 1996).
Geoscientists may view an improved
understanding of the geologic environment and
underlying processes as an obvious requirement for
hazard mitigation. But strong input and
involvement from the geoscience community is
needed to ensure that FEMA and its state
counterparts include improved scientific
understanding in their mitigation efforts along
with better building codes and emergency response
planning.
A legislative
opportunity
Legislation introduced by Senator Ted Stevens
(R-Alaska) during this past session of Congress
provides another opportunity to strengthen the
connection between geoscience and public policy.
S. 1043 would reauthorize the Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Act of 1977, which created the National
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP), and
expand its focus by adopting a multihazard
approach with a strong emphasis on mitigation. The
reauthorization effort stalled because the bill
also tried to reform natural disaster insurance --
a subject that proved politically too hot to
handle.
An amended version of the Stevens bill is
sure to receive serious consideration in the next
Congress regardless of which party is in control.
The Association of American State Geologists and
others have worked with Stevens' staff to craft
the bill so that it explicitly recognizes the role
of geoscience in hazard mitigation. The American
Geological Institute supports this effort and is
seeking broader community involvement in this
issue.
But while negotiations were taking place on
the Stevens bill, Congress was cutting funds for
the U.S. Geological Survey's external earthquake
program that supports universityresearchers.
Convincing legislators of the need for geoscience
research in this area remains an uphill battle.
Fortunately, half of the funds cut in fiscal year
1996 were reinstated in the fiscal year 1997
budget.
In cutting out this external program,
legislators reasoned that they should fund
internal programs first in a time of shrinking
budgets. In fact, the opposite approach makes more
sense. Agencies can stretch limited resources by
reaching out to academic and private sector
partners and to state and local governments.
More work is needed both here and abroad to
bridge the gap between research and
implementation. We cannot wait for enlightened
administrators to seize the opportunities that
already exist. Instead, the geoscience community
must argue the merits of it case -- and
repeatedly.
David Applegate
Director of Government Affairs
American Geological Institute
Please send any comments or requests for information to AGI Government Affairs
Program govt@agiweb.org
November Geotimes |
Geotimes Home Page |
Gov. Affairs |
AGI Home Page |
Education |
GeoRef |
Members