GEOSCIENTISTS' ROLES IN NATURAL-HAZARD DECISIONS: BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER

Policy-makers are faced with myriad competing priorities with respect to natural hazards, particularly given the inherent conflict between uncommon events with inconsistent recurrence and economic drivers with a constant presence. Geoscientists should be best-suited to contribute critical information during natural-hazard policy development and crisis management. Before a disaster, geoscientists can define hazards and estimate boundaries on impact scope, as well as helping to identify vulnerabilities to specific hazards. This can drive land-use decisions and code adoption as well as improving hazard vulnerability analyses, which can aid in prioritizing preparedness activities among finite resources. Perhaps the two most important preparedness contributions from geoscientists are in defining and incorporating uncertainty into response and recovery plans and in developing valid planning assumptions, on which response and recovery actions are based.

When warnings are issued, critical geoscientific input includes: potential duration of the warning period and actual event; possible event paths (e.g., increased volcanic activity followed by eruption, quiescence, or both); guidance for delineating warning area; guidance for initial and long-term response considerations. Once impact has occurred, decision-makers will need updated hazard information as well as potential obstacles to response and recovery (e.g., aftershocks). Post-incident recovery offers the opportunity to capitalize on ephemeral public awareness and interest, securing policy-level support for limiting rebuilding in hazard-zones, building to better standards, developing more resilient infrastructure, and incorporating more realistic planning assumptions.