I. The AGCI Workshop

The goal of the AGCI workshop was to produce specific recommendations on public policies and programs that ought to be instituted or expanded to reduce the impacts of future natural disasters. As such, the workshop differed from typical scientific meetings in which the intent is simply to present new research findings and to indicate areas of future research. Here, the premise is that, while we still do not know everything we ought to know, we now know enough to make a significant difference if we purposefully develop and apply that knowledge. Thus, suggestions for high priority research were a secondary objective of the workshop.

While considering the links between disasters (those social occasions involving major disruptions of community life) and hazards (potentially dangerous physical agents which often give rise to disasters), the AGCI workshop focused on what might be done about reducing the negative effects of disastrous occasions, especially those of a relatively sudden nature. This included the full span of disaster planning; that is, mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery.

The Aspen Global Change Institute provided the ideal format in which persons of differing professional and scientific backgrounds could interact, meld their knowledge and perspectives, and produce proposals for concrete steps that should be taken in the future. There was also an assumption that there can be little progress in implementing disaster programs and policies without a clear understanding of the potentials and limitations of technological and social dimensions involved. Thus, the workshop brought together technologists, physical and social scientists, and representatives of the public and private sectors who have some responsibility for planning and implementation of disaster reduction measures.

Six topics were identified as themes for the workshop. These were:

1. Activities of citizens and public perceptions regarding disaster reduction;

2. Technological innovations/developments and the opportunities and possible impediments they present for disaster reduction;

3. The role of the private sector in disaster reduction;

While we still do not know everything we ought to know, we now know enough to make a significant difference if we purposefully develop and apply that knowledge.

4. The political aspects and governmental dimensions of disaster reduction;

5. Natural disaster reduction goals and programs: the economic, sociological and technological nexus;

6. Long-term physical and social trends affecting the occurrence and nature of natural disasters and efforts to predict and reduce them.

While the major focus was on natural disasters and their effects in the United States, "human-made" or "technological" disasters were also considered, and attention was given to cross-national and international aspects of disaster reduction.

Prior to the workshop, attendees prepared and submitted working papers which were distributed to the other participants before the meeting. In order to maximize interaction among, and participation from the attendees, discussion at the workshop progressed through several stages:

1. A plenary session in which the goals, objectives and organization of the workshop were discussed (one-half day);

2. Three half-day sets of two concurrent exploratory sessions on the six themes of the workshop;

3. Six two-hour plenary sessions, one on each of the themes;

4. Six simultaneous thematic sessions for detailed discussions and development of recommendations (one day);

5. Joint meeting of theme group chairs to prepare and coordinate observations and recommendations (half-day);

6. Discussion, revision and approval of recommendations in plenary session.

The agenda proved an excellent mechanism for maximum discussion and interaction among the participants and for coordination of the observations and recommendations of the several interlocking themes. Numerous activities on weekends and in the evenings provided additional opportunities for interactions and discussion.

The full span of disaster planning includes mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery.

Participants

Participants were chosen to represent differing perspectives and backgrounds with respect to disaster management and Earth observing relative to natural disasters. These were:

Chairs

1. Prof. E. L. Quarantelli, University of Delaware
2. Dr. Louis Walter, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Organizing Committee

1. Dr. Miriam Baltuck, NASA Headquarters
2. Dr. William Hooke, NOAA
3. Prof. Walter R. Lynn, Cornell University
4. Dr. Vincent Salomonson, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Attendees

1. Prof. Beningo Aguirre, Texas A&M University
2. Dr. William Anderson, National Science Foundation
3. Mr. Matthew Ashe, Ashe Associates
4. Mr. Richard Bernknopf, U. S. Geological Survey
5. Dr. Robert Brakenridge, Dartmouth College
6. Dr. Caroline Clarke, National Academy of Sciences
7. Mr. Donald Geis, International City/County Management Association
8. Prof. Oscar Huh, Louisiana State University
9. Prof. Fred Krimgold, Virginia Polytechnic Graduate Center
10. Prof. Dennis Mileti, University of Colorado
11. Prof. Joanne Nigg, University of Delaware
12. Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr., National Center for Atmospheric Research
13. Prof. John Rundle, University of Colorado
14. Mr. Frank Thomas, FEMA, ret.
15. Ms. Janet Workman Gorman, Workman Group

There can be little progress in implementing disaster programs and policies without a clear understanding of the potentials and limitations of technological and social dimensions involved.

The preceding material provides the background for the workshop and this report. The body of the workshop report is contained in Vision and Priorities for Action (Chapter IV) and the Thematic Framework (Chapter V). The Priorities for Action are a result of a valuable plenary discussion of encompassing goals which the workshop participants believe could and should be attained, and include a vision of the future which participants foresee upon achievement of these goals. The Thematic Framework contains detailed observations and recommendations for five of the six themes of the workshop. In that section, the workshop also attempts to identify organizations, or classes of organizations, which should be responsible for developing and/or carrying out the recommendations. Results of the discussion on the "Trends" theme are presented in the following section of this report (Chapter II). The final chapter summarizes the recommendations developed by each of the theme groups.

Forward to Next Section//Back to Table of Contents//AGCI Homepage//Comments: agcimail@agci.org