The increased frequency and intensity of natural disasters, the rising amount of economic losses, and the mounting costs of providing relief indicate the growing importance of disaster1 resilience. Disasters have far-reaching consequences, ranging from the most basic physical injuries and property losses to long-term psychological, economic, and cultural damage. Merely supplementing resources to address the aftermath of disasters—rather than mitigating risks and putting in place key elements in advance of a disaster—is not a sustainable model for community resilience. Additionally, failure to utilize the resources of all public-and private-sector2 stakeholders to develop long-term planning mechanisms leaves communities vulnerable to repeated, high levels of damage and destruction.
A “whole of community” approach that addresses each stage of the emergency management cycle offers a more pragmatic, workable model for improving resilience. Based on comparative advantage, federal executive agencies, the U.S. Congress, and the private sector can all contribute to certain elements within each stage. Philanthropic organizations can prove especially important in the long-term planning and recovery phases due to their ability to pool private funding and act independently of election cycles.
The ability of communities to set goals, measure risk and vulnerability, and identify gaps in capabilities are critical steps on the path toward achieving resilience. Understanding threats and prioritizing mitigation efforts are central to efficient and effective emergency management. Recent examples of incentivizing mitigation efforts illustrate federal, state, and local governments’ recognition of the need to pursue this strategy. Incentives help move local communities beyond problem identification and toward options evaluation, implementation, and outcomes testing. By analyzing and sharing results among levels of government and the private sector, communities can benefit by leveraging past successes and best practices. Due, for instance, to the constant impact of disasters along the Gulf Coast of the United States, the lessons from those affected communities can help improve the resilience of other places across the nation and the world.
Legislative bodies must learn from mitigation efforts, too, seeking ways to authorize and reinforce cost-saving procedures. Flexible and scalable legislation ensures resources can match the unique effects of each disaster. Spreading the costs of disaster spending across all levels of government and the private sector can also reduce the burden on taxpayers and potentially increase participation in the insurance market, thereby lowering certain premiums.
Spreading costs and sharing capabilities require strong relationships between the public and private sectors. Partnerships built on trust and understanding of the goals and responsibilities of each party prove the most successful in fulfilling the needs of communities. Maintaining a long-term vision of the requirements for healthy, sustainable communities and harnessing the power of public-private partnerships and individual efforts represent integral factors for achieving resilience.
The following table lists the study team’s main findings and recommendations.
