Glendale (PDF) - Hazard Mitigation Web Portal - State of California

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity of Glendale, CaliforniaAppendix C – Economic AnalysisAPPENDIX C: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OFNATURAL HAZARD MITIGATIONPROJECTSBenefit/cost analysis is a key mechanism used by the State Office of Emergency Services (OES),the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and other State and Federal agencies inevaluating hazard mitigation projects, and is required by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Reliefand Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended.This appendix outlines several approaches for conducting economic analysis of natural hazardmitigation projects. It describes the importance of implementing mitigation activities, differentapproaches to economic analysis of mitigation strategies, and methods to calculate costs andbenefits associated with mitigation strategies. Information in this section is derived in part from:The Interagency Hazards Mitigation Team, State Hazard Mitigation Plan, (Oregon State Police– Office of Emergency Management, 2000), and Federal Emergency Management AgencyPublication 331, Report on Costs and Benefits of Natural Hazard Mitigation.This section is not intended to provide a comprehensive description of benefit/cost analysis, noris it intended to provide the details of economic analysis methods that can be used to evaluatelocal projects. It is intended to (1) raise benefit/cost analysis as an important issue, and (2)provide some background on how economic analysis can be used to evaluate mitigation projects.Why Evaluate Mitigation Strategies?Mitigation activities reduce the cost of disasters by minimizing property damage, injuries, andthe potential for loss of life, and by reducing emergency response costs, which would otherwisebe incurred.Evaluating natural hazard mitigation provides decision-makers with an understanding of thepotential benefits and costs of an activity, as well as a basis upon which to compare alternativeprojects. Evaluating mitigation projects is a complex and difficult undertaking, which isinfluenced by many variables. First, natural disasters affect all segments of the communitiesthey strike, including individuals, businesses, and public services such as fire, police, utilities,and schools. Second, while some of the direct and indirect costs of disaster damages aremeasurable, some of the costs are non-financial and difficult to quantify in dollars. Third, manyof the impacts of such events produce “ripple-effects” throughout the community, greatlyincreasing the disaster’s social and economic consequences.While not easily accomplished, there is value, from a public policy perspective, in assessing thepositive and negative impacts from mitigation activities, and obtaining an instructivebenefit/cost comparison. Otherwise, the decision to pursue or not pursue various mitigationoptions would not be based on an objective understanding of the net benefit or loss associatedwith these actions.What are Some Economic Analysis Approaches forMitigation Strategies?The approaches used to identify the costs and benefits associated with natural hazard mitigationstrategies, measures, or projects fall into two general categories: benefit/cost analysis and costeffectivenessanalysis. The distinction between the two methods is the way in which the relative2006 PAGE C - 1
Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity of Glendale, CaliforniaAppendix C – Economic Analysiscosts and benefits are measured. Additionally, there are varying approaches to assessing thevalue of mitigation for public sector and private sector activities.Benefit/Cost AnalysisBenefit/cost analysis is used in natural hazards mitigation to show if the benefits to life andproperty protected through mitigation efforts exceed the cost of the mitigation activity.Conducting benefit/cost analysis for a mitigation activity can assist communities in determiningwhether a project is worth undertaking now, in order to avoid disaster related damages later.Benefit/cost analysis is based on calculating the frequency and severity of a hazard, avoidedfuture damages, and risk.In benefit/cost analysis, all costs and benefits are evaluated in terms of dollars, and a netbenefit/cost ratio is computed to determine whether a project should be implemented (i.e., if netbenefits exceed net costs, the project is worth pursuing). A project must have a benefit/costratio greater than 1 in order to be funded.Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisCost-effectiveness analysis evaluates how best to spend a given amount of money to achieve aspecific goal. This type of analysis, however, does not necessarily measure costs and benefits interms of dollars. Determining the economic feasibility of mitigating natural hazards can also beorganized according to the perspective of those with an economic interest in the outcome.Hence, economic analysis approaches are covered for both public and private sectors as follows.• Investing in Public Sector Mitigation ActivitiesEvaluating mitigation strategies in the public sector is complicated because it involvesestimating all of the economic benefits and costs regardless of who realizes them, whichcould potentially be a large number of people and economic entities. Furthermore, somebenefits cannot be evaluated monetarily, but still affect the public in profound ways.Economists have developed methods to evaluate the economic feasibility of publicdecisions that involve a diverse set of beneficiaries and non-market benefits.• Investing in Private Sector Mitigation ActivitiesPrivate sector mitigation projects may occur on the basis of one of two approaches: itmay be mandated by a regulation or standard, or it may be economically justified on itsown merits. A building or landowner, whether a private entity or a public agency,required to conform to a mandated standard may consider the following options:1. Request cost sharing from public agencies;2. Dispose of the building or land either by sale or demolition;3. Change the designated use of the building or land and change the hazardmitigation compliance requirement; or4. Evaluate the most feasible alternatives and initiate the most cost-effective hazardmitigation alternative.Estimating the costs and benefits of a hazard mitigation plan strategycan be a complex process.Employing the services of a specialist can assist in this process.The sale of a building or land triggers another set of concerns. For example, real estate2006 PAGE C - 2
Page 2 and 3:
City CouncilDave Weaver, MayorRafi
Page 4 and 5:
Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Table 4-2: STAPLEE Ranking of Actio
Page 58 and 59:
Table 4-4: Description of Ranking C
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Sec
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187: Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
NOTES:This map is intended for gene
Page 325:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 332 and 333:
City of GlendaleUpdateHazard Mitiga
Page 334 and 335:
Similar to Safety ElementIncludesEa
Page 336 and 337:
HospitalsPartnershipsWithin City an
Page 338 and 339:
Impact on CityMost significant area
show all

Glendale (PDF) - Hazard Mitigation Web Portal - State of California

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?