1. The Spatial Patterns Of Earthquake Casualties (Damages) And Social Vulnerability Zahra Golshani Natural Resource & Environmental Science University of Illinois Feb,17,2009

2. Introduction Natural hazard Loss reduction through mitigation, preparedness and recovery programs Natural hazard Loss reduction through mitigation, preparedness and recovery programs Social factors play significant role in determining population vulnerability to hazard (not just physical nature of hazard) Social factors play significant role in determining population vulnerability to hazard (not just physical nature of hazard) Increasing disparities in wealth and socio- economic status increases the potential loss for greater human loss Increasing disparities in wealth and socio- economic status increases the potential loss for greater human loss

3. Introduction (continue) Risk modeling has been limited to physical aspect Risk modeling has been limited to physical aspect Developing integrated models of risk assessment that would incorporate the social and economic consequences of earthquakes Developing integrated models of risk assessment that would incorporate the social and economic consequences of earthquakes Incorporating indirect/non-structural loss to current models Incorporating indirect/non-structural loss to current models

4. Objective/Questions An attempt to assess vulnerability in spatial term (including both social vulnerability and physical damage) An attempt to assess vulnerability in spatial term (including both social vulnerability and physical damage) Testing damage & social vulnerability relationship Testing damage & social vulnerability relationship Does it confirm the literature? Does it confirm the literature? Creating social risk map Creating social risk map

5. Conceptual model Cutter-1996 Cutter-1996 Place Vulnerability Biophysical Vulnerability Social Vulnerability Social Fabric Hazard potential Risk Mitigation Geographic Context

6. Defining Social Vulnerability Some fundamental factors that influence social vulnerability includes: Lack of access to resources, including information and knowledge Lack of access to resources, including information and knowledge Limited access to political power and representation Limited access to political power and representation Weak building or weak individuals Weak building or weak individuals (Blaiki et al.1994;cutter 1997;Mileti 1999)

7. Measures Of Social Vulnerable Population Characteristics Differential access to resources & information/greater susceptibility due to physical weakness Differential access to resources & information/greater susceptibility due to physical weakness Wealth or poverty Wealth or povertyVariable Vulnerable-POP Vulnerable-POP (by Age) Female population Female population Non-white (Race) Non-white (Race) Low education Low education Per capita Income Per capita Income Median house value Median house value

8. Data Description Social Vulnerability Data : all was obtained from census manipulations were done to obtain the rates Social Vulnerability Data : all was obtained from census manipulations were done to obtain the rates Vulnerable-POP (people under 14 & over 70) Female population Non-white (Race) Low education (no school through 6 grade population) Per capita Income Median house value Average dollar value of residential damage in zipcode-89 Average dollar value of residential damage in zipcode-89

9. Data Description-2 some change due to data issues Casualty (only 33 casualty in Northridge so it was not possible to do meaningful analysis with that data. Casualty (only 33 casualty in Northridge so it was not possible to do meaningful analysis with that data. The Turkey casualty data---  only 5% avaliable (census data are aggregated) Therefore damage data for Northridge earthquake was used: Average estimated damage for single and multi family at zipcode level ( Obtained from CPS Report: California Policy Seminar )

10. Procedures Creating damage map (Total damage for single and multi family houses as the Physical vulnerability indicator) Creating damage map (Total damage for single and multi family houses as the Physical vulnerability indicator) Social vulnerability maps (using different variables) Social vulnerability maps (using different variables) Compare the results Compare the results Aggregate the social map and compare the results Aggregate the social map and compare the results

11. Method Using GIS to manipulate and join data from different sources Using GIS to manipulate and join data from different sources Using GIS to create single and integrated maps and compare the results Using GIS to create single and integrated maps and compare the results

12. Case Study Northridge earthquake (modest earthquake) Northridge earthquake (modest earthquake) Jan 17,1994 Jan 17,1994

13. Physical Damage Map (LA County-zipcode level) $ value $ value Distribution of data is not normal Distribution of data is not normal Skewed to the right Skewed to the right 287 out of 312 zipcode had less than $1 million estimated damage 287 out of 312 zipcode had less than $1 million estimated damage

14. Damage & Poverty-Rate Maps

15. A closer look

16. Damage & Non_White Rate Maps

17. A closer look

18. Damage & Household size Maps

19. Closer look

20. Damage & Female population Maps

21. A closer look

22. Damage & Low Education population Maps

23. A closer look

24. Household Median value and Vulnerable population results

25. Comparison of social &physical vulnerability maps

26. Social vulnerability & damage relationship (significant at 10%)

27. Observations/implications Modeling the spatial pattern of social vulnerability with GIS does not contradict the literature Modeling the spatial pattern of social vulnerability with GIS does not contradict the literature Implications on natural hazard planning Implications on natural hazard planning Identifying high risk locations (physical damage) -  mitigation Identifying high risk locations (physical damage) -  mitigation Targeting social vulnerable groups in response, relief and recovery phases Targeting social vulnerable groups in response, relief and recovery phases

28. Future direction Running different kind of regressions including spatial regression on data Running different kind of regressions including spatial regression on data Using other physical vulnerability indicators such as distance to epicenter, distance to Fault, peak ground acceleration Using other physical vulnerability indicators such as distance to epicenter, distance to Fault, peak ground acceleration Using other variables such as injury Using other variables such as injury

29. conclusion The benefit of integration The benefit of integration Improving risk assessment models Improving risk assessment models Better and more efficient natural hazard planning Better and more efficient natural hazard planning

30. Questions & Comments?? Thanks for your time Thanks for your time have a great afternoon have a great afternoon