Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities and the STORM Act

Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities
Student's Name
University Affiliation
Professor's Name
Course Title
Due Date
Introduction
Although several policy changes in disaster management have been made in the last few decades, the changes made after hurricane Katrina have been the most impactful in the Emergency and Disaster Management field. There are several reasons why I hold this position. First, the consequent shift from response focus to mitigation has proven to reduce the negative impacts felt by the areas most prone to disastrous events (Gall & Cutter, 2019). Secondly, the aftermath of the hurricane prompted several initiatives to be enabled at the federal level. The Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities and the STORM Act are key among the initiatives. These initiatives have equipped communities with the key infrastructure necessary to avert or reduce negative effects in the event of a disaster or emergency.
Thirdly, although it is hard to quantify the return on investment due to the above-mentioned shift, there is compelling evidence to show that it has greatly increased community benefits. These benefits include a reduction in the negative effects brought about by consequent hurricanes/disasters. This paper will discuss the above-mentioned points in detail. Additionally, the paper will also discuss the future of disaster management. The policy changes made after Hurricane Katrina have been the most impactful in the disaster management arena.
Disaster Management Model Prior to Hurricane Katrina
To understand the impact of Hurricane Katrina on policy changes, it is important to review the disaster intervention model prior to this deadly hurricane. The United States had experienced several hurricanes before Katrina. New Orleans, for instance, had experienced at least five hurricanes in the 20th century. In those hurricanes, the focus of the federal government was majorly based on response and recovery. Although hurricanes could cause great damage, the government's main focus remained pegged on response for decades. However, when hurricane Katrina struck, it came with some dynamics that made it inevitable to change the disaster management model employed by the federal government. The following is a discussion of some of these factors.
First, although about 80% of the population had left New Orleans by the time the hurricane started, thousands were still left at home (National Hurricane Center and Central Pacific Hurricane Center, 2005). Consequently, when the hurricane struck, response interventions were inevitable. Evidence reveals that ordinary people did a significant part of the rescue process. Additionally, the Coast Guard also rescued at least 34000 people (Gall & Cutter, 2019). While all the rescue was happening, the federal government seemed very unprepared for the disaster. The federal government took several days before intervening. When the Federal Emergency Management Agency did intervene, it did not seem to have a well-planned plan of action. The government was largely blamed for its lack of preparedness. In fact, most government officials, including the then president George Bush, did not have an idea of the extent to which the hurricane had caused damage. ...