James Kendra’s research while affiliated with University of Delaware and other places

Objectives This study empirically examines preparedness with a kit, medication, and a disaster plan on disaster outcomes including perceived recovery, property damage, and use of medical or mental health services. Methods Using a cross-sectional, retrospective study design, 1114 households in New York City were interviewed 21-34 months following Super Storm Sandy. Bivariate associations were examined and logistic regression models fit to predict the odds of disaster outcomes given the level of preparedness. Results Respondents with an evacuation plan were more likely to report not being recovered (odds ratio [OR] = 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5-3.8), property damage (OR =1.4; 95% CI: 1.1-1.9), and use of medical services (OR = 2.3; 95% CI: 1.1-4.5). Respondents reporting a supply of prescription medication were more likely to report using mental health (OR = 3.5; 95% CI: 1.2-9.8) and medical services (OR = 2.3; 95% CI: 1.1-4.8) Conclusions Having a kit, plan, and medication did not reduce risk of adverse outcomes in Superstorm Sandy in this sample. Disaster managers should consider the lack of evidence for preparedness when making public education and resource allocation decisions. Additional research is needed to identify preparedness measures that lead to better outcomes for more efficient and effective response and recovery.

The genesis of this book was the 50th Anniversary Workshop and Celebration of the Disaster Research Center at the University of Delaware in 2014. In marking that milestone in the history of the center, we wanted a workshop in which participants would reflect on what is known about disaster science—much of which is owed to DRC, to its long lineage of intellectual descendants, and to their scholarly cousins in a variety of fields. We wanted to assess where that knowledge is uncertain, where new or reinforced knowledge is needed, and also to think about the state of practice. For this collection, authors were explicitly encouraged to be provocative; to be iconoclastic; to be speculative; to try as best possible to bring in new ideas or different approaches to familiar themes. In this first chapter, we consider some of today’s pressing environmental challenges and the associated research needs, moving from there to introduce the chapters and their overall contributions to this volume.

The opening chapter in this volume portrayed the growing urgency of disaster research, as the nature and scope of hazards shift. People already familiar with their local environment may find that a changing climate changes their risk for certain kinds of hazards (Relf, G., Kendra, J. M., Schwartz, R. M., Leathers, D. J., & Levia, D. F. (2015). Slushflows: Science and planning considerations for an expanding hazard. Natural Hazards, 78(1), 333–354). People moving from place to place in search of better jobs or housing may move into a hazard milieu that is new to them. Political transformations with an authoritarian bent will probably increase vulnerability amongst populations already at greater risk for experiencing a disaster and for recovering more slowly, such as those in poor housing, those with chronic illnesses, and those with Functional and Access Needs. Robust research is needed, but some critics have emerged to challenge the practice and propriety of disaster research, especially quick-response research. This chapter argues for an affirmative right to conduct research.

The 50th anniversary of the Disaster Research Center of the University of Delaware provoked a discussion of the field’s background, its accomplishments, and its future directions. Participants representing many disciplines brought new methods to bear on perennial problems relevant to effective disaster management and policy formation. However, new concerns were raised, stemming from the fact that we live today in a globally unfolding environmental crisis every bit as pressing and worrisome as that of the 1960s when the Disaster Research center was founded. This volume brings together ideas of participants from that workshop as well as other contributors. Topics include: the history and evolution of disaster research, innovations in disaster management, disaster policy, and ethical considerations of disaster research. Readers interested in science and technology, public policy, community action, and the evolution of the social sciences will find much of interest in this collection.

Film as a pedagogical technique has been increasingly utilized by instructors in the classroom setting. As previous research highlights the benefits of this method, the question remains as to how this strategy can be effectively applied in the study of hazards, disasters, and emergency management. This paper describes an undergraduate course that uses cinematic portrayals of disaster to present and highlight a number of significant themes from the disaster science literature. We have found the examination of disaster films to be a valuable strategy for teaching topics which can range from disaster myths or erroneous science or, by contrast, relatively accurate portrayals of human behavior in disaster. This article surveys some of the existing literature on film in teaching; highlights how we have used films in courses; and offers suggestions on how some noteworthy films can be used to demonstrate and rein force challenging theories from the literature.

This article focuses on the analysis of the levels of household preparedness in New York City (NYC) during an imminent threat scenario, that is, the landfall of Superstorm Sandy on October 25, 2012. Additionally, it reveals how social and socio-psychological factors influenced the preparedness behavior of NYC households. This study uses data from the New York City Random Digit Dialing survey, conducted by the Disaster Research Center at the University of Delaware, with a sample of 1,449 adult residents in NYC at the time of the storm. The data was analyzed using frequencies, cross-tabs, and factor analysis in order to build four path analysis models of household preparedness. Results indicate that the levels of household preparedness in NYC at the time of the storm were modest. Each household engaged, on average, in 7 preparedness activities out of a possible 14 on the date of the storm. Households engaged more in the acquisition of preparedness supplies than in developing planning or mitigation capabilities. Moreover, social capital was an enabler of preparedness. Households that were politically active or that were integrated into community networks were more likely to engage in all types of preparedness efforts. Risk perception also had a positive impact on the preparedness efforts developed by NYC households. Also, single mother households, low-income households, and households with seniors were less likely to be proactive regarding preparedness efforts, while households with one or more members with functional and access needs and households located within the Sandy inundation areas were more likely to prepare for a disaster or an emergency.

This study focuses on household disaster preparedness in New York City (NYC) prior to Superstorm Sandy occurrence on October 25, 2012. The purpose of our analysis is to explain the level and patterns of disaster preparedness before a relatively rare natural disaster event occurred and to investigate the factors that influenced the capacity of NYC households to prepare for emergencies and disasters. A random telephone (RDD) survey comprised of 2001 NYC residents across all five boroughs was conducted by the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and completed before Sandy struck the City. These data were explored using frequencies, cross-tabs, and factor analysis to build a path model of household disaster preparedness. Findings indicate that household disaster preparedness levels in NYC are high, especially regarding the acquisition of emergency supplies and communication resources. A trust in local government and assistance from one’s social network are the strongest predictors of general household preparedness. Exogenous variables in our model – low income households and those with functional and access needs residents – will be more vulnerable during an actual disaster since they are less able to access communication technologies to search for self-protective disaster information and to communicate their needs during an emergency.

This paper reanalyzes the 1974 Xenia, OH (U.S.) tornado in comparison to the 2013 Moore tornado in light of current theories of disaster mental health and emergency planning and operation. It argues that prior conclusions can be reinterpreted as theoretical perspectives shift. Utilizing archival materials from the 1974 Xenia tornado and original fieldwork following the 2013 Moore, OK (U.S.) tornado, researchers examined 23 boxes of primary documents and interview material and corroborated their understanding of the archival data with the original research report on the 1974 recovery study to test for internal consistency. They then compared those findings to what was observed in the 2013 Moore tornado. While contemporary analysis tended to be critical of the mental health response, owing to a lack of planning, we found that mental health and faith-based participants repurposed a faltering system to provide a variety of services. An approach similar to what we know today as Psychological First Aid was the preferred approach by community groups responding to disaster in 1974 over the initial medically oriented model of counseling and in Moore in 2013. This shift may point to the efficacy of the approach in meeting community needs.

Today, university educators are confronting unparalleled challenges regarding declining state education budgets. Meanwhile, an ethos of corporate social responsibility has taken hold in some sectors, where companies define themselves as members and participants in a community, able to offer something besides financial transactions. Engagement and support of educational programs and institutions is an example of one such kind of involvement. This chapter details such collaborations between Grainger corporation, NC4, ESi Acquisition Inc. and the University of North Texas’s Emergency Administration and Planning program. The generosity of these private companies helped the program open an Emergency Operations Center training lab on campus to facilitate hands-on decision support systems training, and enhance creativity and problem solving skills in a simulated environment for emergency management students. Such public-private partnerships and outreach efforts to enhance disaster management training and educational experiences of students have the potential to make a real and lasting difference to all players involved.

In this chapter, we examine community innovation. We begin first by conceptualizing community and innovation as they relate to hazard and disaster. We identify the difficulties inherent in the terms community, innovation, and community innovation, presenting some working concepts that seem to align best with overall disaster research experience. We examine the characteristics of communities that make innovation both necessary and difficult, using examples of innovations drawn from the United States and internationally. This discussion will point toward some directions for future research, including an understanding of community that might be suitable for newer, complex, and diffuse hazards – such as bioterrorism, cyberterrorism, and slow onset hazards related to climate change. The discussion will also point to some needed reorientations in policy that might proceed from either subsequent or existing research.