Transactions and Friction as Concepts to Guide Disaster Recovery Policy

William J. Siembieda

doi:10.1007/s13753-012-0005-3

Article Contents

Article Navigation > International Journal of Disaster Risk Science > 2012 > 3(1): 38-44

William J. Siembieda. Transactions and Friction as Concepts to Guide Disaster Recovery Policy[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2012, 3(1): 38-44. doi: 10.1007/s13753-012-0005-3

Citation:

William J. Siembieda. Transactions and Friction as Concepts to Guide Disaster Recovery Policy[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2012, 3(1): 38-44. doi: 10.1007/s13753-012-0005-3

William J. Siembieda. Transactions and Friction as Concepts to Guide Disaster Recovery Policy[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2012, 3(1): 38-44. doi: 10.1007/s13753-012-0005-3

Citation:

William J. Siembieda. Transactions and Friction as Concepts to Guide Disaster Recovery Policy[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2012, 3(1): 38-44. doi: 10.1007/s13753-012-0005-3

PDF

Transactions and Friction as Concepts to Guide Disaster Recovery Policy

doi: 10.1007/s13753-012-0005-3

William J. Siembieda^,

California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA 93449, USA

Available Online: 2021-04-26

Abstract

Abstract

Large-scale disaster events in Japan (2011), New Zealand (2011), Chile (2010), and China (2008) generate a need for understanding the dynamics of multilocation disaster recovery. This article uses analogs from contemporary economic theory to model recovery interactions over time and over large geographic areas. The model consists of the external and internal sectors and how they engage in transactions during the recovery period. The concept of transaction is developed and its use as a policy tool explored. The concepts of friction and uncertainty are introduced as barriers to efficient and effective completion of the transactions needed for recovery. Friction adds time and resource costs, while uncertainty slows the completion of transactions entered into by recovery stakeholders.
- complex recovery systems,
- disaster policy,
- friction,
- multilocation recovery,
- recovery theory,
- transactions

FullText(HTML)

References(10)

References

Alesch, D., L. A. Arendt, and W. J. Petak. 2012. Natural Hazard Mitigation Policy:Implementation, Organizational Choice and Contextual Dynamics. London:Springer.

Alesch, D., and W. Siembieda. 2011. The Role of the Built Environment in the Recovery of Cities and Communities from Extreme Events. Washington, DC:Public Entity Research Institute. NSF Workshop on Recovery Theory.

Chen, Y., and D. C. Booth. 2011. The Wenchuan Earthquake of 2008:Anatomy of a Disaster. Beijing:Springer and Science Press.

Comerio, M. 1998. Disaster Hits Home:New Policy for Urban Housing Recovery. Berkeley:University of California Press.

Edgington, D. W. 2010. Reconstructing Kobe:The Geography of Crisis and Opportunity. Vancouver:University of British Columbia Press.

Ito, S., and T. Ojima, eds. 2011. Rebuilding Japan after the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami. Tokyo:Asian Institute of Urban Environment (English version).

Mammen, D. 2011. Creating Recovery:Values and Approaches in New York After 9/11. Tokyo:Fuji Technology Press. NPR (National Public Radio). 2012. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103720889.

Olshansky, R., and L. Johnson. 2010. Clear as Mud:Making of the New Orleans Plan. Chicago:American Planning Association Press.

Paice, E. 2008. Wrath of God:The Great Lisbon Earthquake of 1755. London:Quercus Publishers.

Vale, L. A., and T. J. Campanella, eds. 2005. The Resilient City:How Modern Cities Recover from Disaster. New York:Oxford University Press.

Relative Articles

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Proportional views