breaking the hydro-illogical cycle: are we making progress?
TRANSCRIPT
University of NebraskaLincoln
R
School of Natural Resources
Breaking the Hydro-illogical Cycle:
Are we making progress?
Donald A. Wilhite, Director
School of Natural Resources
University of Nebraska
The Dirty ‘30s . . a
reference point
The Great Depression will never happen again!
Responding to the 1930s Drought
• First federal response to drought• Combination of reactive and proactive
responses– Proactive responses emphasized building
institutional capacity– Creation of new federal infrastructure– Public works projects
• Federal efforts in the 1930s sets a precedence for future federal involvement in drought response
• Similar practices were followed in the 1950s, i.e., a combination of reactive and proactive response measures.
Designation of drought emergency areas, 1977.
What were the criteria used for designations?
1977
Criteria used by the Interagency Drought
Coordinating Committee
• PDSI
•Political influence
Drought impacts today are similar but more complex as more economic sectors are
affected, creating more conflicts between water users.
How do we break the cycle?
STOP!
The Cycle of Disaster ManagementThe Cycle of Disaster Management
CRISIS MANAGEMENT
RISK MANAGEMENT
. . . . requires a paradigm shift!
Movement from crisis to risk management . .
Principle Elements
of Drought Risk
Reduction Framework
University of NebraskaLincoln
R
School of Natural Resources
National Drought Mitigation National Drought Mitigation Center . . . . a Center . . . . a catalystcatalyst for for
changechange
MissionMission: To lessen societal vulnerability to drought by promoting
planning and the adoption of appropriate risk management
techniques.
Support for RISK-BASED DROUGHT MITIGATION PLANNING . . . .
has been from the BOTTOM UP!
State/Local/Tribal
Regional
Federal
Response Mitigation
Increasing need for timely, reliable climate/water supply assessments
Increasing need for higher resolution analysis for policy/decision support
Increasing need for more reliable seasonal forecasts/outlooks
The progression to drought mitigation planning . . . . .
Demand for mitigation planning
Development of new monitoring tools
a synergistic relationship!
New tools not only make the USDM task much easier and the finished product more reliable,these tools promote improved decisions by a diverse set of
users from local to national and from managers to policy makers.
Progress has been impressive . . . .
. . . . with more on the way!
and then along comes . . .
NIDIS
Western Governor’s Association• 1996: Recommendation for national preparation for and response
to drought. • 2000: Creation of National Drought Policy Commission.• 2003: Partnership with NOAA to improve drought monitoring and
forecasting.• 2004: Formal document published recommending NIDIS.
U.S. Congress• The 109th Congress introduced a bill (H.R. 1386/S. 802) to improve
national drought preparedness, mitigation, and response efforts, etc.Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction (President’s
National Science and Technology Council)• Highlighted drought as one of the grand challenges for disaster reduction
in 2005. • Proposed actions calls for developing an implementation plan for NIDIS.
U.S. Integrated Earth Observing System• NIDIS is one of six near term opportunities identified by U.S. GEO.
Major Drivers of NIDIS
Are we there yet?
Darn!. . . but we’re making
good progress!
“If we don’t succeed, we run the risk of failure.”
Dan Quayle
University of NebraskaLincoln
R
School of Natural Resources
That’s all folks!
School of Natural ResourcesSchool of Natural Resources
snr.unl.edusnr.unl.edu
[email protected]@unl.edu