An Asset-Based Approach to Enhancing Adaptive Capacity -- Looking at Risk MAP differently

Bob Freitag CFMDirector of the Institute for Hazards Mitigation Planning and Research

and Senior Instructor, UW

Results: “We need stronger neighborhoods, increased walkability, greater sense of place, mixed land uses, closer neighbor and family ties and trust;”

Some approaches:• Appreciative Inquire: Asset based approach. (as compared to a

vulnerability based approach.) • Ecosystem Services: HWB goods and services provided by a variety of

capital. (natural, social and human built)• Public Involvement : Use of stories (Scenarios), Focus Groups, World Café. • 5e Educational Methods: (engagement, exploration, explanation,

elaboration and evaluation)• Resilience as the ability to self-organize. (General Resilience, Specified

Resilience, Remembering, Revolt, Feedbacks, Threshold / Tipping Point and Transformability)

a. Map risks / Opportunities.Develop Scenario.

c. Assess risks / opportunitiesregarding HWB and vetted plans

d. Evaluate / contextualize strategies

b. Assess risks / opportunities

regarding HWB

1Identify Risks/ Opportunities

(Scoping meeting)

Assess Risks/ Opportunities

regarding HWB – Round

1

Communicate Risks/

0pportunities regarding

HWB – Round 2

Mitigate Risks/exploit opportunities (in context of future vision)

– Round 3

Risk MAP (Reduce Threats to HWB)

Responsibilities:Project Team ActivityCommunity Activity

2

34

approaches that strengthened the process:• Stressing opportunities along with risk• Incorporating a rigorous public process• Developing a pre-event baseline built off of what community

stakeholders appreciated about their communities• Identify ecosystem services values attributable to natural capital and

tools that can document the strength of human networks• Incorporating visioning of the community’s future• Resilience as a community’s ability to self-organize

Resilience within the context of the four phases of emergency management

Change

Response

Recovery 1 Preparedness

Response 2

Mitigation possible in any phase

Resilience within the context of the four phases of emergency management

Change

Response

Recovery 1 Preparedness

Response 2

Mitigation possible in any phase

1. Remembering 2. Revolt 3. Feedback 4. Tipping Point5. Transformability6. Collapse

Name Role David Batker EarthEconomicsNora Wahlund EarthEconomicsJohn Schelling Emergency Management WASusan Bolton Environmental and Forest Sciences, UWAmanda Siok FEMA R10 (Contract Monitor)Kristen Meyers FEMA R10Scott Miles Huxley College, WWUJosh Bruce Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience, UOAnn Bostrom Professor of Environmental Policy, UWAndrew Winck (Makah Tribe) Point of ContactDavid DeHaan (Everett EM) Point of ContactCharles Gorman (Redmond EM) Point of ContactRob Odle (Redmond, Planning) Point of ContactBob Freitag (PI) Project TeamDan Abramson (PI) Project TeamManish Chalana (PI) Project TeamJamie Mooney (SeaGrant) Project TeamRachel Aronson (Intern Ecy WA) Project TeamMaximilian M Dixon (RA lead) Project TeamTim Lehman (RA) Project TeamJonathan Olds (RA) Project TeamJesse Reynolds (RA) Project TeamChungho Kim (TA) Project Team

Project Advisory Committee and Project Team

Questions?bfreitag@ uw.edu