Category Archives: Disaster Reponse

【Disaster Research】When Nature Meets Human Error: Lessons from History’s Deadliest Volcanic Mudflow 40 Years Ago

Growing up, many of us were taught that natural disasters are inevitable acts of nature beyond human control. This perspective changed dramatically for me when I started working at a research institute. My senior researcher emphatically told me, “The natural disaster is not natural.” This profound statement transformed my approach to disaster research, helping me understand that human decisions often determine whether natural hazards become catastrophic disasters.

The Forgotten Tragedy of Armero

On November 13, 1985, the Nevado del Ruiz volcano in Colombia erupted after 69 years of dormancy. The eruption triggered massive mudflows (lahars) that rushed down the volcano’s slopes, burying the town of Armero and claiming over 23,000 lives. This catastrophe stands as Colombia’s worst natural hazard-induced disaster and the deadliest lahar ever recorded.

What makes this tragedy particularly heartbreaking is its preventability. Scientists had observed warning signs for months, with seismic activity beginning as early as November 1984. By March 1985, a UN seismologist had observed a 150-meter vapor column erupting from the mountain and concluded that a major eruption was likely.

Despite these warnings, effective action to protect the vulnerable population never materialized. The devastation of Armero wasn’t simply the result of volcanic activity but the culmination of multiple human failures in risk communication, historical memory, and emergency response.

When Warning Systems Fail: Communication Breakdown

The Armero disaster epitomizes what disaster researchers call “cascading failures” in warning systems. Scientists had created hazard maps showing the potential danger to Armero in October 1985, just weeks before the eruption. However, these maps suffered from critical design flaws that rendered them ineffective.

One version lacked a clear legend to interpret the colored zones, making it incomprehensible to the general public. Devastatingly, Armero was placed within a green zone on some maps, which many residents misinterpreted as indicating safety rather than danger. According to reports, many survivors later recounted they had never even heard of the hazard maps before the eruption, despite their publication in several major newspapers.

As a disaster researcher, I’ve seen this pattern repeatedly: scientific knowledge fails to translate into public understanding and action. When I conducted fieldwork in flood-prone regions in Thailand, I discovered a similar disconnect between technical risk assessments and public perception. Effective disaster mitigation requires not just accurate information but information that is accessible and actionable for those at risk.

The Cultural Blindspots of Risk Perception

The tragedy of Armero illustrates how cultural and historical factors shape how communities perceive risk. Despite previous eruptions destroying the town in 1595 and 1845, causing approximately 636 and 1,000 deaths respectively, collective memory of these disasters had seemingly faded as the town was rebuilt in the same location.

In the hours before the disaster, when ash began falling around 3:00 PM, local leaders, including the town priest, reportedly advised people to “stay calm” and remain indoors. Some residents recall a priest encouraging them to “enjoy this beautiful show” of ashfall, suggesting it was harmless. These reassurances from trusted community figures likely discouraged self-evacuation that might have saved lives.

My research in disaster-prone communities has consistently shown that risk perception is heavily influenced by cultural factors, including trust in authority figures and historical experience with hazards. In Japan, for instance, the tsunami markers that indicate historic high-water levels serve as constant physical reminders of past disasters, helping to maintain community awareness across generations.

Systemic Failures and Institutional Response

The Armero tragedy wasn’t just a failure of risk communication or cultural blind spots—it revealed systemic weaknesses in disaster governance. Colombia was grappling with significant political instability due to years of civil war, potentially diverting governmental resources from disaster preparedness. Just a week before the eruption, the government was heavily focused on a guerrilla siege at the Palace of Justice in Bogotá.

Reports suggest there was reluctance on the part of the government to bear the potential economic and political repercussions of ordering an evacuation that might have proven unnecessary. This hesitation proved fatal when communication systems failed on the night of the eruption due to a severe storm, preventing warnings from reaching residents even after the lahars were already descending toward the town.

In my research examining large-scale flood disasters, I’ve found that effective disaster governance requires robust institutions that prioritize public safety over short-term economic or political considerations. My 2021 comparative analysis of major flood events demonstrated that preemptive protective actions consistently save more lives than reactive emergency responses, even when accounting for false alarms.

Learning from Tragedy: The Path Forward

The Armero disaster, while devastating, catalyzed significant advancements in volcano monitoring and disaster risk reduction globally. Colombia established specialized disaster management agencies with greater emphasis on proactive preparedness. The

Colombian Geological Service expanded from limited capacity to a network of 600 stations monitoring 23 active volcanoes.

The contrast with the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines demonstrates the impact of these lessons. There, timely forecasts and effective evacuation procedures saved thousands of lives. The memory of Armero remains a powerful reminder of the consequences of inadequate disaster preparedness.

As I’ve emphasized in my own research on disaster resilience in industrial complex areas, building sustainable communities requires integrating technical knowledge with social systems. My work developing social vulnerability indices demonstrates that effective disaster risk reduction must address both physical hazards and social vulnerabilities.

Remember, disasters may be triggered by natural events, but their impact is determined by human decisions. By learning from tragedies like Armero, we can create more resilient communities prepared to face future challenges.

【Disaster Research:Excel】Pivot Tables for Disaster Research: A Step-by-Step Guide

Today, I gonna explain how to use a pivot table to conduct disaster research using dummy data.

What is a Pivot Table?

Imagine you have a big pile of data, and you want to see summaries or patterns quickly. A pivot table lets you rearrange (or “pivot”) that data to show different views, like totals, averages, or counts, without changing the original data.

Sample Disaster Research Dataset:

dummy dataset

Step-by-Step Pivot Table Analysis for Disaster Research

  1. Select Data & Insert Pivot Table
  • Select all the data (Ctrl+A or Cmd+A)
  • Go to “Insert” → “PivotTable” → “OK” (for a new worksheet or you can choose the location in the same sheet)
  1. Total Aid Provided by Disaster Type

The sum of Aid by Disaster Type

  • Drag “Disaster Type” to the “Rows” box
  • Drag “Aid Provided (USD)” to the “Values” box (automatically shows sum of aid)
  • Interpretation: Quickly identify which disaster types received the most total aid
  1. Aid Provided by Organization
  • Remove “Disaster Type” from rows and add “Organization” instead
  • Keep “Aid Provided (USD)” in the “Values” box
  • Interpretation: Visualize which organizations have contributed the most aid overall
  1. Aid Provided by Year
  • Replace “Organization” with “Year” in the “Rows” box
  • Keep “Aid Provided (USD)” in the “Values” box
  • Interpretation: Track annual patterns in aid disbursement over time
  1. Aid Provided by Disaster Type and Year
  • Add “Disaster Type” to the “Rows” box
  • Place “Year” in the “Columns” box
  • Keep “Aid Provided (USD)” in the “Values” box
  • Interpretation: Create a cross-tabulation showing aid distribution across disaster types and years
  1. Average Aid Provided
  • Click on “Sum of Aid Provided (USD)” in the “Values” box
  • Select “Value Field Settings” → “Average” → “OK”
  • Interpretation: Compare the average aid amounts across categories
  1. Filtering by Location
  • Add “Location” to the “Filters” box
  • Use the dropdown to select a specific location (e.g., Nepal)
  • Interpretation: Focus your analysis on specific geographic regions
  1. Counting Disaster Occurrences

Sorted Table

  • Remove “Aid Provided (USD)” from values
  • Add “Disaster Type” to the values box
  • Change the value field setting from sum to count
  • Interpretation: Track the frequency of different disaster types in your dataset

Key Insights from Disaster Research Pivot Tables

  • Aid Distribution Analysis: Identify which disaster types or locations receive the most financial support
  • Organizational Impact Assessment: Understand which relief organizations are most active in different scenarios
  • Temporal Trend Identification: Analyze how aid distribution patterns change over months, quarters, or years
  • Comparative Regional Analysis: Compare aid efforts across different geographic areas and disaster contexts

By experimenting with different field combinations, you can uncover valuable insights from your disaster research data. Pivot tables transform complex datasets into actionable intelligence for disaster management, policy development, and resource allocation.

Content Gap Opportunities

  • A section on advanced pivot table features specifically useful for disaster research
  • Guidance on data visualization options after creating pivot tables
  • Information on combining pivot tables with other analytical tools for comprehensive disaster analysis
  • Tips for presenting pivot table findings to non-technical stakeholders

【Disaster News】Natural Disasters Just Drained $400B – Your Wallet Is Next

Imagine 3

Did you know natural disasters drained over $400 billion from the global economy last year? Your wallet might be next.

2024 was the hottest year since 1850, with catastrophic consequences. We faced 21 separate billion-dollar disasters worldwide, with insurers covering only $154 billion of the total $417 billion in damages.

Hurricanes Helene and Milton were the costliest events, each causing about $20 billion in insured losses alone. Meanwhile, severe thunderstorms and hail contributed a staggering $64 billion to the insurance bill.

As a disaster management expert, I’ve watched climate patterns shift dramatically in recent years. What’s truly alarming is how wildfire and storm seasons are becoming increasingly unpredictable – like the January fires we saw in Los Angeles, completely outside the traditional season.

Our old preparedness playbooks are becoming obsolete. In my experience, communities that adapt now with flexible emergency plans will save both lives and money when – not if – disasters strike.

Source: Wall Street Journal

 

Day_209 : Snow Disasters: When Winter Wonderland Turns into a Nightmare

Winter’s beauty can turn dangerous with heavy snow, blizzards, and ice storms. These snow disasters cause power outages, transportation chaos, and property damage. But what causes them, and how can we prepare?

The Science of Snowstorms

Snow disasters happen when cold temperatures, precipitation, and wind combine. Think of heavy snowfall, icy roads, and massive snowdrifts. Climate change is making things worse with more intense snow and hazardous ice.

The Impact

Snow disasters disrupt transportation, causing accidents and delays. Power lines snap under the weight of snow, leading to blackouts. Buildings can even collapse, and ice dams cause leaks and damage.

Fighting Back: Snow Removal and Prevention

Traditional methods like shoveling and plowing are still essential. But we now have snowblowers, snowmelt systems, and de-icing techniques. Advanced weather prediction helps us prepare, and GPS-guided snowplows clear roads faster.

Be Prepared!

Even with the best technology, snowstorms can still hit hard. Have an emergency kit with food, water, blankets, and a first aid kit. Plan for transportation and communication in case of an emergency.

Stay safe and warm this winter!

# Image Source: Unsplash‍

 

Day_196 : The Matsushiro Earthquake Center

The following is a reprint of a column I once wrote:

The Matsushiro Earthquake Center, nestled in the historic town of Matsushiro within Nagano Prefecture, represents a pivotal chapter in Japan’s approach to seismic research and disaster mitigation. Established in February 1967 under the auspices of the Japan Meteorological Agency’s Seismological Observatory, this institution was born out of a critical period marked by intense seismic activity. Between August 3, 1965, and April 17, 1966, the region experienced a staggering 6,780 seismic events, ranging from imperceptible tremors to significant quakes measuring intensity 5 and 4 on the Japanese scale. This unprecedented series of earthquakes not only posed a major societal challenge but also catalyzed the center’s founding.

The initiative to establish the center was strongly influenced by the then-mayor of Matsushiro, Nakamura, who famously prioritized the pursuit of knowledge and research over material wealth. This sentiment laid the groundwork for what would become a crucial site for earthquake prediction and disaster preparedness efforts, situated on the historical grounds of the Imperial Headquarters.

Drawing from my experience at the Natural Disaster Information Office and in collaboration with the Precise Earthquake Observation Office of the Japan Meteorological Agency (now known as the Matsushiro Earthquake Observatory), I have had the unique opportunity to organize and delve into discussions from that era. Despite being born after the seismic events in Matsushiro, I find the archival records fascinating. They not only recount the collective efforts of Matsushiro’s residents to forge a disaster-resilient community in the aftermath of the earthquake but also highlight the comprehensive nature of the research conducted.

The inquiries extended beyond seismic analysis, encompassing a holistic examination of the earthquake’s impact on the community. Noteworthy is the health survey conducted on students from a local school, in collaboration with the Matsushiro Health Center and hospital, to assess the psychological and physical effects of the seismic swarms. Moreover, the scope of investigation included studies on earthquake-induced landslides and the repercussions on water infrastructure, showcasing the multifaceted response from various experts and frontline workers of the time.

This rich tapestry of collective memory and scientific inquiry underscores the enduring spirit of Matsushiro—a community united in its commitment to disaster resilience, informed by the lessons of its past.

Ref.

http://researchmap.jp/read0139271/%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E3%83%96%E3%83%AD%E3%82%B0/

Day_157: Disaster Warning (1)

I will update a column of the NIED e-mail magazine I wrote long ago because the content does not fade with time. (I will do this step by step in Japanese and English.) I will also add comments to update the situation.

Sorry, I am now revising this post because of the translation difficulties. This post will be revised again. Thank you.

Published May 6, 2010
NIED-DIL e-mail magazine: Disaster Warning (1)

■ Disaster Warning (1) ■

In February 2008, a survey provided an opportunity to visit Hawaii’s Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC). In a study, I interviewed the director of the PTWC, and the first thing that caught my attention was the role of the media. The director told me that a public tsunami evacuation alert was required three hours before the event, which was too time-sensitive, but the press was an advantage to do this. However, there were various restrictions for the government organization, such as warnings in an international framework. I remembered the Chilean Navy’s disaster response to the damage caused by the earthquake and tsunami in Chile in February this year.

Next, I was interested in science, technology, and data, which are the basis of alarm decisions. I think regular (flood, etc.) warnings will be judged based on current and past data, but especially for tsunami warnings, there were errors in the original earthquake and the tide gauge data. To judge, we should know that 99.99 percent of the errors could be caused by error. The fact that past data is not very useful because the devices to figure out the data are changing daily, making it difficult to rely on it.

From these facts, it was generally noticed that the disaster warning was based on the combination of the progress of science and technology and the competence of the person in charge. The actual warning also relies on the institution belonging to it. For example, variables such as the recipient of the alert, the psychology of the local people, the social situation, and various systems also needed to be added.

Issued May 6, 2010 No. 4

Day_195 : Scientists and Disaster Management Controversy issues with a L’Aquila Earthquake Case

The L’Aquila earthquake, which struck the Abruzzo region of Italy on April 6, 2009, was a significant case study for both scientists and disaster risk management professionals for several reasons. With a magnitude of 6.3, this earthquake caused extensive damage to the medieval city of L’Aquila, resulting in the deaths of more than 300 people, injuring over a thousand, and leaving tens of thousands of people homeless. Beyond the immediate physical damage and tragic loss of life, the L’Aquila earthquake raised important issues related to earthquake prediction, risk communication, and the responsibilities of scientists and authorities in disaster risk management.

Scientific Aspects and Controversies

The occurrence of earthquakes sparked a controversial debate over the ability to predict earthquakes and the communication of seismic risks to the public. Before the earthquake, a series of tremors were felt in the region, leading to heightened public concern. A week before the major earthquake, a meeting of the Major Risks Committee, which included government officials and scientists, was held to assess the situation. The committee concluded that it was not possible to predict whether a stronger earthquake would occur but reassured the public, suggesting a low likelihood of a major event. Unfortunately, the devastating earthquake struck shortly thereafter.

This situation has led to significant controversy, particularly regarding the role and communication strategies of scientists and government officials in disaster risk management. Critics argued that reassurances were misleading and contributed to a false sense of security among the population.

Legal and Ethical Issues

In a highly controversial decision, six Italian scientists and one government official were initially found guilty of manslaughter in 2012 for underestimating the risks and failing to adequately warn the population. This verdict was widely criticized by the international scientific community, which argued that it was unreasonable to expect scientists to accurately predict earthquakes. The verdict was largely overturned in 2014, with the convictions of scientists being annulled and the sentence of the government official being reduced.

Disaster Risk Management Implications

The L’Aquila earthquake underscored the importance of effective disaster-risk management and communication strategies. Key lessons include:

  1. Communication of Uncertainty: It highlighted the need for clear communication of scientific uncertainty to the public. Conveying the inherent uncertainties in earthquake prediction is crucial for helping individuals and communities make informed decisions about risk reduction and preparedness.
  2. Public Education and Preparedness: The tragedy reinforced the need for ongoing public education on disaster preparedness and the importance of building earthquake-resilient communities.
  3. Building Codes and Urban Planning: Ensuring strict adherence to earthquake-resistant building codes and urban planning practices is vital in reducing the vulnerability of buildings and infrastructure.
  4. Multi-disciplinary Approach: The event demonstrated the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach that includes not only seismologists but also engineers, urban planners, emergency management professionals, and policymakers in disaster risk management planning and response.
  5. Ethical Responsibilities: The aftermath raised questions about the ethical responsibilities of scientists and the balance between preventing public panic and ensuring preparedness.

The L’Aquila earthquake remains a case study of the complex interplay among science, policy, ethics, and public communication in the context of natural disaster risk management.

Day_194 : Tsunami Up and Down

When a large earthquake occurs at the bottom of the ocean, the ground suddenly lifts and sinks. This movement directly affects the surface of the ocean, creating large waves that spread far and wide. This is the typical way an earthquake-induced tsunami starts. Smaller earthquakes do not cause tsunamis because the shape of the ocean floor does not change much. Also, if an earthquake occurs very deep in the ocean, tsunamis do not occur because their effects do not reach the surface of the ocean. Large tsunamis are caused by huge earthquakes in deep ocean trenches, which are caused by the subduction of the Earth’s plates. In this type of earthquake, the ocean surface is pushed up or pulled down. On the side where the ocean is pushed up, the waves rise; on the side where it is pulled down, the ocean lowers. Which of the two is the first wave of a tsunami has a lot to do with how you perceive the danger and how you escape; the nature of the tsunami that hit Sumatra in 2004 (magnitude 9.0) caused the southern part of Thailand to be hit by a wave that pulled the ocean down, and the nature of this tsunami increased the damage.

Day_153 : Reported Death Numbers

I will update a column of the NIED e-mail magazine which I wrote a long time ago because the content is not faded with time. (I will do this step by step in Japanese and English.) I will also add comments to update the situation.

Published February 4, 2010
NIED-DIL e-mail magazine: Reported fatalities due to disasters

January 12 There was a big earthquake in Haiti. The consequences are still a major social issue, but at an early stage, the President declared that the number of casualties reached 200,000.

At the time of the Hurricane Katrina disaster at the end of August 2005, the first report was 10,000 casualties. But, in the end, there were about 1,300. I felt that nationality, culture, and so on became apparent compared to Japan.

A typical case in Japan is the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake. I was living in Kyoto and worked in Kyoto City at that time. I remember that around 7 a.m., it was reported on TV that there were only a few deaths. As time went by, it increased to hundreds and thousands.

The U.S. tends to have a top-down and strategic approach; on the other hand, Japan seeks bottom-up and accurate process to disclose the number. In the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, reported death tolls in affected countries fluctuated, but taking this into account is a way to understand the disasters that reflect the country’s situations, including social backgrounds, cultures, economies, and so on.

Regarding Haiti, the number of reported deaths increases with time. I pray that the number will not be so huge.

P.S.
For example, the following World Vision website considers the current estimated death to be 250,000. In short, the first report ended up gaining some meaning.

https://www.worldvision.org/disaster-relief-news-stories/2010-haiti-earthquake-facts

Day_186: Timeline for Hurricane Sandy

Moving forward, it is crucial that we continue to prioritize disaster management and invesin mitigation measures to minimize the impact of future disasters. This includes implementing resilient infrastructureconducting regular risk assessments, and engaging with communities to ensure their activparticipation in preparednesand recovery efforts. Additionally, we must continue to improve our communication strategies, utilizing various channels to disseminate timely and accurate information to the public. By learning from the lessons of Hurricane Sandy, we can strengthen our disaster management plans and better protect our communities in the face ofuture challenges.

Hurricane Sandy, which struck the East Coast of the United States in October 2012, is often cited as a case where disaster management and the use of a disaster management timeline played a crucial role in mitigating impacts and facilitating recovery. The response to Hurricane Sandy involved extensive pre-event planning and post-event recovery efforts that spanned the four phases of disaster management: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery.

1. Mitigation
Prior to Hurricane Sandy, New York had already invested in some mitigation measures based on lessons learned from previous storms, though the scale of Sandy’s impact highlighted the need for more extensive measures.

How New York Used Mitigation:
The city had begun to implement its PlaNYC initiative, aimed at preparing the city’s infrastructure for the impacts of climate change, including rising sea levels and more frequent severe weather events.

2. Preparedness
As Hurricane Sandy approached, New York’s state and city officials took several steps to prepare for the impending storm.

How New York Used Preparedness:
Evacuation Orders: Mandatory evacuation orders were issued for residents in low-lying areas, known as Zone A, affecting approximately 375,000 people.
Public Information: Information was disseminated through multiple channels, including social media, to keep the public informed about the storm’s progress and safety measures.
Transit Shutdown: The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) shut down subway, bus, and commuter rail services in anticipation of the storm to protect the system and its users.

3. Response
Once Hurricane Sandy made landfall, the response phase was immediate, with efforts focused on life-saving measures and ensuring the safety of the affected population.

How New York Used Response:
Emergency Services: First responders and emergency services worked tirelessly to rescue those stranded by the floodwaters and to provide immediate aid.
Power Restoration: Efforts were quickly organized to restore power to the millions of residents left in the dark.
Supply Distribution: Critical supplies, including food and water, were distributed to residents, especially in the hardest-hit areas.

4. Recovery
The recovery from Hurricane Sandy has been long-term, with efforts ongoing in some areas years after the storm.

How New York Used Recovery:
Rebuilding Infrastructure: Significant investments were made to rebuild and strengthen the city’s infrastructure, including electrical grids, transportation systems, and coastal defenses.
Resilience Planning: The storm’s impacts led to a heightened focus on resilience and the development of more robust plans to protect against future disasters, such as the “Rebuild by Design” competition that sought innovative solutions for coastal protection.
Community Support and Rebuilding: Efforts were made to support affected communities through the rebuilding process, including financial assistance for homeowners and businesses.

Lessons Learned and Implementation
The response to Hurricane Sandy highlighted the importance of preparedness and the need for robust mitigation and recovery planning. New York’s experience with Sandy has informed subsequent disaster management efforts, emphasizing the need for resilient infrastructure, comprehensive planning, and community involvement in disaster preparedness and recovery strategies.

The use of a disaster management timeline in the context of Hurricane Sandy demonstrated how proactive and reactive measures can mitigate the impact of such events and aid in the recovery process. It also showed the importance of continuous improvement in disaster management plans, incorporating lessons learned to enhance future preparedness and response efforts.

References:

Rosen, Y., & Yakubov, N. (2013). Hurricane Sandy: Lessons Learned from the Severely Damaged Coney Island Hospital, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 28(6), 643. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X13008807

Barthel, E. R., Pierce, J. R., Speer, A. L., Levin, D. E., Goodhue, C. J., Ford, H. R., Grikscheit, T. C., & Upperman, J. S. (2013). Delayed family reunification of pediatric disaster survivors increases mortality and inpatient hospital costs: A simulation study. *Journal of Surgical Research*, 184(1), 430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2013.05.040

Deitchman, S. (2013). Enhancing Crisis Leadership in Public Health Emergencies. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 7(5), 534. https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2013.88

Schmeltz, M. T., González, S. K., Fuentes, L., Kwan, A., Ortega-Williams, A., & Cowan, L. P. (2013). Lessons from Hurricane Sandy: A Community Response in Brooklyn, New York. *Journal of Urban Health*, 90(5), 799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-013-9818-9

Freund, A., Zuckerman, N., Luo, H., Hsu, H.-H., & Lucchini, R. (2014). Diesel and Silica Monitoring at Two Sites Following Hurricane Sandy. *Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene*, 11(9), D131. https://doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2014.916809

Solecki, W., & Rosenzweig, C. (2014). Climate Change, Extreme Events, and Hurricane Sandy: From Non-Stationary Climate to Non-Stationary Policy. *Journal of Extreme Events*, 01(01), 1450008. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2345737614500084

Johnson, D. A. (2023). Exploring the Effectiveness of 311 Data in Disaster Recovery and Response: A Case Study of Hurricane Sandy in New York City. *Academic Commons*. Columbia University. https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/p6h0-vp31

Petkova, E. P., Beedasy, J., Oh, E. J., Sury, J., Sehnert, E. M., Tsai, W.-Y., & Reilly, M. J. (2017). Long-term Recovery From Hurricane Sandy: Evidence From a Survey in New York City. (Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness). https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2017.57

Federal Emergency Management Agency. (n.d.). Remembering Sandy Five Years Later. Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov

These references cover a range of topics related to the impact of Hurricane Sandy, including healthcare challenges, family reunification, crisis leadership, community responses, monitoring of environmental hazards, policy changes due to climate change, the effectiveness of using public data for disaster recovery, and long-term recovery challenges faced by residents.