Planning for Drought: A Risk Management Approach

1. Planning for Drought: A Risk Management Approach Mark Svoboda, Climatologist Monitoring Program Area Leader, National Drought Mitigation Center University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA South Central U.S. Drought Impacts and Assessment Workshop, Austin, TX July 7, 2011

2. Drought: “a force for truth” • Analysis of drought risk management is the starting point for a comprehensive institutional analysis • Stress from drought highlights: • Strengths and weaknesses that are usually hidden • Political priorities and underlying cultural values revealed by difficult choices • Societies will manage climate change in the same way they will manage droughts (for better and worse) Daniel Connell, Australian National University, 2010

3. Characteristics of Crisis Management • reactive, post-impact • poorly coordinated • untimely • poorly targeted • ineffective • decreases self-reliance  greater vulnerability

4. United States National Drought Policy • Collection of fragmented efforts • - 88 drought-related federal programs • - No national policy (WDCC,NDPC 1998) • - States have been leaders (WGA, etc.) • Limited funding for monitoring/mitigation • - fraction of response expenditures • Focus on crisis management • - ad-hoc responses and relief payments • - paradigm shift underway? • Then came NIDIS (2006) • Much more to do……

6. Focusing Events: Windows of Opportunity for Drought Planning

9. NDMC, 2011

10. Drought Plan Components • Monitoring and early warning • Assess, communicate, and trigger action • Foundation of a drought mitigation plan • Vulnerability assessment • Who and what is at risk and why? • Mitigation and responseactions • Actions/programs that reduce risk and impacts and enhance recovery

11. Tools for Planning: NDMC and NIDIS • All droughts are “local” • Planning is a “living” process • Planning should start local • Planning at all scales • Now what?

13. “Drought Ready” Communities http://www.drought.unl.edu/plan/DRC.htm

14. The Drought Ready Communities Project • 2 years (June 2008-June 2010) • Funded by NOAA’s Climate Program Office, Sectoral Applications Research Program (SARP), and NIDIS http://drought.unl.edu/plan/DRC.htm

15. The Pilot Communities • Nebraska City, Nebraska, pop. ~ 7,000 • Wells draw from aquifer under the Missouri River • Decatur, Illinois, pop. ~ 82,500 • Surface water • Norman, Oklahoma ~ 100,000 + • Surface and ground water

16. 1: Invite & Commit • 2: Gather Information • 3: Start Monitoring • 4: Plan for Education & Awareness • 5: Plan Responses to Reduce Impacts

17. NIDIS Engaging Preparedness Communities Working Group Establishing a cooperative network of drought stakeholders UNL Project approval number (IRB# 20101111010 EX)

19. EPC Goal: Assist entities in planning for and reducing the risks associated with drought NIDIS Implementation Plan, 2007

20. Approach

21. Approach • Create • database of state drought plan information

23. Take Home Messages • Be in position to take advantage of focusing events • (windows of opportunity) to push drought planning • to the forefront as a consistent priority via policy • No “one size fits all” option available to develop a • plan • Needs to have a regular update period defined ( • living process) • Many lessons to be shared and learned

24. Why Plan for Drought?

26. Please visit the NDMC website for more information: http://drought.unl.edu Thanks! Contact me at: Mark Svoboda 402-472-8238 msvoboda2@unl.edu