United States Earthquake Early Warning System: How Theory and Analysis Can Save America Before the Big One Happens - Advocating Implementation of the ShakeAlert Warning System on the Seismic Network

This important report has been professionally converted for accurate flowing-text e-book format reproduction.

The United States is extremely vulnerable to catastrophic earthquakes. More than 143 million Americans may be threatened by damaging earthquakes in the next 50 years. This study argues that the United States is unprepared for the most catastrophic earthquakes the country faces today. Earthquake early warning systems are a major solution in practice to reduce economic risk, to protect property and the environment, and to save lives. Other countries have already built earthquake early warning systems, but only after they suffered devastating earthquakes. In the United States, ShakeAlert is the available solution, but it only operates on a test basis in California and still lacks sufficient capability and sustained funding to become operational. This study applies an input-output model of political systems theory to analyze how the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, which controls the development of ShakeAlert, functions in the United States. Using this model provides a framework for a discourse of the analysis to determine how the consequences of catastrophic earthquakes shape our decisions and policies for ShakeAlert.

This study also examines what changes are required within our political system for ShakeAlert to launch as quickly as possible on a national scale and to allow for its sustained integration within the American preparedness culture. Perhaps most importantly, the implementation of ShakeAlert will help prepare the people, businesses, infrastructure, economies, and communities, hopefully before the next significant earthquake impacts the United States. Will the United States have to experience a devastating earthquake before implementing a solution that is recognized to save lives?

I. INTRODUCTION * A. PROBLEM STATEMENT * B. RESEARCH QUESTIONS * C. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE * D. METHODOLOGY * II. LITERATURE REVIEW * A. WHAT IS AN EARTHQUAKE EARLY WARNING SYSTEM? * B. EFFECTIVENESS OF EARTHQUAKE EARLY WARNING SYSTEMS * C. INTERNATIONAL CASE STUDY: JAPAN EARTHQUAKE EARLY WARNING * D. THE NEED IN THE UNITED STATES * E. POLITICAL SYSTEMS THEORY: EASTON'S INPUT-OUTPUT MODEL * F. LITERATURE REVIEW CONCLUSION * III. U.S. STRATEGY TOWARD CATASTROPHIC EARTHQUAKES * A. CATASTROPHIC EARTHQUAKE ENVIRONMENTS * 1. Cascadia Subduction ZoneNorthwest * 2. New Madrid Fault ZoneMidwest * 3. San Andreas FaultCalifornia * 4. Wasatch Fault ZoneUtah * B. NATIONAL EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM * C. SHAKEALERT: EARTHQUAKE EARLY WARNING IN THE UNITED STATES * D. STRATEGY IN THE UNITED STATES CONCLUSION * IV. SYSTEMS ANALYSIS: NATIONAL EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION * A. DYNAMIC RESPONSE MODEL OF A POLITICAL SYSTEM * B. INPUTS: DEMANDS AND SUPPORT * C. NHERP POLITICAL SYSTEM: THE AUTHORITIES * 1. National Institute of Science and Technology * 2. Federal Emergency Management Agency * 3. United States Geological Survey * 4. National Science Foundation * D. OUTPUTS: DECISIONS AND POLICIES * E. INTRASOCIETAL ENVIRONMENT: ENTERPRISE FEEDBACK * F. EXTRASOCIETAL ENVIRONMENT: CONSUMER FEEDBACK * G. SYSTEMS ANALYSIS CONCLUSION * V. CONCLUSION * A. AUTHORITATIVE ALLOCATION OF EARTHQUAKE VALUES FOR SOCIETY * B. A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE * C. FUTURE RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS

Dettagli