RESUMO
How evacuations are managed can substantially impact the risks faced by affected communities. Having a better understanding of the mobility patterns of evacuees can improve the planning and management of these evacuations. Although mobility patterns during evacuations have traditionally been studied through surveys, mobile phone location data can be used to capture these movements for a greater number of evacuees over a larger geographic area. Several approaches have been used to identify hurricane evacuation patterns from location data; however, each approach relies on researcher judgment to first determine the areas from which evacuations occurred and then identify evacuations by determining when an individual spends a specified number of nights away from home. This approach runs the risk of detecting non-evacuation behaviors (e.g., work trips, vacations, etc.) and incorrectly labeling them as evacuations where none occurred. In this article, we developed a data-driven method to determine which areas experienced evacuations. With this approach, we inferred home locations of mobile phone users, calculated their departure times, and determined if an evacuation may have occurred by comparing the number of departures around the time of the hurricane against historical trends. As a case study, we applied this method to location data from Hurricanes Matthew and Irma to identify areas that experienced evacuations and illustrate how this method can be used to detect changes in departure behavior leading up to and following a hurricane. We validated and examined the inferred homes for representativeness and validated observed evacuation trends against past studies.
RESUMO
Risk analysis standards are often employed to protect critical infrastructures, which are vital to a nation's security, economy, and safety of its citizens. We present an analysis framework for evaluating such standards and apply it to the J100-10 risk analysis standard for water and wastewater systems. In doing so, we identify gaps between practices recommended in the standard and the state of the art. While individual processes found within infrastructure risk analysis standards have been evaluated in the past, we present a foundational review and focus specifically on water systems. By highlighting both the conceptual shortcomings and practical limitations, we aim to prioritize the shortcomings needed to be addressed. Key findings from this study include (1) risk definitions fail to address notions of uncertainty, (2) the sole use of "worst reasonable case" assumptions can lead to mischaracterizations of risk, (3) analysis of risk and resilience at the threat-asset resolution ignores dependencies within the system, and (4) stakeholder values need to be assessed when balancing the tradeoffs between risk reduction and resilience enhancement.