Stein, Wilson describe hurricane evacuation data

Stein, Wilson describe hurricane evacuation data

BY FRANZ BROTZEN
Rice News staff

Two Rice political scientists explained the findings of surveys they conducted to determine what went right and what went wrong during two major storms in 2005. Bob Stein, the Lena Gohlman Fox professor of political science, and Rick Wilson, the Herbert S. Autry professor of political science and chairman of the department, spoke at a conference on “Severe Storm Prediction, Education and Evaluation from Disasters” at Duncan Hall May 9.

Stein focused on the evacuation of the Houston area as Hurricane Rita bore down on the region. He was especially concerned with whether the problems related to the evacuation (tens of thousands of motorists stuck in massive traffic jams for an average of 10 and a half hours leaving the city) were due to shortcomings in the infrastructure or human failure. As it turned out, the storm largely missed the Houston metropolitan area.

To address that question, Stein conducted a survey shortly after the storm of those who evacuated, and he got a surprisingly high response rate of 85 percent. He found that people who left from evacuation zones were far more sensitive to the media — they watched TV, read newspapers and listened to the radio. But people who left non-mandatory evacuation zones were more influenced by their neighbors’ actions — if they saw their neighbors packing up, they followed suit. It was the departure of people from non-mandatory evacuation zones that greatly exacerbated the traffic gridlock that characterized the flight from Rita.

Stein’s research is geared toward helping civil authorities determine the optimal flow of evacuees for the next disaster threat. As he reminded the audience, “Human problems are a whole lot easier to solve than pouring more concrete — and a lot cheaper.”

In contrast, Wilson’s talk centered on people who did not leave as a hurricane bore down on a major metropolitan area. He has researched the attitudes of many of the Katrina evacuees who ended up in Houston after the storm devastated New Orleans. Like Stein’s presentation, Wilson’s aimed to guide officials seeking to convince vulnerable people to get out of the way of an oncoming storm.

To better understand how to do this, Wilson asked respondents why they failed to heed warnings about Katrina. According to the survey, most of those who stayed in New Orleans were poor, African-American and had lower levels of education than the rest of the community. Wilson found that many people said they did not leave New Orleans because they weren’t convinced of the danger, were worried about the wellbeing of relatives or simply had no place to go. In addition, many paid little attention to official orders to evacuate.

Wilson’s survey also looked at the evacuees’ feelings about life in Houston. Many said they missed New Orleans and believed jobs were harder to come by, but they also felt schools and housing were better in Houston. Wilson highlighted the respondents’ loss of social networks as they were scattered across Houston’s wide geographical area and how that loss colored their attitudes toward their new home. 

Wilson’s conclusion may offer little comfort to authorities charged with planning for the next disaster: “No matter how you plan as policymakers, you’re going to face 20 percent who won’t leave.”