By: Bridget Harrington
Late October 2021 was rife with discussion of climate change; everyone from world leaders at the UN Climate Change Conference, to religious leaders like Pope Francis, and activists such as Greta Thunberg have all spoken about the need for sweeping changes to climate policy. To many, it seems evident that extreme weather events are becoming both more common and more destructive. In 2021 alone, the United States has endured everything from droughts to floods, a long series of hurricanes and tropical storms, extreme wind and hail, historic cold and heat, and even months-long wildfires on the west coast. Eighteen extreme weather events in the United States have cost upwards of one billion dollars apiece and taken more than 500 lives combined.
Extreme weather events are indeed becoming more common; the number of events this severe has multiplied sixfold since the 1980s. So, what is being done to curb those numbers? National and international governments, as well as reform groups, are discussing broader policy decisions to cut emissions and hopefully slow environmental damage. On the other hand, local governments are tasked with warning their citizens and trying to prevent loss of life and property when these extreme weather events inevitably occur.
The ability of local governments to take preventative measures relies on their capacity to forecast the what, when, and where of a potential disaster. There are many tools available on the market: Doppler radar to observe severe storms, satellite data collected by organizations like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, even supercomputers to analyze any data collected. While these methods are tried and true for meteorological organizations, local governments are searching for even more innovative methods.
In urban areas where water-absorbing green space is scarce, early flood advisories can be essential to preventing loss of life and property. One method to obtain these early warnings is the use of technologies like flood prevention systems. These platforms provide sensors to monitor the levels of nearby bodies of water in real-time, and, using algorithms sourced from meteorological and hydrological data, can alert government organizations to a potential risk well in advance of an actual flooding event. This would not only allow for authorities to issue evacuation orders and advise the shuttering of businesses to prevent property loss, but also to bring in water pumps and clear storm drains to limit damage to infrastructure as well. Some of these platforms not only detect the onset of a crisis but can also provide models of the city which demonstrate which areas are most prone to flooding.
In areas more prone to wildfires, programs which can detect a fire’s location are vital to evacuating civilians nearby and fighting those fires before they can spread. In California, where wildfires have reached crisis levels for several months in 2021, firefighters have employed technology developed from data gathered and tested by the Air Force and Army National Guard.
But it isn’t as simple as ordering a certain system, getting it installed, and letting it do all the work. While these investments can be worthwhile, if the system fails to predict or report a flood or fire, it may be just another financial loss for these communities to endure. Real-life results have been questionable, with a reported failure of one such flood detection platform in China in July. The rainstorms which caused those floods took 302 lives and caused many Chinese citizens on social media to question the efficacy of the technology which was supposed to protect them.
In instances where the military has a hand in creating these programs, as with the fire detection systems, the data and processes used must be rigorously sanitized to prevent the exposure of classified data. While this could suggest that these technologies have been evaluated at length, it is possible that the scrubbing of classified information from these programs leaves holes in their algorithms.
Live-modeling systems, such as those which map what areas are prone to certain disasters, are subject to financial and individual biases. In lower-income areas with scant tax base to draw on, municipalities can be priced out of access to these technologies. Further, when these cities have access to mapping technology, they may prioritize mapping and protecting more built-up regions of the city, which can negatively impact lower-income areas.
Lastly, the technology is useless if the information it provides is not actionable. If a city lacks the funding to adequately respond to these alerts and develop plans based on their mapping programs, or there are not policies in place outlining the authorities of local government officials in response to this information, running these systems on taxpayer funding diverts funds which could instead be used more effectively toward post-crisis rebuilding efforts.
Moving toward a solution is a multilayered process. Of course, solving the root issue of accelerated climate change would help prevent these crises in the first place. However, solutions on the local level must be pursued in the meantime. Policy-wise, instituting regulations requiring increased testing and oversight surrounding the development of these programs, as well as improving transparency from military resources would be key efforts in ensuring the technology that is used is functional, accurate, and efficient. Policies which require these technologies be used to equitably protect the residents of a city could prevent discriminatory impact on lower-income households.
Perhaps most importantly, instituting infrastructure programs to mitigate the risk of flooding and other extreme weather events may be necessary to prevent death and destruction in the future. Of course, such programs are inherently costly: New Orleans has sunk $120 million into green infrastructure programs in recent years which seek to limit flooding in the city. As it is, these programs can only do so much to mitigate flooding. However, with the accelerating rate of extreme weather events which are becoming more and more costly to recover from, it is essential that steps be taken prior to the fact to limit damages and save lives. By maintaining these systems without the safety net of equitable policy, emergency planning, and strong infrastructure, local governments also expose themselves to significant amounts of liability.
Student Bio: Bridget Harrington is a second-year law student at Suffolk University Law School. She is a staffer on the Journal of High Technology Law. Bridget received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Accounting and Finance from the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog are the views of the author alone and do not represent the views of JHTL or Suffolk University Law School.
