by

Indur M. Goklany

Since hurricanes are in rage -- are they ever not! -- here are trends in deaths, death rates, and property losses due to hurricanes in the United States from 1900 to 2004.[1]

The first bar chart provides deaths per year and death rates per year for each decade starting in 1900. Note that the last period only covers 2000 through 2004.

This indicates that both deaths and death rates have declined quite significantly (and substantially over this period). The bars for the first period, 1900-1909, are much larger than subsequent ones because of the hurricane in 1900 that killed anywhere between 8,000 and 12,000 people in Galveston, Texas.

If I remove the first set of bars, the declining trends from 1910 to 2004 are still significant (and substantial), as your eyeballs will confirm.

The declines result from the fact that as a society we are more resilient than we used to be because we are wealthier and have the ability to obtain and implement more effective technologies to cope with adversity in general and extreme weather events in particular. Such resilience is more important than whether hurricanes have strengthened or whether there are more of them hitting the US. In other words, wealth, technology and human capital trump meteorology and climate, as has been noted elsewhere.[2]

The second bar chart provides trends from 1929-2004 for property losses from hurricanes in terms of the “wealth” in the 19 Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic states that have received at least one direct hit from a hurricane between 1850 and 2004.[3] I weighted each state’s “wealth” by the frequency with which hurricanes scored a direct hit on them over this period. This helps account for the fact that if a hurricane hits a rich state, one should expect damages to be higher. Also measuring property damage in terms of “wealth” allows for the fact that with time as society becomes richer, it probably has more assets at risk. In developing this figure, I use state income as a proxy for wealth, hence the quotes around “wealth”.[4] [This was done because although I could not locate data on wealth and/or fixed assets and consumer durables for each state, I did find data on each state’s income going back to 1929.]

The second bar chart shows that through 2004 at least, there has been no significant trend in property losses in terms of weighted wealth, although there should be an upward trend if one looks at losses in constant dollars.[5] These findings essentially re-affirm what other researchers have found.[6]

So here is a paradox: As we get wealthier, we are safer and healthier, but we also have more physical assets (homes and “stuff”) at risk. Also, I suspect, we become more cavalier about putting property at risk. Insurance — and Uncle Sam’s largesse — also help mould this mindset. But I’d rather be safer and healthier, even if that means I have more stuff at risk. All things considered, richer is indeed more resilient.[7]

------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes

[1] Data are from Eric S. Blake, Jerry D. Jarrell, Max Mayfield, Edward N. Rappaport, and Christopher W. Landsea, The Deadliest, Costliest, and Most Intense United States Hurricanes from 1851 to 2004 (and other Frequently Requested Hurricane Facts), Table 13a.

[2] Indur M. Goklany, “Strategies to Enhance Adaptability: Technological Change, Economic Growth and Free Trade.” Climatic Change 30: 427-449 (1995); Indur M. Goklany, “Richer is More Resilient: Dealing With Climate Change and More Urgent Environmental Problems” in R. Bailey, ed., Earth Report 2000, Revisiting the True State of the Planet (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 1999), pp. 155-187.

[3] These data are also from Blake et al.; see note 1. This is taken from this table.

[4] This procedure should automatically incorporate growth in assets at risk as a result of higher population growth. An alternate approach would have been to explicitly use population growth and a national average of wealth per capita. However, that would not capture the fact that on a per capita basis the affected states might be wealthier now relative to the average US person than they used to be (which I suspect to be the case).

[5] Some may discern an upward trend toward the end of the record. However, through 2004, this trend is not significant.

[6] Roger A. Pielke, Jr., and Christopher W. Landsea, Normalized Hurricane Damages in the United States: 1925-95,” Weather and Forecasting, American Meteorological Society 13: 621-631 (1998); Indur Goklany, “Potential Consequences of Increasing Atmospheric CO2 Concentration Compared to Other Environmental Problems.” Technology 7S: 189-213 (2000); Goklany, “Richer is More Resilient: Dealing With Climate Change and More Urgent Environmental Problems” in R. Bailey, ed., Earth Report 2000, Revisiting the True State of the Planet (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 1999), pp. 155-187.

[7] Goklany, “Richer is More Resilient.”