[Granot, 1995]

Type

Factor

Weight

Criteria

Community
Background
[x1]

Demography

1

  1. Below average persons in household
  2. Average number of persons in household
  3. Above average persons in household
-

Unemployment

1

  1. Below national rate
  2. National rate
  3. Above national rate
  4. Depressed area
-

Emergency budgeting

4

  1. Little/none per capita
  2. Low range per capita
  3. Middle range per capita
  4. High range per capita

Event
[x2]

Warning

4

  1. Adequate [2 to 4 hours]
  2. Overly short
  3. Overly long
  4. Little/no warning
-

Frequency [secondary or different hazard]

6

  1. Unlikely soon
  2. Could recur anytime
  3. Likely within one year
  4. Other hazard within one year
-

Familiarity

2

  1. Frequently occurs
  2. Has not occurred recently
  3. Unknown in area
  4. Generally rare and unknown
--

Timing

6

  1. Occurred in work hours
  2. Early morning/evening
  3. Pre-dawn/ late night
  4. Weekend/holiday
-

Intensity

8

  1. Minor
  2. Low range
  3. Middle range
  4. Upper range
-

Management skills

3

  1. Did well under circumstances
  2. Could have done better
  3. Inefficient, incompetent
  4. Negligent, irresponsible

Impact
[3]

Fatalities

12

  1. 10-100
  2. 101-1,000
  3. 1,001-10,000
  4. 10,001 and over
-

Hospitalized

9

  1. Under 5% of the population
  2. 5-15 per cent of the population
  3. 15-25 per cent of population
  4. Over 25 per cent of the population
-

Cost

9

  1. Under US$1 million
  2. US$1-10 million
  3. US$10-1,000 million
  4. Over US$10,000 million
-

Job Loss

6

  1. 1-3 per cent of workforce
  2. 3-5 per cent of workforce
  3. 5-10 per cent of workforce
  4. Over 10 per cent of workforce
-

Area affected

9

  1. Block/neighbourhood
  2. City/division of metropolis
  3. <city/metropolis/region
  4. Nation/international
-

Housing loss

6

  1. Under 5 per cent
  2. 5-10 per cent
  3. 10-20 per cent
  4. Over 20 per cent


Garnot [1995] fails to make it entirely clear as to how this scale should be used. The weightings are not used in the examples he gives, nor is it clear why these weights have the values they do. The reasons for the inclusion of certain factors seems to rest entirely on the fact that others have used similar factors. Just what is meant by "high range", "low range", or how these are worked out, is not clarified. Factors such as "Hospitalized" seem to have been poorly thought out – few, if any, places in the world would have hospital beds for even 2% of the population. The croteria for "Costs" are also poorly thought out.

It is clear that scores are cumulative – they are added together.

References

Granot H, 1995, Proposed scaling of the communal consequences of disaster, Disaster Prevention and Management, 4[3], 5-13.