76 research outputs found

    Investigation of the Performance of the New Orleans Flood Protection System in Hurricane Katrina on August 29, 2005: Volume 1

    Get PDF
    This report presents the results of an investigation of the performance of the New Orleans regional flood protection system during and after Hurricane Katrina, which struck the New Orleans region on August 29, 2005. This event resulted in the single most costly catastrophic failure of an engineered system in history. Current damage estimates at the time of this writing are on the order of 100to100 to 200 billion in the greater New Orleans area, and the official death count in New Orleans and southern Louisiana at the time of this writing stands at 1,293, with an additional 306 deaths in nearby southern Mississippi. An additional approximately 300 people are currently still listed as “missing”; it is expected that some of these missing were temporarily lost in the shuffle of the regional evacuation, but some of these are expected to have been carried out into the swamps and the Gulf of Mexico by the storm’s floodwaters, and some are expected to be recovered in the ongoing sifting through the debris of wrecked homes and businesses, so the current overall regional death count of 1,599 is expected to continue to rise a bit further. More than 450,000 people were initially displaced by this catastrophe, and at the time of this writing more than 200,000 residents of the greater New Orleans metropolitan area continue to be displaced from their homes by the floodwater damages from this storm event. This investigation has targeted three main questions as follow: (1) What happened?, (2) Why?, and (3) What types of changes are necessary to prevent recurrence of a disaster of this scale again in the future? To address these questions, this investigation has involved: (1) an initial field reconnaissance, forensic study and data gathering effort performed quickly after the arrival of Hurricanes Katrina (August 29, 2005) and Rita (September 24, 2005), (2) a review of the history of the regional flood protection system and its development, (3) a review of the challenging regional geology, (4) detailed studies of the events during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, as well as the causes and mechanisms of the principal failures, (4) studies of the organizational and institutional issues affecting the performance of the flood protection system, (5) observations regarding the emergency repair and ongoing interim levee reconstruction efforts, and (6) development of findings and preliminary recommendations regarding changes that appear warranted in order to prevent recurrence of this type of catastrophe in the future. In the end, it is concluded that many things went wrong with the New Orleans flood protection system during Hurricane Katrina, and that the resulting catastrophe had it roots in three main causes: (1) a major natural disaster (the Hurricane itself), (2) the poor performance of the flood protection system, due to localized engineering failures, questionable judgments, errors, etc. involved in the detailed design, construction, operation and maintenance of the system, and (3) more global “organizational” and institutional problems associated with the governmental and local organizations responsible for the design, construction, operation, maintenance and funding of the overall flood protection system

    Extrinsic Rewards and Intrinsic Motives: Standard and Behavioral Approaches to Agency and Labor Markets

    Full text link

    Can we learn from the pathogenetic strategies of group A hemolytic streptococci how tissues are injured and organs fail in post-infectious and inflammatory sequelae?

    Full text link
    The purpose of this review-hypothesis is to discuss the literature which had proposed the concept that the mechanisms by which infectious and inflammatory processes induce cell and tissue injury, in vivo, might paradoxically involve a deleterious synergistic ‘cross-talk’, among microbial- and host-derived pro-inflammatory agonists. This argument is based on studies of the mechanisms of tissue damage caused by catalase-negative group A hemolytic streptococci and also on a large body of evidence describing synergistic interactions among a multiplicity of agonists leading to cell and tissue damage in inflammatory and infectious processes. A very rapid cell damage (necrosis), accompanied by the release of large amounts of arachidonic acid and metabolites, could be induced when subtoxic amounts of oxidants (superoxide, oxidants generated by xanthine-xanthine oxidase, HOCl, NO), synergized with subtoxic amounts of a large series of membrane-perforating agents (streptococcal and other bacterial-derived hemolysins, phospholipases A 2 and C, lysophosphatides, cationic proteins, fatty acids, xenobiotics, the attack complex of complement and certain cytokines). Subtoxic amounts of proteinases (elastase, cathepsin G, plasmin, trypsin) very dramatically further enhanced cell damage induced by combinations between oxidants and the membrane perforators. Thus, irrespective of the source of agonists, whether derived from microorganisms or from the hosts, a triad comprised of an oxidant, a membrane perforator, and a proteinase constitutes a potent cytolytic cocktail the activity of which may be further enhanced by certain cytokines. The role played by non-biodegradable microbial cell wall components (lipopolysaccharide, lipoteichoic acid, peptidoglycan) released following polycation- and antibiotic-induced bacteriolysis in the activation of macrophages to release oxidants, cytolytic cytokines and NO is also discussed in relation to the pathophysiology of granulomatous inflammation and sepsis. The recent failures to prevent septic shock by the administration of only single antagonists is disconcerting. It suggests, however, that since tissue damage in post-infectious syndromes is caused by synergistic interactions among a multiplicity of agents, only cocktails of appropriate antagonists, if administered at the early phase of infection and to patients at high risk, might prevent the development of post-infectious syndromes.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72535/1/j.1574-695X.1999.tb01357.x.pd

    Design and baseline characteristics of the finerenone in reducing cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in diabetic kidney disease trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Among people with diabetes, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality and progression of their underlying kidney disease. Finerenone is a novel, nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist that has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on CV and renal outcomes has not yet been investigated in long-term trials. Patients and Methods: The Finerenone in Reducing CV Mortality and Morbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIGARO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important CV and renal outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIGARO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 6 years. FIGARO-DKD randomized 7,437 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >= 25 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio >= 30 to <= 5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of the primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level alpha = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. Conclusions: FIGARO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of CV and renal events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen. Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2015-000950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02545049

    From Democratic Peace to Democratic Distinctiveness: A Critique of Democratic Exceptionalism in Peace and Conflict Studies

    Full text link

    Making Good Use of Adaptive Management

    No full text
    Over the last two decades natural resource scientists managers and policymakers have increasingly endorsed adaptive management of land and natural resources Indeed this approach based on adaptive implementation of resource management and pollution control laws is now mandated in a variety of contexts at the federal and state level Yet confusion remains over the meaning of adaptive management and disagreement persists over its usefulness or feasibility in specific contexts This white paper is intended to help legislators agency personnel and the public better understand and use adaptive management Adaptive management is not a panacea for the problems that plague natural resource management woes It is appropriate in some contexts but not in others Drawing on key literature as well as case studies we offer an explanation of adaptive management including a discussion of its benefits and challenges a roadmap for deciding whether or not to use it in a particular context and best practices for obtaining its benefits while avoiding its potential pitfalls Following these recommendations should simultaneously improve the ability of resource managers to achieve management goals determined by society and the ability of citizens to hold managers accountable to those goal

    Post-Sovereign Environmental Governance

    No full text
    This article examines a mode of hybrid governance in which sovereign states and nonstate parties collaborate as equal partners to address complex problems that are beyond the problem-solving capacities of states acting alone. Under conventional state-centric approaches, environmental policy is the exclusive province of territorially delimited sovereign states, subject only to such obligations as states incur through voluntary inter-sovereign agreements. In contrast, "post-sovereign" governance is non-exclusive, non-hierarchical, and post-territorial. These arrangements emerge from recognition of the limitations of top-down domestic regulation and rules of inter-sovereign obligation as means to address such complex environmental problems as ecosystem management. Examples are drawn from the US experience in the Chesapeake Bay region, and the joint US-Canadian Great Lakes ecosystem management effort. Copyright (c) 2004 Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    corecore