Global RApid Post-Disaster Damage Estimation (GRADE) Report Hurricane Beryl 2024 Grenada (Report as of August 1, 2024) _____________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer © 2024 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank and the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) with external contributions. The findings, analysis and conclusions expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect the views of any individual partner organization of The World Bank, its Board of Directors, or the governments they represent. Although the World Bank and GFDRR make reasonable efforts to ensure all the information presented in this document is correct, its accuracy and integrity cannot be guaranteed. Use of any data or information from this document is at the user’s own risk and under no circumstances shall the World Bank, GFDRR or any of its partners be liable for any loss, damage, liability or expense incurred or suffered which is claimed to result from reliance on the data contained in this document. The boundaries, colors, denomination, and other information shown in any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Cover photo: Government Information Service, Government of Grenada 2 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Acknowledgements This report was prepared by a team led by Rashmin Gunasekera and Oscar A. Ishizawa (Disaster Climate Risk Management, IDURM, World Bank). The team comprises James Daniell, Antonios Pomonis, Harriette Stone, Guillermo Toyos, Johannes Brand, Roberth Romero, Diana Cubas, and Jung Weil of the IDURM’s Global Program for Disaster Risk Analytics and the World Bank’s IDUDR Disaster Resilience Analytics and Solutions (D-RAS) team. The assessment received financing support from the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) and the Government of Japan. The team gratefully acknowledges the contribution and guidance of peer reviewers: Samantha Cook (Senior Financial Sector Specialist, ELCFN), Ronette Jordan (Disaster Risk Management Specialist, IDURM), Moussa Sidibe (Disaster Risk Management Specialist, IDURM) and Guillermo Siercke (Disaster Risk Management Specialist, IECUR). Contributions on gender are from Zoe Trohanis (Lead Disaster Risk Management Specialist, IDURM), Mirtha Escobar (Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist, IDURM) and Arjola Limani (Consultant, IDURM). Contributions on social vulnerabilty are Bramka Jafino (Disaster Risk Management Specialist, ISARF) and Mikhail Sirenko (Consultant, IDURM). We also acknowledge the advice, support, and information shared by the Government of Grenada; as well as the data and information shared by and collaboration with Grenada’s National Disaster Management Agency (NaDMA), Grenada’s Central Statistics Office (GCSO), Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA), Open Street Map (OSM), Spectee (Japan), and MapAction. The team also acknowledges the support, contributions, and guidance of Ricardo Habalian (Senior Operations Officer, LCC3C), Dionne Ann Marie Oconnor (Operations Officer, LCC3C), Joaquin Toro (Lead Disaster Risk Management Specialist, ILCUR), Elad Shenfeld (Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist, ILCUR), Doekle Wielinga (Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist, ILCUR), Jared Mercadante (Disaster Risk Management Specialist, ILCUR), Francesco Varotto (Consultant, ILCUR), and the World Bank Map Clearance team (GCSIM). Abbreviations CDEMA Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency COPERNICUS EMS COPERNICUS Emergency Mapping Service D-RAS Disaster-Resilience Analytics & Solutions, IDURM, World Bank GCSO Grenada’s Central Statistics Office GRADE Global RApid post-disaster Damage Estimation IDURM Infrastructure Global Department for Disaster Climate Risk Management NADMA National Disaster Management Agency NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration OECS Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States OSM Open Street Map PDNA Post-Disaster Needs Assessment TEV Total Exposure Value US$ United States Dollar 3 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Contents Disclaimer........................................................................................................................................ 2 Acknowledgements......................................................................................................................... 3 Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................. 3 Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary......................................................................................................................... 5 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Context ............................................................................................................................. 7 1.2 Summary of historical hurricanes and tropical storms .................................................... 8 1.3 Event description.............................................................................................................. 8 1.4 Reported impacts ........................................................................................................... 10 2.0 Direct Damage Estimation Methodology .............................................................................. 12 3.0 Results.................................................................................................................................... 16 4.0 Interpretation of results ........................................................................................................ 19 3.1 Social vulnerability: the Unbreakable model ................................................................. 20 3.2 Potential gender impacts and considerations ............................................................... 21 3.3 Potential for structural improvements .......................................................................... 22 4.0 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 23 Annex 1: Data sources .................................................................................................................. 25 Annex 2: Historical hydrometeorological event descriptions ...................................................... 26 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 26 Summary of events between 1850 and 1950 ........................................................................... 26 Summary of events between 1950 and 2000 ........................................................................... 28 Summary of events between 2000 and present day ................................................................ 30 Annex 3: Virtual damage surveying methodology and results ..................................................... 33 Annex 4: Overview of cost benefit analysis of structural improvements for SVG ....................... 35 4 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Executive Summary This GRADE report provides a synopsis of the estimated direct economic damage in Grenada following the passage of Hurricane Beryl. The report is based on a rapid and remote post-disaster damage assessment that follows the established GRADE methodology1. Hurricane Beryl made landfall on the island of Carriacou in Grenada as a high-end Category 4 hurricane on July 1, 2024. Wind speeds ranged from a maximum of sustained winds of 150 mph (240 km/h), equivalent to a Category 4 hurricane in Carriacou and Petite Martinique, to Category 1 hurricane force winds2 in the south-west of the main island of Grenada. The economic damage estimates are summarized in Table 1, and the key findings summarized below. 1. Total economic damages are estimated at US$ 218.0 million (or East Caribbean Dollar - XCD 589 million)3, or equivalent to approximately 16.5 percent of Grenada’s 2023 gross domestic product (GDP). This estimate excludes damages to boats or vessels such as those used for fishing or recreation. 2. Total estimated economic damages from Hurricane Beryl are much lower than damages from Hurricane Ivan in 2004, which were equivalent to 130 percent of 2003 GDP despite wind speeds being similar. The difference is due to the location of the strongest winds being in the lesser populated north of the country and away from the south of the main island of Grenada where most exposure is located. 3. The northern islands of Carriacou and Petite Martinique were the worst hit, accounting for US$ 134 million or 82 percent of the country’s total damages excluding agriculture. 4. Building damage, including residential and non-residential, accounted for around half of the direct economic total damage to physical assets. 5. Infrastructure damages are estimated to account for approximately 30 percent of the total damage to Grenada, including impacts on power, telecommunications, water networks, jetties, and coastal infrastructure. 6. Agricultural impacts account for 20 percent of the total damages estimated. This included damages to crops (especially to nutmeg) on Carriacou, but also with significant damages on the main island, damages to livestock, fisheries (excluding vessels), and small-scale infrastructure such as irrigation. The damages to the agriculture sector were not able to be disaggregated by island or parish as adequate data were not available on distribution of exposure and damages, so they have been presented as an overall total across the country. 1 Global Rapid post-disaster Damage Estimation (GRADE) approach developed at the World Bank and conducted by the Infrastructure Global Department for Disaster Climate Risk Management, Disaster-Resilience Analytics & Solutions (D-RAS) Knowledge Silo Breaker (KSB). The methodology aims to address specific damage information needs in the first few weeks after a major disaster. See: https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication/DRAS_web_04172018.pdf for details of the methodology. 2 The wind speeds associated with tropical storm and hurricane categories can be found here: https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshws.php 3 Note that heretofore unless specified this report presents values in US Dollars only. 5 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Table 1: Summary of GRADE estimations of direct economic damage in Grenada from Hurricane Beryl in July 2024 in US$ millions. N.B. Discretization at the parish and island level has significant difficulties, thus certain damages can be misassigned at this level. Total Damage Islands/Parish Residential Non-Residential Infrastructure Agriculture (US$ mn) Carriacou 45.6 45.4 43.4 134.4 Petite Martinique 5.0 1.1 3.5 9.6 Saint Andrew 1.0 0.6 1.6 3.2 Saint David 0.2 0.1 0.4 .8 43.1 Saint George 0.4 0.8 5.9 7.1 Saint John 0.4 0.5 1.2 2.2 Saint Mark 0.8 0.8 1.5 3.1 Saint Patrick 5.0 3.7 6.0 14.6 Total 58.5 53.0 63.4 43.1 218.0 A bespoke exposure model developed for Grenada1,4,5,6 was updated as part of this GRADE assessment, resulting in a total replacement value of US$ 6.441 billion for assets including residential and non- residential buildings and their contents, and infrastructure sectors. This model was used to calculate the damages caused by Hurricane Beryl. An Unbreakable model7 analysis, based on national level data, estimates that on average, households would lose 15.3 percent8 of their annual consumption. This loss is mainly driven by the need to reconstruct the dwellings and the potentially foregone income due to the damaged productive assets. This GRADE assessment is intended as a rapid remote estimate prepared within a short timeframe to inform early decision-making and is not intended as a substitute for detailed on-the-ground analysis which may be conducted in the weeks and months after an event. Various data sources were reviewed for this assessment (see Annex 1). The GRADE assessment should be interpreted as a first-order estimation of direct damages, with a significant degree of reliability. However, GRADE’s outputs are still estimates— remote-based calculations that are influenced by and updated from available ground-based data. While there is confidence in the overall damage estimates and distribution of damage, the confidence level at the individual asset level is low, and, therefore, results are presented at the island- level for Carriacou and Petite Martinique and at the parish-level for the main island of Grenada. Furthermore, this GRADE assessment does not include the economic losses (e.g., losses due to business interruption), and the recovery and reconstruction needs, that are also crucial for the comprehensive understanding of the impact of the disaster. 4 https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication/Advancing-Disaster-Risk-Finance-in-Grenada.pdf 5 Gunasekera et al. (2015) Developing an adaptive global exposure model to support the generation of country disaster risk profiles. Earth Science Reviews. 150. 594-608. 6 https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/790921494485589302/pdf/114860-WP-PUBLIC-drp-grenada.pdf 7 Hallegatte, S., Vogt-Schilb, A., Bangalore, M., & Rozenberg, J. (2016). Unbreakable: building the resilience of the poor in the face of natural disasters. World Bank Publications. 8 Due to uncertainties in the profile of affected household, this could range from 14% to 16.5%. 6 _____________________________________________________________________________________ 1.0 Introduction The objective of this report is to provide an estimate of the direct economic damage to physical assets caused by Hurricane Beryl in Grenada and to provide information on the spatial distribution of damages to support development of a roadmap for recovery and reconstruction. The report is based on a rapid and remote post-disaster damage assessment that follows the established GRADE methodology which is detailed in its corresponding section below. 1.1 Context Grenada is a multi-island country located in the southern Lesser Antilles chain and is comprised of the main island, Grenada, and eight smaller islands, from which only Petite Martinique and Carriacou are inhabited. In 2023, the GDP of Grenada was US$ 1.32 billion and GDP per capita was US$ 10,4649. Grenada’s economy has seen shifts from agriculture towards tourism-related services in the past two decades. In 2023, the country’s exports of goods amounted to US$ 111.2 million10 (including nutmeg of which Grenada is the world’s second-largest producer, mace, cardamon, nuts, fruits such as bananas and citrus fruits, and frozen fruit) and its exports of services (primarily tourism-related services) amounted to US$ 788 million, rising by 82.5 percent during the last decade (2014 to 2023). The COVID-19 pandemic caused a severe downturn in the economy, with GDP shrinking by 14 percent in 2020. Tourism numbers were severely impacted too, with just 25 percent of pre-pandemic numbers of stays recorded in 202111. The COVID-19 pandemic, as well as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, increased construction prices across the region by 19 percent between 2020 and 202212. The 2021 census recorded 103,532 persons living on the island of Grenada, with a further 4,218 persons living in Carriacou and 526 living in Petite Martinique. The majority of the population (41 percent) reside in the town and parish of Saint George’s in the southwest of Grenada. After declining in the 1970s and 1980s, the national population increased substantially (by 21.2 percent) between the 1990 and 2001 census. A more moderate increase in population of 3.4 percent was recorded in the decade up to the 2011 census, and a small increase of less than 1 percent was recorded in the decade up to 2011. The labor participation rate in 2011 (the latest data available) is 89 percent for men and 78 percent for women between the ages of 24 and 64. According to the Grenada Central Statistics Office Housing Assessment Report (unpublished at the time of writing), developed to report on the damage to houses caused by Hurricane Beryl, the number of houses in Carriacou is 1,828, and in Petite Martinique is 229. No total number is given for mainland Grenada. The country is exposed and vulnerable to natural hazards, including hurricanes, flooding, landslides, earthquakes, and offshore volcanic eruptions from the Kick ‘Em Jenny volcano. Vulnerability is comprised of physical vulnerability from less resilient assets such as buildings and infrastructure, while social vulnerability relates to socioeconomic factors that may increase or exacerbate the impacts of disasters, including inequalities and lack of access to resources. 9 https://data.worldbank.org/country/grenada 10 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BX.GSR.MRCH.CD?most_recent_value_desc=true&view=map 11 https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2022/02/25/grenada-staff-concluding-statement-of-the-2022-article-iv-mission 12 https://bcqs.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/BCQS-Caribbean-Latin-America-Market-Trend-Report_2022-2023-1.pdf 7 _____________________________________________________________________________________ 1.2 Summary of historical hurricanes and tropical storms Table 2 below presents an overview of recent hydrometeorological disasters in Grenada. Annex 2 presents more details. Table 2: Summary of significant reported hydrometeorological disasters in Grenada since 1999 based on public information. Year Event Costs reported Sectors impacted Damages estimated at US$ 96.4 million. Significant beach erosion and damage to sea defenses. 10 homes Hurricane 1999 destroyed. Key roads severely damaged. Partial electricity and Lenny Equivalent to 27% of water supply disruption. 1999 GDP Damages estimated Damage to nearly 80% of the country’s housing stock. Damaged at US$ 788 million. or destroyed 75 primary or secondary schools, with only two Equivalent to 133% being in working condition. Severe damage to hospitals. An of 2004 GDP. Hurricane estimated 60% of hotel rooms were damaged. The 17th century 2004 Ivan prison building was also damaged, allowing many inmates to Losses estimated at briefly escape during the height of the storm. Severe disruption US$ 97 million. to power networks. Severe loss of crops, nutmeg trees, and Equivalent to 16.5% fisheries sector equipment. of 2003 GDP. Widespread damage to housing in Grenada, Carriacou, and Damages of US$ 44.9 Petite Martinique that had been spared the worst effects of million, equivalent to hurricane Ivan (5% of the houses had been seriously damaged). 7.5% of 2004 GDP. A hospital in Carriacou lost its roof, and two of the main Hurricane 2005 hospitals in Grenada were flooded. Much of the nation lost Emily Losses of US$ 7 water supply, though restoration of power quickly remedied this. million, equivalent to The agricultural industry was devastated again, cash crops 1.2% of 2004 GDP. including corn, pigeon peas, and bananas were largely lost, while breadfruit, nutmeg, and cocoa trees were negatively impacted. Damages of US$ 4.15 April Heavy Small number of houses destroyed. Small number of roads cut million, equivalent of 2011 rainstorms off due to being washed away or landslides. 0.5% of 2010 GDP. 1.3 Event description On June 25, 2024, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)’s National Hurricane Center (NHC) reported a low likelihood of a tropical wave south of Cabo Verde that could develop into a tropical cyclone. By June 26, the NHC anticipated that environmental conditions across the central and western tropical Atlantic would be “unusually conducive for late June” due to record-warm sea surface temperatures. By this time, thunderstorms had increased and organized, showing curved bands and some rotation. On June 27, the NHC assessed a high likelihood of development. The disturbance further organized, becoming Tropical Depression Two, over the central tropical Atlantic on June 28, about 1,970 km (1,225 mi) east-southeast of Barbados. The depression moved generally westward and strengthened into Tropical Storm Beryl six hours after forming. Late on June 29, Beryl intensified into a hurricane. At 20:00 local time on June 29, the Grenada Meteorological Services (GMS) issued a Hurricane Watch for the country. 8 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Beryl became a major hurricane on June 30, further strengthening into a Category 4 hurricane with winds of 130 mph (215 km/h). At 19:00 local time, Prime Minister Dickon Mitchell placed Grenada under a state of emergency for one week unless earlier revoked. On July 1 at 15:10 UTC, Beryl made landfall in Carriacou, Grenada (see Figure 1), with sustained winds of 150 mph (240 km/h) equivalent to a Category 4 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind scale. On July 2 at 03:00 UTC, after passing Grenada, Beryl further intensified into a Category 5 hurricane, peaking a few hours later with winds of 165 mph (270 km/h), while moving west-northwest across the Caribbean Sea at about 20 mph (35 km/h) towards the southern shores of Jamaica. Hurricane Beryl was the earliest forming Category 5 hurricane on record. Figure 1: Satellite imagery of Hurricane Beryl over the Lesser Antilles. The box highlights the location of Grenada. Source: NOAA 9 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 2: Wind History map for Hurricane Beryl to July 5 passing Grenada13. Source: NOAA 1.4 Reported impacts Hurricane Beryl exposed the entire population of Grenada to winds between Category 1 and 4 hurricane strength. The hurricane made landfall in Carriacou, exposing the whole island and nearby Petite Martinique to high-end Category 4 hurricane force winds. The main island of Grenada was exposed to Category 3 to 4 hurricane force winds in the north and Category 1 hurricane force winds in the southwest. A Housing Assessment Report by Grenada’s Central Statistics Office (unpublished at the time of writing) was shared with the authors during the GRADE assessment, which reported on residential building and some other sector damage in Grenada, Carriacou, and Petite Martinque. The report states that 96 percent of homes suffered some level of damage in Petite Martinique, 87 percent of homes suffered some level of damage on Carriacou, and 839 of 93,818 homes (0.009 percent) of homes were damaged on the main island of Grenada. Initial rapid surveys were completed by the National Disaster Management Agency Grenada (NaDMA) and the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA), and remote sensing damage assessments using satellite imagery have been undertaken by Copernicus across the Caribbean. The results for residential and non-residential buildings combined are summarized in Table 314 for Carriacou and Petite Martinque. (An assessment was not completed for the main island of Grenada as damage levels were lower.) Damage was assessed as extreme in both Carriacou and Petite Martinique. 13 https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2024/BERYL_graphics.php?product=wind_history 14 https://rapidmapping.emergency.copernicus.eu/EMSR734/download 10 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Table 3: Summary of Copernicus EMS (Emergency Mapping Service) damage assessments of buildings using satellite imagery as of July 2 Petite DAMAGE LEVEL/ISLAND Carriacou TOTAL Martinique Destroyed 905 104 1,009 Damaged 509 163 672 Possibly damaged 1,056 117 1,173 Possibly undamaged 940 10 950 Total Existing 3,410 394 3,804 Destroyed 26.5% 26.4% 26.5% Damaged 14.9% 41.4% 17.7% Possibly damaged 31.0% 29.7% 30.8% Possibly undamaged 27.6% 2.5% 25.0% Carriacou experienced catastrophic damage, with upwards of 90 percent of its infrastructure reported as damaged or destroyed15. Five out of eight official emergency shelters in Carriacou and one out of the two shelters in Petite Martinique suffered extensive structural damage, rendering them inoperable as emergency shelters16. The main healthcare facility, the Princess Royal Hospital, sustained severe damage, as did two medical centers, compromising the delivery of medical services. In addition, the island’s airport and coastal infrastructure were extensively damaged, disrupting essential transportation and logistics17. Electricity and water supplies were severely impacted18. Tragically, four fatalities were reported on Carriacou, underscoring the severity of the disaster’s impact on the island’s residents. The situation was further compounded by the complete loss of electricity and communication networks, hindering relief and recovery efforts. As of July 25, efforts to restore power are ongoing across all three islands19. The environmental impact on Carriacou has been devastating, with reports indicating a complete loss of vegetation and the destruction of mangroves, which are crucial for coastal protection. The island’s fishing sector has been severely hampered, raising concerns about increased risks to food availability in the coming months. Petite Martinique also suffered substantial damage. Similar to Carriacou, the island’s infrastructure was heavily impacted20. This includes both critical infrastructure and residential areas, leaving much of the island’s population vulnerable. There was a widespread loss of electricity and communication services. The island's water supply system, heavily reliant on desalination plants, was compromised as plants 15 https://reliefweb.int/report/grenada/iom-caribbean-hurricane-beryl-situation-report-no-2-8-july-2024 16 https://reliefweb.int/report/grenada/iom-caribbean-hurricane-beryl-situation-report-no-3-15-july-2024 17 https://reliefweb.int/map/grenada/grenada-hurricane-beryl-buildingscritical-infrastructure-damage-carriacou- july-18-2024 18 https://reliefweb.int/report/grenada/latin-america-caribbean-2024-atlantic-hurricane-season-snapshot-6-17- july-2024 19 https://grenlec.com/customer-service/restoration-report-grenada-carriacou-and-petite-martinique/ 20 https://reliefweb.int/report/grenada/iom-caribbean-hurricane-beryl-situation-report-no-2-8-july-2024 11 _____________________________________________________________________________________ suffered damage, potentially leading to water shortages in the near future. This issue is particularly concerning given the recent dry spell that has already strained the island’s water resources. The environmental and economic impacts on Petite Martinique are severe. Food availability issues for the island’s residents have been raised as a concern21. Furthermore, there are concerns about the viability of the fishing industry, which is vital for the local economy and food supply. While the main island of Grenada itself experienced less severe impact compared to Carriacou and Petite Martinique, there were still notable effects from the hurricane. Impacts on the agricultural sector were substantial. Nutmeg, mace, cocoa, bananas and plantains were very badly affected in Grenada, with reports of upwards of 45 percent of the trees damaged or destroyed and many acres affected. In terms of acres of nutmeg damages, Saint Andrew was the worst hit parish, followed by Saint Patrick, Saint Mark, and Saint John. 2.0 Methodology to estimate direct damages to physical assets The GRADE methodology adopted here is a fast first-order approximation of the direct economic impact, and so provides a rapid high-level estimate of damages to physical assets used to inform decisions in a timely fashion. A full catastrophe modelling approach was not adopted in this case. As the scale of the impacted area was relatively small (compared to say country scale) and the country context well known by the GRADE assessment team, better results can be achieved through an engineering approach, which directly considers vulnerability of buildings and other assets. The GRADE methodology adopted estimates of damages using reported damage data. This methodology is conducted in four stages: 1. Development of an updated exposure model; 2. Damage data collection, monitoring, and checking, including virtual damage surveying; 3. Comparison with damage estimates for historical events; and 4. Calibration, modelling, cross-checking, and validation. The development of an exposure model, which encompasses key physical sectoral assets in the country, was also completed. This drew on previous work22, census and living condition surveys, and other Government sources. Where data were out of date, updates and projections were included to achieve a current exposure model: an example of this is the considerable increase to replacement costs that the global pandemic and Russia‘s invasion of Ukraine brought, which resulted in the exposure values rising significantly23. The exposure values representing the replacement cost estimates of built assets are presented in Table 4. Total exposure of buildings and infrastructure is estimated to be US$ 6.441 billion. The majority of assets are located on Grenada (94 percent), Carriacou (6 percent), with only US$ 24 million (0.004 percent) of exposed assets in Petite Martinique. 21 https://reliefweb.int/report/grenada/hurricane-beryls-impact-regional-food-security-plan-must-be-addressed- comprehensively-caricom-lead-head-agriculture 22 https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099110623153035943/pdf/P1705760e98dae06309c250be5da473f04b.pdf 23 https://bcqs.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/BCQS-Caribbean-Latin-America-Market-Trend-Report_2022-2023-1.pdf 12 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Notably, most of the population reside in buildings that have sheet metal roofs, which can be particularly prone to damage in strong winds, especially if not secured properly. Also notable is that there is a wide range of levels of building damages in the same locations, where more established, higher-end construction quality houses and commercial buildings, were seen to have less damage, usually because they were built to higher building standards, including having better roof ties and other hurricane- resistant features. Table 4: 2024 exposure values calculated for Grenada in US$ millions Total Value Island/Parish Residential Non-Residential Infrastructure (US$ mn) Carriacou 135 145 101 380 Petite Martinique 14 3 7 24 Saint Andrew 404 219 242 865 Saint David 221 112 128 461 Saint George 962 1676 1071 3709 Saint John 105 127 83 316 Saint Mark 31 33 23 87 Saint Patrick 250 185 163 598 Total 2123 2500 1817 6441 Please refer to Figure 3 and Figure 4 for understanding of the spatial distribution of exposure for each census division. Following the calculations for exposure, the reported damage data is carefully collated and cross-checked across multiple sources. Various metrics that indicate damage or impacts are collected (see Annex 1) and monitored over time until they stabilize. Aerial and satellite imagery products, social media posts, as well as freely available walk-by, drive-through, and drone videos, which provided snapshots of damage for specific areas, were used as checks for various locations throughout Grenada. 13 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 3: Residential buildings exposure by census divisions of Grenada, including building contents Figure 4: Non-residential buildings exposure by census divisions of Grenada, including building contents 14 _____________________________________________________________________________________ A first estimate of damages was completed using a combination of the exposure, observed damage levels, structural vulnerability data, and unit costs of construction for the residential, non-residential, and infrastructure sectors. In addition, the D-RAS (Disaster-Resilience Analytics & Solutions) team at the World Bank completed a virtual damage survey for 382 buildings on Carriacou and 57 buildings on Petite Martinique. Damage was estimated from openly available imagery and videos online using five damage levels: no damage, minor damage, moderate damage, severe damage, and destroyed – see Annex 3 for more details on damage definitions. The results of the survey can be found in Table 5 and Table 6. The value of agriculture outputs combined with the amount of damage observed was used to develop initial damage estimates for the agriculture sector (excluding fishing vessels). To calibrate these estimates, checks were completed against reported data, social media posts, and historical event reports. Risk modelling approaches were used as a final check of damage estimations. A wind-field map was developed by collecting and assessing available cyclone track data, along with data on land properties affecting the wind-field such as land use and elevation (see Figure 5). Table 5: Residential damages estimated from the virtual damage survey. See Annex 3 for definitions of damage levels. Residential No damage Minor Moderate Severe Destroyed buildings Carriacou 21% 5% 17% 38% 19% Petite 18% 4% 29% 24% 26% Martinique Table 6: Non-residential damages estimated from the virtual damage survey. See Annex 3 for definitions of damage levels. Non-residential No damage Minor Moderate Severe Destroyed buildings Carriacou 24% 7% 23% 37% 9% Petite 33% 0% 17% 50% 0% Martinique 15 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 5: Calculated wind field map for Hurricane Beryl 3.0 Results Total damages from Hurricane Beryl are substantial in Grenada at an estimated US$ 218.0 million, equivalent approximately to 16.5 percent of the 2023 GDP. Table 7 shows the best estimate of total direct economic damages to physical assets in Grenada by sector (with definitions). Table 7: Summary of estimated damages by sector in Grenada Sector Definition Estimated damages US$ million Residential Houses and contents $ 58.5 Commercial, industrial, public and Non-Residential $ 53.0 mixed-use buildings, and contents Power networks, water networks, Infrastructure telecoms, jetties and coastal structures, $ 63.4 roads, and bridges. Crops, trees, grain Agriculture storage, livestock, small-scale $ 43.1 infrastructure, and fisheries Total $218.0 16.5% of 2023 GDP 16 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Damage to buildings alone caused just under half of the total damage. Residential damages are estimated to be US$ 58.5 million, including structural damage and damage to contents. Non-residential damages, including social infrastructure, public buildings, industrial and commercial assets, are estimated at US$53 million. Infrastructure damages are estimated at US$ 63.4 million. Key sectors included power networks, telecommunications assets, water networks, transport networks, including airports and roads, and coastal infrastructure, with all of these having damages on Carriacou, Petite Martinique, and on the main island. Agricultural damage is estimated at US$ 43.1 million in total. This included damages to crops (especially to nutmeg,mace, cocoa, and bananas) on Carriacou; significant damages on the main island; and damages to livestock, fisheries, and small-scale infrastructure such as irrigation. Most damage is likely in parishes Saint Andrew, Saint Patrick, Saint Mark, and Carriacou; however, the differentiation of agricultural damage below national level has too much variation and uncertainty, and, therefore, results are shown only at the national level. On the fisheries side, the highest damages have been seen in Carriacou and Petite Martinique. Table 8 presents the total damage estimated by sector and by island and parish. Petite Martinique, due to its small exposure, has low absolute damages, however very high relative damages. Just over half of the total estimated direct economic damages are seen in the residential and non-residential buildings. Figure 6 and Figure 7 display these data geospatially. However, these results rely on damage estimations for a small number of assets, given the size of Grenada, and small variations in these values can lead to greater inaccuracies in their specific estimates. In absolute terms (US$ millions), Carriacou suffered the most damages (damages of US$ 134.4 million for buildings and infrastructure), and Carriacou and Petite Martinique had the highest damage ratios (damage over total exposed value of assets) of 35 percent and 40 percent, respectively. Damage on the main island is estimated to be less than 15 percent of the total damages (for buildings and infrastructure). Table 8: Total damages by location and sector in US$ millions Total Damage Islands/Parish Residential Non-Residential Infrastructure Agriculture (US$ mn) Carriacou 45.6 45.4 43.4 134.4 Petite Martinique 5.0 1.1 3.5 9.6 Saint Andrew 1.0 0.6 1.6 3.2 Saint David 0.2 0.1 0.4 .8 43.1 Saint George 0.4 0.8 5.9 7.1 Saint John 0.4 0.5 1.2 2.2 Saint Mark 0.8 0.8 1.5 3.1 Saint Patrick 5.0 3.7 6.0 14.6 Total 58.5 53.0 63.4 43.1 218.0 *Discretization at the parish and island level has significant difficulties, thus certain damages can be misassigned at this level. 17 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 6: Total damage estimates by island or parish in US$ millions 18 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 7: Sectoral damage maps by island or parish in US$ millions 4.0 Interpretation of results The best overall estimate from the GRADE assessment places the total cost of direct economic damages to physical assets from Hurricane Beryl to residential, non-residential, infrastructure, and agriculture sectors in Grenada at US$ 218.0 million. This is equivalent to 16.5 percent of Grenada’s GDP in 2023. Hurricane Beryl brought Category 4 hurricane force winds, significant rainfall and storm surges to Carriacou and Petite Martinique. Lower wind speeds were recorded across the main island of Grenada. Overall, Carriacou and Petite Martinique experienced catastrophic damage to buildings, including their contents, and infrastructure. The main island of Grenada sustained significantly less damage to buildings, but the impacts on agriculture and infrastructure were substantial. Infrastructure damages totaled US$ 64.3 million, including transport, telecommunications, water, and power. Resilient reconstruction should be prioritized. Agricultural enterprises suffered an estimated US$ 43.1 million in damages to crops, particularly nutmeg, other spices, and fruit trees. These impacts have affected farmers’ livelihoods, so support for the recovery and re-establishment of crops, some of which will take many years to become productive again (e.g., it takes seven years for nutmeg to produce), will need to be explored. Concerns about food shortages and increased prices have been raised given the significant agricultural losses24. 24 UNOCHA (July 19, 2024) Eastern Caribbean: Hurricane Beryl. Situation Report No. 04. 19 _____________________________________________________________________________________ The tourism sector is also a vital part of Grenada’s economy. Most larger tourist resorts, hotels, and infrastructure are located in the south of Grenada where wind speeds were less. Steps could be taken to strengthen resilience of these assets to protect the tourism sector25. Differences in damages compared to past events is due in part to the location of the strongest wind. The wind that the main island of Grenada experienced during Hurricane Beryl was at least equivalent to those experienced during Hurricane Ivan in 2004, and likely slightly higher, however, the damages relative to GDP are much lower than those associated with Hurricane Ivan in 2004, based on the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) Macro-Socio-Economic Assessment of the damages26, which estimated that impacts from Hurricane Ivan were equivalent to over 130 percent of Grenada’s GDP (using World Bank GDP data for 2003). The difference is likely as strong hurricane winds (category 3 or higher) from Hurricane Beryl did not impact the southern part of the main island of Grenada where most of the country’s exposure resides. From an economic perspective, Hurricane Beryl was more akin to Hurricane Emily in 2004 in terms of damages by GDP, at around 11.7 percent of GDP. GRADE assessments for smaller nations can significantly benefit from reporting of damages. Usually the D-RAS team draws on risk modelling approaches when performing GRADE assessments, however in this case, given that the total number of buildings are relatively small, damages reports, satellite assessments, and visual inspections will likely offer more accuracy. 3.1 Social vulnerability: the Unbreakable model It is critical to understand the distribution of the social impacts of disasters to ensure that recovery and reconstruction efforts identify, target, and help those most in need. To better understand the distributional impacts of the hurricane across the households in Grenada, the D-RAS team utilized the Unbreakable microsimulation model27. The model combines disaster damage data, the country’s household survey data, and the country’s macroeconomic data to translate asset damages to welfare impacts (proxied by consumption loss) at household level. Based on national-level data, the analysis estimates that, on average, households would lose 15.3 percent28 of their annual consumption. This loss is mainly driven by the need to reconstruct dwellings and the potentially foregone income due to the damaged productive assets. The analysis further unravels the unequal impacts experienced by households with different characteristics (Figure 8). Notably, those whose head of households has a low literacy level (i.e., cannot read or write) face a 24 percent higher consumption loss compared to the average household, underscoring their increased vulnerability. Households whose head is unemployed also experience significant economic impacts with a relative consumption loss difference of +13 percent29. There are clear differences in impacts across households with different economic capacities (proxied by their expenditure). The poorest 20 percent (expenditure quintile 1) are estimated to experience almost 20 percent higher consumption losses, whereas the richest 20 percent (expenditure quintile 5) would have 25 https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/599401635337080916/360- resilience-a-guide-to-prepare-the-caribbean-for-a-new-generation-of-shocks-resilience-of-the-caribbean-tourism-industry 26 https://reliefweb.int/report/grenada/grenada-macro-socio-economic-assessment-damages-caused-hurricane-ivan 27 Hallegatte, S., Vogt-Schilb, A., Bangalore, M., & Rozenberg, J. (2016). Unbreakable: building the resilience of the poor in the face of natural disasters. World Bank Publications. 28 Due to uncertainties in the profile of affected household, this could range from 14% to 16.5%. 29 Large households (those with five or more members) and rural households experience more moderate, despite still larger, adverse impacts of around losing 7% and 5% of their annual consumption, respectively, compared to the average household. 20 _____________________________________________________________________________________ around 12 percent less losses, compared to the average household. The distributional analysis also allows for estimating the poverty impacts of the hurricane. The estimate suggests that around 6.4% of the affected population might be pushed to below the poverty line, with only 10% of them able to recover within 5 years. This signifies the potential long-term poverty implications of the hurricane and underscores the immediate needs to support the most vulnerable segments of the population. Figure 8: Relative differences in consumption loss by household type, when compared to the average household. A positive value implies that the particular household type experiences larger consumption loss compared to the average household. 3.2 Potential gender impacts and considerations Disasters can exacerbate gender disparities, impacting men and women differently. Research spanning 141 countries from 1981–2002, shows that disasters—including droughts, earthquakes, fires, floods— often reduce women’s life expectancy more than men’s30. Moreover, women are disproportionately affected in terms of employment dynamics following disasters. Research also shows that the likelihood of unemployment increases by 7 percent among women residing in municipalities that have experienced at least one flood31. Gender impacts have not been directly quantified as part of the GRADE assessment; however, some observations are presented here based on general experience and the context in Grenada. A 2020 study found that, in Grenada, 29 percent of women have experienced at least one form of violence, closely mirroring the global statistic that one in three women will encounter physical and/or sexual violence in their lifetime32. Following the passage of Hurricane Ivan in 2004, women and girls faced safety challenges in shelters due to inadequate facilities that lacked privacy and separate sanitation amenities for men and women. As a result, some women fell victim to domestic abuse and sexual violence by their male partners, while cases of sexual abuse involving girls were reported at shelters33. Unpaid work is also likely to increase during disasters. The COVID-19 pandemic caused a surge in Grenada’s unemployment rate from 15 percent pre-crisis to 28½ percent in the second quarter of 2020. The increased joblessness particularly affected older individuals and lower-income groups, with women experiencing higher unemployment rates compared to men. Following Hurricane Ivan, the destruction of 30 https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/80f2e78e-f04f-5a59-86a6-9cfe6bcd7b87/content 31 https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/80f2e78e-f04f-5a59-86a6-9cfe6bcd7b87/content 32 https://easterncaribbean.un.org/en/93856-1-every-3-women-grenada-will-experience-intimate-partner-violence 33 https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099625111282240498/pdf/P1712560312b6901c097740224d911ff486.pdf 21 _____________________________________________________________________________________ day care centers severely impacted women who were primary caregivers, as 70 percent of the children attending these centers came from single-female-headed households34. Among households in Grenada, the lowest poverty rate, at 2.4 percent, is observed among women who live alone, constituting two percent of all households35. According to the Caribbean Policy Development Centre (CPDC) (2021), although the share of female and male farmers who lost crops or livestock due to natural hazards and extreme weather events is almost the same, only 4 percent of female farmers have ever had insurance compared to 12.5 percent of male farmers36. Moreover, men working in the agricultural sector are reported to have higher ownership of productive assets compared to women, which increases men‘s capacity to cope with impacts of natural disasters37. These factors illustrate how gender-specific vulnerabilities intersect with disaster impacts in Grenada. Implementing gender-responsive policies in post-disaster assessments can ensure that recovery efforts support all individuals equitably, particularly women and vulnerable groups, thereby fostering a more resilient and inclusive recovery. 3.3 Potential recommendations for building physical resilience As is the case across the Caribbean, the majority of vulnerable persons in Grenada live in lower-income housing areas, which are often more vulnerable to hurricanes. The widespread use of sheet metal roofing throughout Grenada means that the majority of buildings are vulnerable to strong winds, especially when roofs and cladding are not tied down adequately. The damage to structures in the lesser impacted regions could be reduced with relatively straight forward structural improvements, for example, installing hurricane straps and using screws instead of nails at the correct spacing to fix down roof sheeting. These installation measures may have helped in some cases in Carriacou and Petite Martinque. However, for major hurricanes, more advanced structural improvements may be needed. In a study completed for Saint Vincent and Grenadines (unpublished) to examine the benefits of strengthening building structures, the following were found: 5. Introducing resilient structural improvements to buildings could result in potential savings of more than US$ six for every US$ one spent for highly vulnerable asset classes. 6. The return on investment is greater for the poorer and more vulnerable groups than for the not vulnerable groups. Figure 9 and Annex 4 present more details on the cost benefit analysis for neighboring Saint Vincent and the Grenadines38. The adherence to building codes, such as the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States’ (OECS) building code, could help to ensure that all reconstruction and future new construction is designed and 34 https://repositorio.cepal.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/a42a12ed-cf47-4e9b-b609-38cce7e98fb5/content 35 https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/367321631770928387/pdf/Living-Conditions-in-Grenada-Poverty-and- Equity-Update.pdf 36 https://cpdcngo.org/download/gender-and-climate-and-disaster-risk-finance-and-insurance-a-focus-on-small-scale-farmers- in-antigua-and-barbuda-barbados-and-grenada-research-paper/ 37 https://caribbean.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2022/02/engender-gender-inequality-climate-change- disaster-risk-resilience-brief-grenada 38 Disaster Risk Assessment and Adaptive Social Protection Analysis for St. Vincent and the Grenadines” (2023) from the WB/GFDRR (Unpublished) 22 _____________________________________________________________________________________ constructed resiliently. The Sectoral Recovery Capacity Assessment for Grenada’s Housing Sector report39 has further options for improving housing sector resilience for future events. Figure 9: Return on investment per $1 of structural improvements in neighboring Saint Vincent and Grenadines as part of a risk profile (basic or intermediate/advanced) made to structures to improve hurricane resilience. The inset legend provides details on the types of outer walls, the types of roof covers, and the categories of socio-economic groups. Relatedly, proper maintenance of public infrastructure and assets can help to protect resilience and public services after a disaster. The 2022 Grenada Disaster Resilience Strategy40 stated that the budget for infrastructure maintenance has been lower than the estimated minimum requirement in recent years (around 0.2 percent of GDP only). This could be a priority policy area to protect existing infrastructure investments, help reduce risks, and increase resilience to future events. 4.0 Conclusions This GRADE assessment provides a synopsis of the direct economic impacts to physical assets of Hurricane Beryl in Grenada during July 2024. Damage was concentrated in Carriacou and Petite Martinque, where wind speeds were higher, however, notable levels of damage also extended south to the main island of Grenada. Total damages are estimated to be US$ 218.0 million (equivalent to East Caribbean Dollar (XCD) 589 million) or approximately 16.5 percent of Grenada’s 2023 GDP, to residential buildings and their contents, non-residential buildings and their contents, infrastructure, and agriculture. 39 https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099743003142430486/pdf/IDU162e5a1bf1614814af619bd1160550752efbf.pd f?_gl=1*13dhy8d*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MjI5NTE4NTcuQ2p3S0NBandrOGUxQmhBTEVpd0FjOE1IaUhwWUQxeHpJdmlONTJyd3Jm YWRjZnFSVDk3U2FnbjQxMEluSlZ5SGVvWG1QZTg2N3NITVNCb0NGTFVRQXZEX0J3RQ..*_gcl_au*MzEzMjAxNzkyLjE3MjA3MDU0 NTM. 40 https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2022/03/16/Grenada-Disaster-Resilience-Strategy-515246 23 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Carriacou was the worst hit, suffering an estimated US$ 134.4 million in damages to buildings (residential and non-residential), contents, and infrastructure, equivalent to 35 percent of the total exposed value. Petite Martinique sustained an estimated US$ 9.6 million in damages excluding agriculture, equivalent to 40 percent of the total exposed value. The main island of Grenada was subjected to hurricane force winds and sustained an estimated US$ 74 million in damages to buildings, building contents, and infrastructure, equivalent to 1.2 percent of the total exposed value. In total, damage to buildings accounts for over one half of the total damage. The residential sector is estimated to have sustained US$ 58.5 million in damage, while non-residential buildings sustained US$ 53.0 in damages. Infrastructure accounts for an estimated US$ 63.4 million in damages. Damages to the agriculture sector (including the fisheries sector but excluding damage to vessels) total US$ 43.1 million and are particularly important given the significant role it plays in Grenada’s economy. Notably, much of the Grenadian population live in structures that have sheet metal roofing, which is particularly vulnerable to strong winds. Minor structural improvements would increase resilience against future storm events and should be closely considered for recovery and reconstruction efforts, given the context of climate change. Using the Unbreakable microsimulation model41 to understand the distribution of social impacts of the hurricane across the households in Grenada suggests that around 6.4 percent of the affected population might be pushed to below the poverty line, with only 10 percent of them able to recover within five years. This highlights the potential long-term poverty implications of the event and underscores the immediate needs to support the most vulnerable segments of the population. This GRADE assessment is based on damage reporting from a range of agencies, local media reports, as well as modelling of present-day buildings and infrastructure in Grenada. Analysis and results were checked and verified using a wide range of data sources, including satellite imagery, academic studies, government data, CDEMA and Government of Grenada reporting, and social media reports. 41 Hallegatte,S., Vogt-Schilb, A., Bangalore, M., & Rozenberg, J. (2016). Unbreakable: building the resilience of the poor in the face of natural disasters. World Bank Publications. 24 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Annex 1: Data sources Datasets used include: • CDEMA and OCHA Situation Reports • Grenada NaDMA Reports including the NaDMA/CDEMA Rapid Needs Assessment (RNA) Report – HU Beryl for Grenada (2024) • Population from Census data and projections • Local media publications • ReliefWeb and Humanitarian Info updates • UNOSAT, Copernicus, Sentinel, Google Earth and other remote sensing imagery • GlobalML and Google Building footprints • Local and international news reports • Social Media reports and imagery from X, Facebook, YouTube, and other sources and corroboration of photo data • Unit Costs of Construction (UCC) from Building statistics • Building and population data and projections • 2011 Population and Housing Census • 2008 Grenada Survey of Living Conditions • Physical Planning Unit data (building attributes, enumeration districts, hotels and other public buildings) • World Bank’s Country Disaster Risk Profile (CDRP) for Grenada • Past PDNAs, DALAs and disaster reporting in Grenada and the Windward Islands – such as Hurricane Ivan and Emily • NOAA National Hurricane Center datasets • CHARIM Project datasets including Land Cover 2014 • Settlement Information Agriculture data from 2015-2022 from Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Fisheries with FAO data • Infrastructure data from OSM, CHARIM, and other global products • Building typologies from census data, footprints from OSM • UWI Seismic Research Center Reports • World Bank economic data • Capital stock estimates using budget and capital investment data • Wind station data 25 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Annex 2: Historical hydrometeorological event descriptions Introduction Hurricane Beryl was the first major Atlantic storm of the 2020s and the first Category 4 hurricane to impact Grenada in more than 165 years. Understanding past weather patterns and scales of damages from similar events helps to improve damage estimations. Therefore, a historical analysis was completed during the GRADE. From this, the following is a short description of all hydrometeorological events since 1856. Summary of events between 1850 and 1950 The late 19th and first half 20th centuries saw Grenada repeatedly impacted by storms in 1856, 1877, 1887, 1894, 1896, 1897 (two events), 1898, 1901, 1915, 1918, 1921, 1928, and 1944. In addition, there were three damaging flood events in 1889, 1938, and 1946. From these storms, the 1856, 1921, and 1944 storms featured Category 1 hurricanes when passing over or near Grenada and caused significant damage to buildings, infrastructure, and agricultural crops, disrupting daily life and economic stability on the island. A Category 1 hurricane with winds of 80 mph (130 km/h) was initially observed about 750 miles (1,210 km) northwest of the coast of Venezuela on August 13, 1856. The cyclone tracked due westward and crossed Grenada. Heavy rain and squalls were reported in Barbados and Grenada. This storm was determined to have reached hurricane status based on information of destruction felt in Grenada and Barbados42. On September 21, 1877, a tropical storm was first observed east of Grenada and Saint Vincent. Moving westward at a low latitude, the cyclone intensified into a hurricane early the next day while moving between Grenada and Tobago. The storm then remained close to the coast of South America while strengthening, becoming a Category 2 hurricane on the present-day Saffir–Simpson scale on September 23. Strong winds generated by the storm in Grenada downed some trees and telegraph lines and damaged some roofs. On July 21, 1887, a tropical storm passed between Barbados and Grenada. Impacts on Grenada are not known. On November 8, 1897, a tropical storm caused heavy rains in St. John's, flooding the Gouyave River and once more damaging the recently erected boulder bank, and again on December 6, further damaging the boulder bank and destroying the stone bridge at the mouth of the Gouyave River. On September 6, 1889, severe flooding took place along the west coast of Grenada. The Gouyave and St. Mark's Rivers overflowed their banks and caused considerable damages, sweeping through the town of Gouyave and Victoria and tearing up the roads. On September 28, 1894, a tropical storm affected Grenada. Damage to farms and causeways was reported. Persistent rainfall for 24 hours led to rivers overflowing their banks in the parish of St. Andrew's. Roads, bridges, and crops were damaged. 42 https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/metadata_master.html 26 _____________________________________________________________________________________ A tropical storm formed over the far southern Windward Islands on November 27, 1896. As the storm slowly tracked northward, it passed just west of Grenada, causing torrential rainfall and strong winds in Trinidad, Grenada, Saint Vincent, Barbados, and onto Montserrat the next day, giving rise to flash flooding along streams and in valleys, destroying crops, and property. Cotton, coffee, and sugar plantations sustained significant damage in the affected islands. A tropical storm was first observed near the Windward Islands on October 9, 1897. The storm passed over Grenada, but impacts on the island are not known. A tropical storm was first observed just east of the Windward Islands on October 2, 1898. The tropical storm moved west-northwest and passed near or over Bequia Island, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. Impacts on Grenada are not known. A tropical storm was first observed on July 1, 1901, about 225 miles (360 km) north of the modern-day French Guiana–Suriname border. The storm intensified slowly and moved north-westward, reaching the Windward Islands early on July 3, 1901. Around that time, a cyclone passed between Grenada and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, with little impact. On August 20, 1901, a tropical storm reached maximum sustained winds of 50 mph (80 km/h). Late that day, the storm passed through the Windward Islands just north of Grenada. According to then Governor- in-Chief of the Windward Islands Robert Baxter Llewelyn, no damage occurred in Grenada. A tropical storm was first observed about 45 miles (70 km) east-northeast of Grenada on September 21, 1915. Impacts on Grenada are not known, but also in 1915 (possibly during this event), 20-25 acres of cocoa and three bridges and roads were damaged. It was reported as, “the most serious rain event in living memory”43. This storm strengthened into a Category 4 hurricane as it moved across the Caribbean Sea and into the Gulf of Mexico and became known as the 1915 New Orleans hurricane. A tropical storm developed just east of the Windward Islands on August 22, 1918. While the storm passed south of Barbados, sustained winds reached 48 mph (77 km/h). Later that day, the storm passed through the Grenadines. It intensified into a Category 2 hurricane three days later. Impacts on Grenada are not known. A Category 1 hurricane made landfall on Grenada at 4:30 pm on September 8, 1921, increasing in force at 7:00 pm, followed by a short lull from about 10:30 to 11:30 pm, when the wind shifted, coming with redoubled force from E-NE, reaching maximum force around midnight. Local newspapers reported that damage was done to estates, plantations, and gardens in the outer districts. Numerous peasant houses were completely destroyed, and some more substantial buildings damaged. The sum of £100,000 was deemed a moderate estimate of loss to nutmeg and cocoa plantations, which will require at least seven years to re-establish. Crops of ground provisions were completely ruined. Telephone communication with the outer districts was lost. Two lives were lost.44 Landslides and flooding were also reported45. A tropical wave developed into a tropical depression near Tobago on August 7, 1928. The system then passed through the Windward Islands just south of Carriacou and Petite Martinique as a tropical storm. Impacts on Grenada are not known. 43 https://www.cdema.org/virtuallibrary/index.php/charim-hbook/country-data/countrydocs-gnd/grenada-historical-disasters 44 https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/metadata_master.html 45 https://www.cdema.org/virtuallibrary/index.php/charim-hbook/country-data/countrydocs-gnd/grenada-historical-disasters 27 _____________________________________________________________________________________ In October 1938 (exact date not known), a violent rainstorm resulted in the loss of five lives, widespread damage to cultivation, roads, bridges, and telephone lines over the southern portion of the island. The main bridge over the St. John's river, which led to the town of St. George's, was completed destroyed. A tropical storm was first observed east of Barbados around 18:00 UTC on August 16, 1944. The storm passed over Grenada on August 17, 1944, as a Category 1 hurricane before crossing into the eastern Caribbean Sea, where it quickly intensified into a Category 3 hurricane that became known as the 1944 Jamaica hurricane. A newspaper article describing the impacts in Grenada indicated that 150 houses were destroyed and that over a dozen schooners and fishing vessels were capsized, destroyed or severely damaged. As reported in the article, it was estimated that the cyclone was at hurricane intensity at its closest approach to Grenada on August 17. On October 4, 1946, severe rainfall caused flooding, the loss of 15 lives in Victoria, and washed away 13 houses. Summary of events between 1950 and 2000 In the second half of the 20th century, Grenada was impacted by three major storms in 1954, 1955, and 1963 and by tropical storms in 1961, 1978, 1988, 1990, and 1999. Hurricane Hazel formed on October 5, 1954, just east of the Windward Islands and intensified into a Category 1 hurricane while crossing the southeastern Caribbean Sea. Hazel made landfall in Grenada with winds of 75 mph (121 km/h) in the early hours of October 6, 1954, categorized as a low-end Category 1 hurricane. The island of Carriacou was most affected, where damage to property and coastal vessels, exclusive of Government property, was estimated at US$ 80,00046. Trees were uprooted, houses destroyed, roads damaged and electricity supply disrupted47. In the morning hours of September 23, 1955, Hurricane Janet passed over Union Island of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines48 and approximately 42 miles (69 km) north of Grenada, as a Category 2 hurricane, with 106 mph (171 km/h) eyewall winds, extending outward for at least 50 miles (80 km), brought heavy rains and hurricane-force gusts to most of the main island and to Carriacou. On Grenada’s north coast, where Janet’s nine-foot (3 m) storm surge inundated the beaches and bungalows of Levera Bay, seven men drowned when their private yacht was broken away from its mooring and driven onto the rocks. Farther inland, Janet’s steady downpours spawned serious flash floods and mudslides along the 2,757- foot (919-m) slopes of Mount St. Catherine. More than half of Grenada’s commercial and residential communities, including dozens of warehouses filled with nutmeg and coconut stores, suffered some degree of structural damage, later necessitating a year-long reconstruction effort49. In total, 6,000 dwellings were destroyed and 20 out of 50 schools seriously damaged50. Loss of life in this event was estimated at 189 across Barbados, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Grenada51, but the exact number of lives lost in each island nation is not known, with reported numbers for Barbados at 38 or 57; for Grenada at more than 50, 115, or 147; and 122 for the Grenadines islands (possibly including Carriacou and Petite Martinique). Many of the deaths in Grenada were related to the mudslides, which made it difficult for authorities to determine a more accurate death count. Strong winds destroyed docks and 46 https://books.google.gr/books?id=JqAChW2hMRkC&pg=PA41&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false 47 https://www.cdema.org/virtuallibrary/index.php/charim-hbook/country-data/countrydocs-gnd/grenada-historical-disasters 48 https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/metadata_master.html 49 Longshore, D. (2008): Encyclopedia of Hurricanes, Typhoons, and Cyclones. 2008 Edition. 481 pp. 50 https://www.cdema.org/virtuallibrary/index.php/charim-hbook/country-data/countrydocs-gnd/grenada-historical-disasters 51 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Janet 28 _____________________________________________________________________________________ warehouses, unroofed the leading hotel, and damaged the hospital in St. George's. Balconies of government offices in St. George's were torn off. The airport in Grenada was covered in debris, and eight people were killed in a small town adjacent to the airport. All bridges in the island's interior collapsed. An estimated 75 percent of nutmeg plantations were destroyed, along with nearly all of the island's banana and cocoa crops. Three ships were grounded in the local harbor. In the waterfront of St. George's, debris was scattered, and an 820-foot (250 m) pier collapsed. Water supply was disrupted. Landslides and flooding also occurred. Over US$ 2.8 million in damages were estimated in the Grenadines, possibly including Carriacou and Petite Martinique. The UK Parliament Hansard reported on October 26, 195552, that the death toll in Grenada was 115, and about three-quarters of all the buildings in the island have been either virtually destroyed or severely damaged, the pier and warehouses at St. George's, the capital, disappeared into the sea. A survey has shown that 95 percent of the island's nutmeg trees, over half the coconut trees, and the whole of the food and banana crops have been destroyed while most of the cocoa trees were beaten to the ground, though many were expected to recover. It was also possible to replant many of the banana trees. In Carriacou, the death toll was 38, and, as in Grenada, the great majority of buildings and crops were destroyed. Her Majesty's Government made grants of £ 50,000 to Grenada, informing the Grenada Government that further financial assistance would be made available by Her Majesty's Government where there was need. On July 20, 1961, Category 2 hurricane Anna passed south of Grenada as a tropical storm and produced strong winds (wind gusts of 50 mph [80 km/h]), though damage was limited to some crops, banana trees, and telephone poles53. On September 30, 1963, Category 2 hurricane Flora passed south of Grenada after having made landfall on Tobago earlier in the day54. Damage in Grenada was estimated at around £20,000, with strong rainfall lasting for nearly 90 minutes, causing banana crop losses up to 40 percent in some areas. The airport, bridges, and roads were damaged, and the telephone service was disrupted, while roads were blocked by fallen trees55. Over a period of four months, there was a 25 percent reduction in the average monthly output of banana production (13,000 stems instead of 20,000 stems)56. Six people died due to drowning. According to the UK Parliament’s Hansard on Hurricane Damage Relief dated December 20, 1963, 70 percent of Grenada’s banana crop industry were destroyed at a provisional cost of US$ 255,000, while other crops, including citrus fruits, coconuts, and cocoa, were damaged but not uprooted. On September 30, 1975, an unnamed tropical storm caused six casualties in Grenada57. In November 1975, heavy rainstorms caused flooding and an estimated US$ 4.7 million in losses58. On August 11, 1978, Hurricane Cora made landfall in southern Grenada as it weakened into a tropical depression. Damage on Grenada, if any, is unknown59. 52 https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1955/oct/26/hurricane-damage 53 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Anna_(1961) 54 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Flora 55https://www.uwi.edu/ekacdm/node/117#:~:text=Hurricane%20Flora%20hit%20Grenada%20with,were%20blocked%20by%2 0fallen%20trees. 56 https://cdema.org/virtuallibrary/index.php/charim-hbook/country-data/countrydocs-gnd/grenada-historical-disasters 57 https://cdema.org/virtuallibrary/index.php/charim-hbook/country-data/countrydocs-gnd/grenada-historical-disasters 58 https://cdema.org/virtuallibrary/index.php/charim-hbook/country-data/countrydocs-gnd/grenada-historical-disasters 59 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Cora 29 _____________________________________________________________________________________ On August 4, 1980, Category 4 Hurricane Allen caused severe damage in Saint Lucia and Martinique and affected the northern part of Grenada and Carriacou as a low-end tropical storm or tropical depression. There are reports of US$ 5.3 million in losses in Grenada60, but no further details are known. On October 15, 1988, Tropical Storm Joan made landfall in Grenada. Sustained winds up to 51 mph (82 km/h) with gusts up to 64 mph (103 km/h) were recorded in Grenada. Heavy rains amounting to six inches (152 mm) were observed in and around St. George's. Significant flooding was reported throughout the island, while swollen streams transformed the deserted streets of neighboring villages into gushing sluiceways. Although damage to houses and crops across the island exceeded several hundred thousand US dollars, no fatalities or serious injuries were reported. A rare invasion of African desert locusts in the Windward Islands were blamed on the storm61. Damage to crops from this invasion is not known. On July 25, 1990, Tropical Storm Arthur passed just south of Grenada after having made landfall on Tobago. Wind gusts reportedly reached 55 mph (89 km/h) on the island, where two major bridges were damaged, electricity and telephone services were disrupted, and crops were affected. In addition, Arthur caused damage to four hotels and hundreds of houses62. On November 17, 1999, Category 4 Hurricane Lenny affected Grenada strongly despite it being centered, on that day, over the US Virgin Islands. Lenny was a storm of very large dimensions that had an unusual eastward track63. In Grenada, there was little warning about the hurricane, and most people left their boats in the water. In western Grenada, high waves affected much of the coastline, destroying 21 small boats, particularly in St. John's and St. Mark's, and causing significant beach erosion. The waves covered the entire Grand Anse Beach in Saint George parish. The erosion heavily impacted tourist areas and also threatened the foundation of the runway at the Maurice Bishop International Airport. Roaring waves washed rows of homes into the sea at Charleston Harbour and in the small fishing town of Gouyave. Several houses, restaurants, and other business premises in St. George's, St. John's., St. Mark's, as well as in Carriacou and Petite Martinique, were destroyed. The western main road leading from St. George's in the south to St. Patrick in the north was severely damaged in five places. Sea defenses on the western side of Grenada suffered seriously. Electricity and water supply in St. John's was disrupted. The fishing facility, which the Government had just started building with assistance from the Japanese Government, was destroyed, as well as the New Fish Market in St. John's. All schools on the west of the island, from St. Mark's to Point Saline, including all schools in St. George's, were closed. The Parish of St. John's suffered the most as a result of storm surges, with several families forced to evacuate their damaged houses. The cut-off roads resulted in an island-wide fuel shortage. Carriacou sustained damage to the road leading to its airport. At least 10 homes were destroyed in Grenada, and damage totaled US $94.6 million, equivalent to 27 percent of the Grenada's GDP64. In the aftermath, workers repaired the road system to allow fuel to be transported across the island and began to reclaim land near the airport to mitigate erosion. Summary of events between 2000 and present day In the first two decades of the 21st century, Grenada was affected by major storms in 2004 and 2005 and by tropical storms in 2002, 2007, 2017, and 2019. 60 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Allen#cite_note-emdat-16 61 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00193608 62 https://reliefweb.int/report/grenada/caribbean-tropical-depression-arthur-jul-1990-undro-information-reports-1-2 63 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Lenny 64 https://web.archive.org/web/20110607041756/http://www.unesco.org/csi/wise/sands.htm 30 _____________________________________________________________________________________ On September 22, 2002, tropical storm Lili passed over Carriacou. The storm affected all areas of Grenada, between Sunday, September 22, until the early morning of Tuesday, September 24, with 45 to 55mph sustained wind speeds and gusts up to 65 to 75mph and rainfall estimates ranging from two to four inches. No significant flooding situations were reported; however, storm surges were reported in the northern parts of Grenada. The north and northwest of Grenada were most affected, including St. Patrick's, St. Mark's, Carriacou, and Petit Martinique. Wind damage to buildings, landslides, and disruption of power caused by fallen trees were the main problems. Roofs of 14 homes were damaged (five lost their entire roof, while eight sustained partial damages), and one home was destroyed (due to a landslide). The island Medical Centre's roof was damaged, and 12 landslides were reported. There was also mild damage to infrastructure, particularly in St. Patrick's parish; three bridges were damaged or destroyed, along with seven utility poles and a water main. Roads, both main and secondary, were impacted. In St. Patrick's, an approximate 16 feet of road was under-mined, making vehicular traffic impassible. In Carriacou, dirt roads were washed away in many areas. The Gouvey and Mahoe bridges in St. Patrick's were broken, while the bridge in Red Mudd was partly damaged. One wooden shop was swept away by a river in St. Patrick's. The Berean Camp, which houses part of the St. Patrick's R.C. School, had partial damage to its roof. The warehouse of the Grenada Cocoa Association in Mt. Horne suffered some minor damages to part of its roof by a fallen tree. In Carriacou, the roof of the Government's storage house on the farm in Limlair was also damaged, as well as the roof of Belair Hospital. The National Water and Sewerage Authority suffered damages to some of its main pipelines. Water supplies were disrupted in many communities on the main island. There was also a nationwide power outage. However, power was restored in St. George's within eight hours, but northern, eastern, and northwestern areas were without electricity as poles were down. A vegetable farm in St. Patrick's was inundated. Many banana trees fell, and large fallen trees blocked roads. Three sheep drowned in Petit Martinique due to flooding. Telephone communications remained intact. The Health Clinic at Sauteurs was inaccessible as fallen trees blocked roads leading to the facility. The medical clinic in Petit Martinique sustained damages to part of its roof, while the hospital in Belair, Carriacou, was flooded in some parts65. In the early hours of August 15, 2004, Tropical Storm Earl passed just south of Grenada with peak wind intensity of 51 mph (82 km/h) by 0600 UTC, causing moderate damage. On the main island, roofs were blown off of 12 homes, while three others were partially damaged; more than 12 trees and six power poles were also knocked down. The heavy rain triggered 9 mudslides and three rockslides on the mainland. On Carriacou, 6 homes had their roofs completely blown off, and 13 others had their roofs partly blown off. Flooding was reported on River Road, Beausejour in St George’s northwest, as well as in parts of Carriacou66; however, no known damage resulted from them. During the storm, a nursing home had to be evacuated due to significant damage to its structure, and more than 30 residents were moved to a shelter67. On September 7, 2004, Hurricane Ivan passed seven miles (11 km) south-southwest of the southern tip of Grenada as a strong Category 3 hurricane, leaving 39 people dead and about 700 people injured. It was the worse hurricane to strike the island since Hurricane Janet in 1955. On that day, sustained winds reached up to 120 mph (193 km/h), with gusts peaking at 133 mph (214 km/h) at Point Salines International Airport, where 5.26 inches (134 mm) of precipitation was recorded. The winds raked the southern portion of the island and of Grenada's six parishes, the southernmost four (constituting 80 percent of the total population) were most severely affected. The strong winds damaged nearly 80 65 https://reliefweb.int/report/cuba/tropical-storm-lili-situation-report-no-2 66https://web.archive.org/web/20141020232742/http://www.belgrafix.com/gtoday/2004news/August/Aug%2028/Report%20 on%20Tropical%20Storm%20Earl.htm 67 https://web.archive.org/web/20121025185459/http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-97657044.html 31 _____________________________________________________________________________________ percent of the country’s housing stock, with nearly half of the houses (around 15,000 housing units) suffering serious damage or destruction of their roof structure (including roof cladding and roof frame)68 leaving around 53,000 people temporarily homeless. Complete housing replacement needs were assessed at 10,000 units69. In St George’s, 90 percent of the historic Georgian buildings were reported damaged. The nation's emergency operations center was damaged, and York House, home of the Parliament of Grenada, had its roof blown off. Ivan damaged or destroyed 75 primary or secondary schools, with only two being in working condition. The Princess Alice Hospital, the island's second largest, suffered complete damage to its roof and windows and as a result the Female Ward, Maternity and Pediatrics Wards plus the physiotherapy and sterilizing room and the laundry facilities were seriously affected losing 33 beds and four cots. Only the roof of the male ward remained relatively intact with only minor roof damage. At the country’s primary hospital, the 200-bed St. George's General Hospital, the medical laboratory suffered the worst damage within the hospital compound, losing approximately 40 percent of its roof, 25 percent of its windows, and all reagents. An estimated 60 percent of hotel rooms were damaged. The 17th century prison building was also damaged, allowing many inmates to escape during the height of the storm. At least 80 percent of the country’s 110,000 residents were without power (and a similar percentage without running water. In the agriculture sector, 60 percent of the nutmeg trees were downed and another 25 percent affected. Losses to other crops varied between 60 and 90 percent, while in fisheries there was considerable number of boats, equipment and icemakers lost or damaged. Environmental damage was also tremendous with 100 percent and 70 percent of forest and natural vegetation and mangroves damaged respectively. The Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) and the United Nations Economic Commission of Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) estimated the damages at US$ 787.7 million, equivalent to 133 percent of the 2003 GDP, while losses were estimated at US$ 97.3 million, equivalent to 16.5 percent of the 2003 GDP based on World Bank’s GDP data for Grenada in 2003. On July 14, 2005, Hurricane Emily passed over Grenada as a Category 1 hurricane, with 85 mph (137 km/h) winds, causing one fatality due to a landslide and inflicting extensive damage to a nation that was barely recovering from Ivan’s effects only 10 months earlier. Hurricane-force winds tore roofs from homes, nationwide, 2,641 homes were damaged of which at least 120 were destroyed, leaving 167 families homeless. Of the impacted homes, 1,153 were in Saint Andrew Parish that had seen 60 percent of its houses seriously damaged by Hurricane Ivan and 350 in Carriacou and Petite Martinique that had been spared the worst effects of Hurricane Ivan (5 percent of the houses had been seriously damaged). A hospital in Carriacou lost its roof, forcing the relocation of patients, 16 houses were destroyed and more than 200 damaged. The hardest hit were parts of Saint Andrew and Saint Patrick parishes. Mount Rich (Saint Patrick parish), saw the destruction of half its homes. A police station in Sauteurs lost its roof, as did two homes for the elderly elsewhere. Two of the main hospitals were flooded, including the hospital in St. George that had just been rebuilt with assistance from the Cuban Government after Ivan. Flooding affected communities in Saint George's, notably in Grenville. Much of the nation lost water supply, though restoration of power quickly remedied this. The agricultural industry was devastated again. Cash crops including corn, pigeon peas, and bananas were largely lost, while breadfruit, nutmeg, and cocoa trees were negatively impacted. The OECS estimated the damages at US$ 44.9 million, equivalent to 7.5 percent of the 2004 GDP, while losses were estimated at US$ 7 million, equivalent to 1.2 percent of the 2004 GDP based on World Bank’s GDP data for Grenada in 2004. On April 12, 2011, there were numerous reports of flooded houses, landslides, road blockages, sunken boats, and destroyed houses after heavy rainfall. In Gouyave, one house was destroyed by the violent 68 https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication/Grenada-A%20Nation%20Rebuilding.pdf 69 https://www.oas.org/dsd/Documents/G-_HR_2_CQA%20Project%20Impl_Ex%20Summary.pdf 32 _____________________________________________________________________________________ river, which overflowed its bank. Road access from Waltham St. Mark to Victoria had been blocked. The Balthazar bridge was flooded. In Clozier, St. John, access to Gouyave was cut off due to a landslide. Additionally, 11 boats sunk in Victoria, St. Mark. Five major landslips occurred in Gouyave, with about three houses lost along the river and other properties flooded. There were no reports of loss of life. Rains affected other parts of Grenada, including southwest and northwest St. Andrew, resulting in rising water levels in some rivers and landslides in the Grand Etang area. The estimated cost of damage was US$ 4.15 million. Annex 3: Virtual damage surveying methodology and results The small island context of Grenada lends itself well to the benefits of virtual damage surveying. The number of buildings is, in comparison to larger countries, relatively small, so it is possible during the GRADE process to systematically survey the damage and achieve a large enough sample to better understand the damages. Across both damaged and non-damaged areas, attaining extensive and good quality imagery is vital to the success of virtual surveying, and this was achieved in Carriacou and Petite Martinique with drive-by videos, unmanned ariel vehicle (or drone) imagery, and social media posts with imagery, in large parts of the islands. The survey collected usage and building information and assessed damages to the roof covering, roof frame and walls using the damage scale in Table 9. These damages by structural element translate to an overall damage grading as described in Table 10. It also assessed the value of the structure on a scale of 1 (more rudimentary buildings or low-income housing) to 5 (luxury high-end villas or large, high-quality, non-residential assets). The surveys were completed by going building-by-building for all structures with enough visibility to make judgements. Careful attention was paid to non-damaged buildings as it is important to capture a representative sample during virtual damage surveys. The number of structures surveyed are presented in Table 11. The results achieved are presented in Table 5 and Table 6 for residential and non-residential structures. Comparisons were made to the Grenada Central Statistics Office (GCSO) damage surveys to calibrate and validate the results. Table 9: Damage definition used for virtual damage surveys for the roof covering, roof frame and walls None No visible damage Some minor repairs or small replacements will Minor be needed A good section of the element is missing or will Partial need replacing The whole element is missing or will need Complete replacing 33 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Table 10: Building damage level definitions for virtual surveying Roof covering None Minor Partial Complete None No damage Minor Minor damage Roof frame Partial Moderate damage Complete Severe damage If roof frame and roof covering and walls are complete: Destroyed Table 11: Number of buildings surveyed for damage by island and usage Total buildings Residential Non-residential Carriacou 382 282 100 Petit Martinique 57 51 6 Total 439 333 106 34 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Annex 4: Overview of cost benefit analysis of structural improvements for neighboring Saint Vincent and the Grenadines The report “Disaster Risk Assessment and Adaptive Social Protection Analysis for Saint Vincent and the Grenadines” (2023) from the WB/GFDRR (unpublished) includes a cost benefit analysis of existing socioeconomic and tropical cyclone hazard data in order to estimate risk and account for climate impacts; and then to quantify the correlation between hazard and social protection, and to estimate future potential losses and therefore budget requirements for social protection policy. Two options were explored as part of the cost-benefit analysis to gauge the benefits versus the costs of a large-scale retrofitting of sheet metal roofs required for protection from hurricane winds in SVG’s residential typologies. The traditional methodologies of cost-benefit analyses use a relative cost of retrofit compared to the value of the house before retrofit (according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency of the United States [FEMA]). When an extensive retrofit program is considered, such methodologies are often used because of the unknown nature of the cost of retrofit relative to the value of house. Depending on a household’s social class, the value of a house can differ greatly. In this way, the cost-benefit analyses often produce results where the more vulnerable building stock has larger benefits. Table 12 summarizes the various characteristics and construction attributes that are affected by wind damage and other vulnerabilities. Each of these were explored. Users should refer to the FEMA Retrofit Guide70 for more details. Table 13 summarizes the costs relative to the building value of the various retrofit options for wood frame houses with a hipped or gable roof. Table 12: The list of building characteristics to be examined for Retrofit Option 2 from FEMA P-804, 2010. Characteristic Value Comments Building Type Wood or Masonry Indicates if the single-family residence is constructed out of wood or masonry. Number of Stories One Story, or Two or More Indicates if the single-family residence has one or Stories more stories. Roof Shape Hip or Gable Indicates if the single-family residence has a hip or gable roof. Secondary Water Yes or No Identifies whether there is a secondary water Resistance resistance barrier to prevent water penetration through the roof decking after the loss of the roof covering. Roof deck 6d Nails at 6/12, 8d Nails at Refers to the nail diameter (e.g., 6d refer to 0.06 Attachment 6/12, 6d/8d Mix at 6/6, or 8d inch) and spacing of the nails (6/12 is 12 inches on- Nails at 6/6 center, 6/6 is 6 inches on center) that attach the roof decking. 70 https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_p-804-wind-retrofit-guide-042023.pdf 35 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Roof-Wall Toe-Nail or Strap Indicates if the load path of the single-family Connection residence can transfer loads from the roof to the foundation. In general, a strap provides a better connection from the roof framing to the walls than solely nails. The roof-wall connection has been a weak, damage-prone point in past hurricanes. Shutters Yes or No This characteristic indicates if the single-family residence has shutters, thereby reducing windborne debris damage to the building and its contents. Garage None, Weak Door, Standard Indicates whether the residence has a garage, and, Door, or South Florida if present, the strength of the garage door. Building Code (SFBC) 94 (if Reinforced garage doors are considered standard shuttered) and unreinforced doors are considered weak. Masonry Yes or No This characteristic indicates if a masonry single- Reinforcing family residence has reinforced or unreinforced masonry walls. Table 13: Estimated retrofit costs as a percentage of building value with various options for hip and gable type roofs (an of average one- and two- story, wood framed houses), according to FEMA. Retrofit Cost as % of Building Value Hip Gable Basic without replacing roof cover 1.8% 2.4% Basic with replacing roof cover 4.0% 5.2% Basic with opening protection, not replacing roof cover 4.0% 4.7% Basic with opening protection with replacing roof cover 6.3% 7.5% Intermediate without replacing roof cover 5.0% 5.8% Intermediate with replacing roof cover 7.8% 8.6% Advanced without replacing roof cover 11.3% 12.1% Advanced with replacing roof cover 14.1% 14.9% It is important to consider that the retrofit costs differ significantly due to differences in construction type and existing home values. For example, concrete block wall-sheet metal roof houses would likely require the highest costs associated with a change to the various components. A professional assessment would be required to back up this option. It would be uneconomical for this typology when applying an intermediate/advanced option. While this type of building would maintain 10 percent of its value over a 30-year lifecycle, the homeowner would still likely face repair costs from hurricane damage. 36 _____________________________________________________________________________________ About GRADE GRADE reports provide an estimate of the costs associated with the economic damage to physical assets of housing, public buildings, non-residential buildings, agriculture, and critical infrastructure using a methodology that considers the disaster’s three components: hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. To conduct GRADE reports, the World Bank’s D-RAS team compiles physical damage information by employing hazard and engineering modelling, checks the information carefully against observations and historical precedent, and presents the data, figures, and estimated costs in the first weeks after a major disaster such as cyclones, earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, and conflicts. GRADE reports continue to provide a useful initial estimate of the damages and economic impact and help contribute and complement additional damage and loss assessments conducted, which all are key to plan and design disaster recovery and reconstruction. To date, the D-RAS team has conducted more than 60 GRADE assessments. So far, on average, GRADE’s estimated overall damages are above 80 percent accurate relative to the detailed, on the ground assessments that follow in the weeks and months after a disaster. 37