Evacuation from a Nuclear Technological Disaster¶
Zeigler, Brunn, & Johnson. (1981). Evacuation from a Nuclear Technological Disaster. Geographical Review.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Domain-specific¶
- Evacuation Shadow
- Hurricane evacuation — the canonical cases (Floyd 1999, Rita 2005), where shadow evacuees gridlocked interstates hundreds of miles inland; the Rita evacuation in Texas is the case in which in-traffic deaths exceeded direct storm fatalities. Wildfire evacuation — rural and rural-fringe households outside declared zones leave on a smell of smoke or perceived proximity, clogging limited egress roads. Nuclear and industrial-accident contingencies — planning models show large shadow zones, with populations evacuating well beyond the technical-risk perimeter on even minor incident signals
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
“Our objectives are to identify the spatial and temporal dimensions of evacuation behavior among TMI residents, to offer a conceptual model of evacuation-decision making in response to a nuclear disaster, and to suggest the role for geographers in evacuation planning.”
- Hurricane evacuation — the canonical cases (Floyd 1999, Rita 2005), where shadow evacuees gridlocked interstates hundreds of miles inland; the Rita evacuation in Texas is the case in which in-traffic deaths exceeded direct storm fatalities. Wildfire evacuation — rural and rural-fringe households outside declared zones leave on a smell of smoke or perceived proximity, clogging limited egress roads. Nuclear and industrial-accident contingencies — planning models show large shadow zones, with populations evacuating well beyond the technical-risk perimeter on even minor incident signals
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This work's DOI is recorded above but has not been resolved against an external catalogue, so nothing here confirms the work exists.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:63a712c7c679 · see in the full table