The Jamaica situation after hurricane Ivan points to an event that while being
geographically limited in scope affected in different ways to whole of the country. The event’s
direct damage and indirect losses amount to 8% of the country’s current GDP in 2003 (almost
36,000 million Jamaican dollars or 580 million of US dollars).
Hurricane Ivan was formed as a tropical depression just off the coast of Africa on 2 September. It
followed a westward direction, getting stronger, and became a tropical storm on the following day. By 5 September it had become a full-fledged hurricane, and continued its path towards the
Caribbean where it eventually affected many island States. It reached the vicinity of Jamaica on 10 September, with category four winds . The hurricane followed an irregular path approaching the southern coast of Jamaica, and at 11:00 pm on 10 September was located at a point approximately 40 kilometers South from Hellshire Point, in the Parish of St Catherine, the closest position ever to the island. In the following hours, the eye of the hurricane seemed to be nearly stationary off the country’s coast. The initial effects of the hurricane were felt since 9
September in the form of showers and thundershowers in the East (Portland and St. Thomas) and in the Southwest (Westmoreland and St. Elizabeth) of the country. The following day rain showers were covering the entire country, with increased intensity in the northwest. On 11
September, as the hurricane passed closest to the island, strong sustained winds of up to 180 kilometers per hour occurred in the southern coastal areas. Rainfall totals during the period 10 to 12 September were highest in several locations of Clarendon, St. Catherine and in Kingston as indicated in the table below, that shows preliminary data provided by the Meteorological
Service.
Rainfall exceeded several times the normal or average depth for the locations mentioned above, which undoubtedly resulted in high storm runoff in the rivers draining the watersheds. When the carrying capacity of river channels was exceeded, extensive flooding of adjacent lands occurred. Then, too, the combination of saturated soils from previous events 1 and the intensive rains caused many land slippages that destroyed or cut roads, bridges and drainage culverts, as well as other physical infrastructure and housing.
Wind gusts as high as 340 km/h were recorded at selected points within the higher elevations of the island. Storm waves and surge were reported in excess of 20 meters along the cliff in the vicinity of Rick’s Café, West End Negril. Wave heights along sections of the east (Manchioneal, St Thomas) and south coasts were reported between 2 and 8 metres. The hurricane continued its northwest direction and went on to affect other countries in the following days. Of special importance were damage and losses imposed on the State of Florida. It is to be noted that initial projections indicated that Ivan might hit head on the Kingston area, in which case its winds and storm surge would have made considerable more damage.
Affected population
The most recent population and housing census of 2001, reported that the population of Jamaica
was 2.6 million persons spread throughout the country’s thirteen parishes. When Ivan struck the island on 10 September 2004, the projected population was 2.65 million. Fourteen per cent (14%) of the total population or some 369,685 persons was directly affected by the natural disaster. Many of these persons were found in the direct path of the hurricane in Clarendon, St. Elizabeth, Westmoreland, Kingston and St. Andrew and Manchester. The following map has been prepared by PIOJ to show the location of the affected communities.
Seventeen persons lost their lives as a direct result of the hurricane, eight from Kingston and St, Andrew, six from Clarendon (all from Portland Cottage), two from St. Catherine and one from Manchester. Deaths occurred due to collapsing roofs, mudslides, persons being swept away
by floodwaters, or due to fallen trees. There were another fourteen deaths indirectly related to the hurricane. Nine of those deaths occurred in KSA, two each were reported from St. Elizabeth and
St. Ann and one from Hanover.
At the beginning of October there were at least 38 shelters still opened island wide housing some 493 persons. The majority of these were in the parishes of Clarendon, Manchester, St. Elizabeth and St. Catherine, where a total of 23 shelters with 350 persons were still opened as of October 2, 2004
SOCIAL SECTORS
Hurricane Ivan very negatively affected the living conditions of the population of Jamaica, in
varying degrees in the different social sectors. The impact on these sectors is described below.
a) Private housing
Damage to the housing sector was considerable. A total of 102,000 households reported
damage to property to the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, 1 which is equivalent to 14%
of the total housing stock of the country.
Of the households assessed, 61% had been processed providing details of extent of
damage. Nine percent (9%) of those processed, or 5,624 households, were so severely damaged
as to require complete reconstruction. More than a fifth of these homes could be found in areas
such as Portland Cottage in the parish of Clarendon, and in the parish of St. Catherine. Some
46,971 homes or 75% were assessed as being severely damaged, with roof and structural damage, and another 14% or 8,836, as requiring minor repairs.
Total damage to the housing sector amounted to J$ 11,163 million. Of this figure, direct
damage to dwellings and furnishings, accounted for some J$ 10,474 million or 93% of the cost.
The indirect loss represents the cost of removal of debris and the relocation of certain
communities 3 such as Rocky Point and Portland Cottage that were in extremely vulnerable
environments. The indirect loss was thus estimated at J$ 689 million.
SUMMARY OF DAMAGE AND LOSSES
The total impact of hurricane Ivan on Jamaica, as described in previous chapters of this report,
amounts to 36,886 million Jamaican dollars, or its equivalent of US$ 595 million. 1 In spite of
some limitations imposed by the lack of sufficient data in some infrastructure sectors or
activities, the above figure reflects the amount of damage and losses sustained by the country.
Of the total figure quoted above, 63% (J$ 23,182 million) refers to damage to physical
assets and the remaining 37% (J$ 13,704 million) to indirect losses or changes in economic flows
that will occur during the remainder of 2004 and in the next three years. 2 Partial information
from the insurance industry indicates that an estimated amount of J$ 3,000 would be reimbursed
to owners of affected homes and other infrastructure, no information was available in regard to
the possible insurance refunds to productive activities.
The total amount of damage and losses are equivalent to 8% of the country’s GDP for the
previous year, which figure provides a measure of the magnitude of the disaster for the island.
While the same hurricane-imposed damage and losses to other neighboring island states that
represent much higher figures, the impact in Jamaica should not be underestimated, especially
in regard to its geographical distribution.
Of special relevance and interest is the breakdown of the above amount by type of impact,
as follows:
The first type of impact refers to the amount of assets that have been lost or damaged and
which will have to be reconstructed or repaired in the following years, and is a measure of the
reconstruction effort to be undertaken by the government and private sector. In addition, the
second type of impact indicates the amount by which – after converting to value added – gross
domestic product will be affected. Finally, the third type of impact – while admittedly
underestimated due to lack of sufficient data especially in the transport sector – is an indication of how private and public sector utilities will be affected in their financial results for the year.
The private sector sustained damage and losses of J$ 27,180 million (74% of the total
estimated impact), while the public sector suffered the remaining 26 per cent of the impact.
Nevertheless, the government has already indicated his disposition to absorb part of the damage
sustained by poor population groups that do not have any means to face the requirements of
reconstruction. The government’s share of the impact will therefore be substantially higher.
The analysis undertaken allows to identify the sectors that were most affected in one-way
or another. The productive sectors were the most affected since they sustained damage and losses
of J$ 13,375 million, followed by the social sectors (J$ 12,729 million), while infrastructure
suffered a comparatively lower impact (J$ J$ 6,988). (See table 6-1 below). However, the single
most affected sector is that of housing which sustained total damage and losses of J$ 11,164
million, or 31% of the total impact, followed by agriculture and livestock (J$ 8,550 million and
24%), and transport (J$ 3,256 million and 9%). When only indirect losses are considered, the
most affected sector is that of agriculture (J$ 5,143 and 37% of total losses), followed by food
processing (J$ 1,995 million and 14%), tourism (J$ 1,591 million and 12%), and
telecommunications (J$ 1,535 million or 11%).
Based on the above information it is possible to assert that the disaster caused by
hurricane Ivan in Jamaica can be described, in broad terms, as one that destroyed or damaged
assets of housing, transport infrastructure, the environment and some permanent agricultural
plantations, while at the same time imposing a decline in future agriculture and livestock and
food processing production and in the tourism industry, as well as bringing about decreased
revenues and increased operational costs of utilities in the electricity, water supply,
telecommunications and transport sectors.
Based on the above information it is possible to assert that the disaster caused by
hurricane Ivan in Jamaica can be described, in broad terms, as one that destroyed or damaged
assets of housing, transport infrastructure, the environment and some permanent agricultural
plantations, while at the same time imposing a decline in future agriculture and livestock and
food processing production and in the tourism industry, as well as bringing about decreased
revenues and increased operational costs of utilities in the electricity, water supply,
telecommunications and transport sectors.
Source: https://goo.gl/meBE2c