opportunities and challenges for public libraries to enhance community resilience

Risk Analysis, Vol. 34, No. 4, 2014 DOI: 10.1111/risa.12130

Opportunities and Challenges for Public Libraries toEnhance Community Resilience

Shari R. Veil1,∗ and Bradley Wade Bishop2

This study bridges a gap between public library and emergency management policy versuspractice by examining the role of public libraries in the community resource network for dis-aster recovery. Specifically, this study identifies the opportunities and challenges for publiclibraries to fulfill their role as a FEMA-designated essential community organization and en-hance community resilience. The results indicate there are several opportunities for librariesto enhance community resilience by offering technology resources and assistance; provid-ing office, meeting, and community living room space; serving as the last redundant commu-nication channel and a repository for community information and disaster narratives; andadapting or expanding services already offered to meet the changing needs of the commu-nity. However, libraries also face challenges in enhancing community resilience, includingthe temptation to overcommit library capacity and staff capability beyond the library mis-sion and a lack of long-term disaster plans and collaboration with emergency managers andgovernment officials. Implications for library and emergency management practice and crisisresearch are discussed.

KEY WORDS: Community resilience; crisis; disaster; library

1. INTRODUCTION

In December 2010, the U.S. Federal Emer-gency Management Agency (FEMA) formally rec-ognized public libraries as essential communityorganizations.(1) This change in the Stafford Act au-thorized FEMA to provide federal assistance andtemporary relocation facilities for libraries to main-tain services following a disaster. Other public facil-ities in this category of community services deemed

1Department of Communication and Division of Risk Sciences,College of Communication and Information, University of Ken-tucky, Lexington, KY, USA.

2School of Information Sciences, College of Communication andInformation, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, TN,USA.

∗Address correspondence to Shari R. Veil, Department ofCommunication and Division of Risk Sciences, College ofCommunication and Information, University of Kentucky, 235Grehan Building, Lexington, KY, USA; tel: 859-218-0468;[email protected].

“necessary to save lives, or to protect and preserveproperty or public health and safety” include police,fire protection/emergency services, medical care, ed-ucation, and utilities.(2) FEMA recognized that al-though public libraries are not equipped to assist indisaster response efforts in the same line as emer-gency responders, after the storm has passed, li-braries are uniquely primed to provide a standard ofservices that can enhance disaster recovery.

Across the United States, there are a total of17,487 public library outlets.(3) With 98% of all U.S.counties containing at least one public library andthe mean county average of five, this nearly ever-present, free, and open public institution is a sub-stantial part of U.S. public infrastructure.(4) Publiclibraries are also the primary provider of free com-puter and Internet access. In fact, over 62% of pub-lic libraries report offering the only free Internet ac-cess in their community.(5) As community anchorinstitutions, libraries are also located centrally in

721 0272-4332/14/0100-0721$22.00/1 C© 2013 Society for Risk Analysis

722 Veil and Bishop

neighborhoods in sound structures with secure com-munication lines.(6) Many libraries have back-up gen-erators and central lines to maintain access to elec-tronic resources (e.g., subscription databases, onlinepublic access catalog) and climate control for preser-vation of print materials.(7) So even if the powergrid is down across a community, many libraries canmaintain full operation.

Results from the 2011–2012 Public Library Fund-ing and Technology Access Survey show almost all(96.6%) public libraries provide assistance to patronsapplying for or accessing e-government services.(5)

Over 70% report staff help patrons complete gov-ernment forms, and nearly 31% of public librariespartner with government agencies and/or nonprofitorganizations to provide e-government services.(5) Inaddition, 27% of dial-up users, primarily located inrural areas, indicate they do not have any other ac-cess to broadband Internet service in their area.(8)

Many users lack the computer literacy needed todownload and complete e-government forms andmust seek assistance from librarians.(9) These statis-tics are key because FEMA aid forms can only becompleted online and require certain types of soft-ware (e.g., web browsers) and technical know-how.After a natural disaster, the need for e-governmentservices is heightened, explaining why public librarieshave been identified as a centralized hub for connec-tivity following disasters.(10,11)

Previous research has identified the array of ser-vices public libraries have delivered following dis-asters, most extensively following hurricanes.(5,7,9)

The findings from these studies have been publishedwidely in library journals and shared extensivelythrough professional and academic library associa-tion forums. However, the discussion of libraries asan essential resource in disaster recovery has re-mained in the library literature and, in practice, li-braries continue to be excluded from community dis-aster preparedness, response, and recovery planning.Zach suggests “this exclusion may foster a sense thatlibraries cannot play a proactive role beyond theirtraditional one of providing access to collections andto a physical safe haven in times of crisis.”(11) Re-search shows even library staff underestimate the im-portance of libraries in disaster recovery, and formerFEMA Director David Paulison agreed that emer-gency managers do not have libraries on the radaras a resource.(12) He stated in an interview, “I thinkyou’re really on to something there, I mean, whereelse are they going to go? Libraries have back up gen-erators for power, they have the Internet, they have

people who will help you. I guess we never reallythought of the role libraries could play.”(13)

This study seeks to bridge a gap between pub-lic library and emergency management policy ver-sus practice by examining the role of public librariesin the community resource network for disaster re-covery. Specifically, this study identifies the oppor-tunities and challenges for public libraries to en-hance community resilience. First, an overview ofprevious research on libraries and disasters is pro-vided. Next, the literature on community resilienceis outlined to provide a framework for analyzing andcategorizing the services offered by public libraries.Then, the findings from interviews with librarians, li-brary directors, and library patrons from communi-ties that recently suffered significant tornado damageare described and analyzed according to the adaptivecapacities of community resilience, and opportuni-ties and challenges for libraries to enhance commu-nity resilience are identified. Finally, implications forpublic libraries, emergency management, and futureresearch are discussed.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Public Libraries and Disasters

Although public libraries are not typically in-cluded in community preparedness or response plan-ning, previous disasters have shown that communitymembers do seek out library services. One studyshowed that even though 35% of the Louisiana pub-lic libraries were closed following Hurricane Katrina,the overall number of visitors only went down by1%, indicating that individuals sought library serviceselsewhere if their library was closed.(14) More re-cently, on October 30, 2012, the day after HurricaneSandy struck the East Coast, the Princeton, NJ, pub-lic library experienced an influx of over 2,000 morepatrons than average using computers, looking up in-formation, watching movies in the community room,and charging phones and laptops on the power stripsthat lined the stacks.(15)

The most extensive research on the role of pub-lic libraries in disasters was conducted following the2004–2005 hurricane season along the Gulf Coast ofthe United States.(7) Library services identified in-cluded responding to information inquiries; creatingcommunity contact centers; staffing shelters in librarybuildings; housing city command centers (i.e., police,fire, public works); distributing food and supplies;

Libraries and Community Resilience 723

providing hookups to recharge electronics and com-munication devices; assisting with the completionof FEMA, insurance, and other paperwork; provid-ing library materials to evacuees in shelters; provid-ing FEMA, Red Cross, National Guard, and ArmyCorps of Engineers personnel with a place to meetwith residents; and giving temporary library cardsto relief workers, among other services.(12) The useof the Internet to contact FEMA was the most fre-quently cited service that libraries provided to theircommunities. One librarian in the Gulf study noted,“our staff helped customers file over 45,000 FEMAapplications [and] insurance claims.”(12)

In 2007, the National Library of Medicine con-ducted an oral history project to identify the roles li-brarians take on to support disaster management.(16)

The project identified eight prominent roles oflibraries in disaster management: (1) institutionalsupporters, (2) collection managers, (3) informa-tion disseminators, (4) internal planners, (5) commu-nity supporters, (6) government partners, (7) edu-cators and trainers, and (8) information communitybuilders.(16) Each of the roles is described in Table I.To assist public libraries in formalizing their disasterrecovery roles, Bishop and Veil suggested librariesshould (1) develop a disaster plan to include how thelibrary can assist the community in crisis recovery; (2)regularly update emergency contact information; (3)work with emergency response managers to integratepublic libraries into the existing community disasterplanning framework; and (4) quantify the number ofusers assisted in disasters to provide clear evidence ofthe essential nature of public libraries in disasters.(17)

In summary, previous research indicates thatpublic libraries have spontaneously taken on a vari-ety of roles to support disaster recovery in commu-nities. Even without a formal role in disaster recov-ery efforts, public libraries have periodically adjustedtheir policies and services based on what their com-munity needed at the time. These practices are notonly indicative of a resilient system, but if integratedwith emergency management could support a moreresilient community. The following review providesa framework for categorizing and analyzing the ser-vices offered by public libraries following a disasterto consider the opportunities and challenges for pub-lic libraries to enhance community resilience.

2.2. Community Resilience

The National Academies recently described dis-aster resilience as a national imperative.(18) Defined

as “a community’s ability to strengthen its responseto deal with crises or disruptions,” resilience is of-ten confused with mitigation (strategies to reduce im-pacts of hazards) and resistance (strategies to stophazards from occurring).(19) However, resilience as-sumes that we cannot plan for every event or pre-vent every event from occurring. Therefore, the goalof resilience is to improve the community’s abil-ity to anticipate threats, reduce vulnerability to haz-ard events, and respond to and recover from hazardevents when they occur.(20) A resilient community isable to bounce back from an event, not necessarilyto return to normal, but to return to a new normal inthe initial days, weeks, and months depending on thesize and scope of the disaster. Longstaff et al. describecommunity resilience as a function of resource ro-bustness and adaptive capacity.(21) In the traditionalthree-phase model of precrisis, crisis, and postcrisis,community resilience is most evident in the fluiditybetween the crisis and postcrisis phases.(21) Thus, re-silience can be seen in the resources used and adap-tive strategies enacted to cope or “get through” thechronic, ongoing process of cleanup and recovery inthe aftermath of an event.

2.2.1. Resource Robustness

Scholars have attempted to measure communityresilience by assessing resources according to theproperties of robustness (ability to withstand stress);redundancy (extent to which elements are substi-tutable); rapidity (ability to achieve goals in a timelymanner); and resourcefulness (capacity to identifyproblems and mobilize resources).(22) Others explainresource robustness as a function of resource per-formance (resource capacity and quality), diversity(multiple resources that fulfill the same role), andredundancy (failsafe, or back-up resources).(21) Ac-cording to community resilience scholars, modern re-sources like electricity, computers, Internet access,and satellite communications have made us morevulnerable in disasters. Longstaff et al. argue that“[n]ever before have governments, communities, andindividuals been so devastatingly unprepared to copewith disturbances to infrastructure, vital resources orpublic goods and services.”(21)

Even our emergency response network has be-come overreliant on technology. For example, theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)admitted following Hurricane Katrina that depen-dence on electronic channels like websites, ra-dio, and television severely hindered its ability to

724 Veil and Bishop

Table I. Library Roles in Disasters (Featherstone, Lyon, Ruffin, 2008, pp. 345–348)

Institutional supporters Academic libraries acted as a command center for activities; posted institution-specific information onthe Web; helped displaced students and professionals (such as doctors, nurses, faculty members, andprofessional researchers); or acted as part of the institution-wide disaster plan.

Collection managers The primary responsibilities of all libraries acting in this role were to protect, restore, and provideaccess to collections.

Information disseminators Public, academic, special, and hospital libraries were all involved in efforts to disseminate current,reliable information to patrons, institutions, or the general public. In some cases, the library acted asthe primary source of information for the entire community.

Internal planners Librarians developed planning documents for their organizations, worked to keep track of displacedstaff members, documented activities for FEMA, and generally improvised to keep their librariesrunning.

Community supporters Libraries acted as community gathering places; provided Internet access for evacuees; sent mobile unitsto shelters; volunteered wherever help was needed; gave needed emotional support; managed anddispersed donations; organized volunteers; worked in shelters; and helped people find their familymembers, find jobs and apartments, fill out FEMA forms, arrange for new prescription medications,locate shelters for their animals, and many other activities.

Government partners Libraries prepared reports and seminars; participated in and organized federally mandated emergencyexercises; referred citizens to social service agencies; applied for grants and contracts to provideinformation; and worked with state health departments, local police and fire departments, and federalinstitutes, departments, and agencies.

Educators and trainers Librarians trained emergency responders in the use of information tools, evaluated software, taughtclasses in disaster management skills, developed technology tools for emergency responders, andtrained other information professionals to provide emergency reference services.

Information communitybuilders

Libraries acting in this capacity were involved in mass book donation projects, provided restorationsupport to damaged sister libraries, shared information and resources via interlibrary loan and othermeans of electronic transfer, promoted preparedness activities, housed displaced informationprofessionals, and established buddy systems for libraries to ensure continued services.

deliver health information, and workers had to re-sort to posting printed flyers to disseminate informa-tion about the safety of food and water.(23) More re-cently, as a nor’easter approached the East Coast ofthe United States nearly a full week after HurricaneSandy, 1.3 million people were still without powerand access to media channels.(24) Police were sent outwith bullhorns to warn residents in low-lying areasof the approaching storm.(25) For those without elec-tricity or a vehicle phone charger (or vehicle for thatmatter) along the East Coast, mobile phones were lit-tle more than paperweights, and having power didnot equate to having service. One in four cellulartowers were knocked out in the 10 states affected byHurricane Sandy.(26) Finally, according to FEMA’swebsite, there are three ways to apply for assistance:online at DisasterAssistance.gov, via smartphone atm.fema.gov, or by phone at (800) 621-3362. Even to-day, applying for disaster aid requires a phone, elec-tricity, and Internet access.

Although hazard mitigation and resistance antic-ipates threats to resources and enacts strategies toreduce the vulnerability of resources to hazard im-pacts, community resilience also identifies strategiesto adapt when resources fail. Researchers have thus

identified broad categories of community resourcesand the adaptive capacity of those resources requiredfor a community to be resilient.

2.2.2. Adaptive Capacities

Norris et al. provided a framework for a the-ory of community resilience that identified four net-worked adaptive capacities of community resilience:economic development, social capital, informationand communication, and community competence.(27)

Together, these capacities provide a foundation forcommunity preparedness, response, and recovery.

Economic development includes fairness of riskand vulnerability to hazards, level and diversityof economic resources, and equity of resourcedistribution.(27) Hazards are not evenly distributedacross populations, and individuals from lower so-cioeconomic backgrounds are not only more likely tolive in areas prone to hazards, but also less likely tohave the financial resources to rebuild and recoverfrom a disaster.(28) Cutter et al. also suggest that poorcommunities are less successful in mobilizing supportafter disasters.(28)


Social capital includes received and perceived so-cial support, formal and informal ties to the commu-nity, organizational linkages and cooperation, senseof community, and attachment to place.(27) Socialsupport takes account of having family and friendsnearby and/or willing to help as well as relation-ships between individuals and their neighbors andthe larger community network, including religiousgroups, schools, and community organizations. Com-munity relations is considered essential to buildingsocial capital to bring organizations and municipalservices together to support rebuilding and recovery.As Wyche and colleagues suggest: “The assumptionof community resilience is that people work collabo-ratively, rather than independently, to improve theircommunity.”(19) Having a sense of community andattachment to place promotes community recoveryas a requirement for personal recovery.

Information and communication include respon-sible media, skills and infrastructure, trusted sourcesof information, and narratives.(27) Effective commu-nication before, during, and after a disaster can becrucial in reducing damage and loss of life, whereasrumors and misinformation can exacerbate a crisis.Similarly, media coverage that sensationalizes disas-ter information rather than providing instructionalmessages for self-protection can hinder response andrecovery.(29) Information resources are needed to as-sist communities with rebuilding and recovery. Peo-ple need to know where to go, what to do, howto contact family and friends, where to locate sup-plies for cleanup and rebuilding, how to file insur-ance claims and apply for federal aid, and how todonate and help others. Communication and infor-mation also include the development of communalnarratives of the disaster. These narratives contributeto adaptive capacity by allowing a community to (1)store and remember its experiences through institu-tional memory; (2) use that memory and experienceto learn, innovate, and reorganize resources; and(3) connect with others to communicate experiences,lessons learned, and self-organize.(21) Longstaff et al.suggest that this narrative learning process enhancesall adaptive capacities.(21)

Community competence includes community ac-tion, critical problem-solving skills, flexibility andcreativity, collective efficacy and empowerment, andpolitical partnerships.(27) Communities must be ableto adapt to changing conditions following a disaster.Developing, testing, and evaluating emergency andcrisis plans can help identify potential weaknessesthat can be addressed before disaster strikes. Encour-

aging the preparation of emergency kits and planscan assure emergency services can focus on respond-ing to those most vulnerable in a disaster. Establish-ing relationships and outlining aid agreements withneighboring communities can assist in building com-munity competence.

3. METHODS

Community resilience relies on a broad networkof resources to anticipate threats, reduce vulnerabil-ities, and adapt strategies when resources fail. How-ever, how public libraries can enhance community re-silience has yet to be explored. Unlike the previousstudies that identified the array of services offered bylibraries following hurricanes and the unique roles li-braries can play in disaster recovery, this study con-siders where libraries fit in the community resilienceresource network by examining opportunities andchallenges faced by libraries in supporting the adap-tive capacities identified by Norris et al.(5,7,12,16,27)

3.1. Study Context

On April 27, 2011, a series of tornados torethrough Alabama killing 131 people across the state.Tuscaloosa was hit the hardest by an EF-4 tornadothat destroyed more than 5,000 homes.(30) Less thanone month later, on May 22, 2011, an EF-5 tor-nado swept across Joplin, MO, damaging or de-stroying 7,500 homes and 500 businesses and citystructures.(31) The Joplin tornado was the deadli-est single tornado in recent history, killing 161 peo-ple and injuring thousands more.(32) The followingspring more than 45 tornados sprung up across ruralsouthern Indiana and northern Kentucky, killing 13in Indiana and another 23 in Kentucky.(33) An EF-4twister stayed on the ground for more than 49 milescutting through Henryville, IN, while an EF-3 stayedon the ground for 95 miles leveling the town of WestLiberty, KY. All of these tornados left in their wakeshock, confusion, and mass wreckage. Following theIndiana and Kentucky tornado outbreak, we appliedfor and received a quick response grant from theNatural Hazards Center to cover the cost of travelto conduct interviews with librarians in impactedcommunities.

3.2. Reflexive Statement

Lykkeslet and Gjendal explore issues that canresult from engaging in practice-close research.(34)

726 Veil and Bishop

They explain that when a researcher is close to theresearch, it is important to be reflexive, transpar-ent, and explicit about one’s preconceptions. As re-searchers, we did not enter the study context withoutprior knowledge of public libraries and risk contexts.One of the authors specifically studies the servicesof public libraries and served as a graduate researchassistant on the original studies examining the ser-vices offered by public libraries in hurricane-pronecommunities. The other author studies risk and cri-sis communication and has worked with local, state,and federal emergency managers and public infor-mation officers on continuity of operations and com-munity resilience planning. By acknowledging ourvarious interests and roles associated with this study,we seek to be transparent in our research goals be-cause “qualitative inquiry is uniquely personal andinvolved activity.”(35)

With any research inquiry, the research ques-tion(s) should guide the methodological choice.(36)

This study is situated within the qualitative paradigmin order to gain an understanding of the lived ex-periences of librarians and library patrons followingdisasters to identify the opportunities and challengesfor public libraries to enhance community resilience.Our goal is to provide “a rich understanding of thesocial context; and . . . serve the purpose of promot-ing social change.”(36) By explaining these opportu-nities and challenges in the language of emergencymanagement and community resilience researchersand practitioners, we hope to better integrate pub-lic libraries into community emergency planning, re-sponse, and recovery efforts.

3.3. Data Collection

Face-to-face and telephone interviews were con-ducted with 22 librarians from 12 different com-munity libraries across northern Alabama (n = 3),southwest Missouri (n = 3), southern Indiana (n =2), and Kentucky (n = 14). Five library patrons intwo communities, as well as a local emergency man-ager from one community and a state library con-sultant, were also interviewed. All participants (n =29) were identified based on whether their commu-nity suffered structural damage from a tornado. Wefirst contacted the state library directors in Alabama,Missouri, Indiana, and Kentucky and requested con-tact information and recommendations for librariesthat were affected by tornados in the last two years.We then called to schedule interviews with the li-brary directors in each of the communities and asked

if there were additional librarians and communitymembers who would be knowledgeable about theservices provided during the disasters. We did notcontact community members directly but asked thelibrary directors to invite community members to thelibrary on the scheduled interview day.

Telephone interviews (n = 7) were first con-ducted with participants in communities where atornado had occurred at least one year prior to pi-lot questions and gain hindsight perspectives. Face-to-face interviews (n = 22) were then conducted withparticipants who had experienced a tornado in thelast three months to allow for interview adjustmentbased on facial cues of distress. Interviews were con-ducted until no additional libraries or communitymembers were recommended for interviews. Lindlofsuggests that qualitative research is purposeful “be-cause its practitioners strive to locate themselves atthe sites of specific communicative performances andpractices” (p. 126).(35) In some libraries, we inter-viewed individuals one-on-one throughout the work-day. In other libraries, the staff sat down with us asa group before the library opened to the public. Weallowed the participants to determine the interviewformat based on their staffing schedule and prefer-ences.

All interviews were audio recorded and lastedbetween 20 minutes for an individual interview and90 minutes for a group interview (two or three staffmembers). Interviews began with broad questionsabout the event followed by more specific questionsrelated to the role of the library in disaster recovery(see the Appendix). These questions allowed partici-pants to describe the event and how prepared eachlibrary was, what services each library offered re-lated to the event, how and why the libraries felt theycontributed successfully to the community recovery,and how other libraries can best prepare for a ma-jor disaster. As the number of interviews conductedincreased, more specific questions were used to testprevious findings (e.g., Did you increase collectionson certain topics such as home improvement or cop-ing with disasters?). Participants signed a consentform allowing the audio recording and analysis oftheir comments. Researchers received approval fromtheir Internal Review Board to conduct the study.

3.4. Data Analysis

Patton argues that the qualitative researcher canadopt both inductive and deductive processes.(37) Forthe first level of analysis, notes were taken during


the interviews to create a schema based on the re-searchers’ prior knowledge regarding services of-fered in previous studies on public libraries anddisasters.(38) For example, sections of the notes weremarked with an asterisk when librarians mentionedhelping patrons fill out FEMA forms and with aplus sign when they described posting informationfor Red Cross shelters. Thus, some data reduc-tion occurred through deductive analysis during datacollection.

Following each interview, summaries were writ-ten describing each interview. Data were inductivelyanalyzed to identify unique comments and descrip-tions of services not previously identified or con-sidered in the hurricane studies. Notes and sum-maries were then typed whereas recordings werereplayed to ensure accuracy of the notes and directquotations from participants. Each interview tran-script with notes and summary was then color codedso that the researchers could easily identify the origi-nal source of a comment or description after the datahad been categorized through the second level ofanalysis.

The second level of analysis started with theory-driven deductive analysis.(39) Again, the purposeof this study was to identify and describe theservices and activities of public libraries relatedto disaster recovery and consider the opportuni-ties and challenges for public libraries to enhancecommunity resilience. Thus, Coffey and Atkinson’sclustering for organization was used to concep-tually organize the data by the underlying con-struct of the adaptive capacities of communityresilience.(39,40) There is always an ethical concern indeductive research using qualitative or quantitativemethods that data are forced into categories to sup-port the theoretical construct rather than allowingthe data to speak for themselves.(41) However, pre-vious research has already identified the array of ser-vices offered by libraries and the roles libraries canplay in disaster recovery, and little progress has beenmade to integrate these services and roles into com-munity preparedness and response.(5,7,9,11,16) Thus, to“serve the purpose of promoting social change,” theresults of this study are described in the terms of com-munity resilience to better integrate public librariesinto community emergency planning, response, andrecovery efforts.(36) The data were organized intoclusters relating to the adaptive capacities of com-munity resilience utilizing the constant comparativecoding method in that the researchers continuallywent back to the data to identify additional com-

ments and descriptions that fit the adaptive capacitiesof community resilience.(35,42) Comments that did notfit into a category of adaptive capacities, such as thosethat focused on library recovery instead of commu-nity recovery, were categorized as other and set asidefor analysis in a future study. Once categorized, perreviewer suggestion, the data were then inductivelyanalyzed to identify opportunities and challenges inenhancing those capacities.

4. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

The communities impacted by tornados in thisstudy all had differing city structures, populations,number of lives lost, and levels of destruction caused.Ten of the libraries survived the storms unscathed,one library lost its roof, and another was later con-demned because the tornado moved the building offits foundation. In one community, 10 of the 40 li-brarians on staff lost their homes. In another, threemonths after the storm, when we conducted inter-views, church groups were still providing daily mealsfor the community. Although every public library’sstory was unique, many of the key roles conductedby public libraries in response to tornadic events cor-responded with those from prior studies of public li-braries’ responses to hurricanes. To demonstrate theopportunities and challenges for public libraries toenhance community resilience, the services and activ-ities of the libraries are described and analyzed hereaccording to the adaptive capacities of communityresilience (Table II).

4.1. Economic Development

The primary opportunity for enhancing commu-nity resilience identified in this study was that pub-lic libraries provided access to technology resources.Across the communities, the library directors re-ported they had an increase in the number of pa-trons using computers to look up information anduse e-government websites, including downloadingand completing FEMA and insurance forms, track-ing down lost tax information, filing for unemploy-ment if their employer’s business was destroyed, andcontacting friends and family through email and so-cial media. “People didn’t have Internet at home,”said one library patron. “Cell phones weren’t goodand home phones were down, so Internet was theonly way to connect . . . and everything is free.” Onelibrary procured additional laptops from the state li-brary, another library installed wireless Internet the

728 Veil and Bishop

Table II. Opportunities and Challenges of Libraries for Enhancing Adaptive Capacities

Economic development Opportunities: Access to technology resources and assistance; office space for community members;office space for government agencies and organizations.

Challenge: Committing public space for private use without reimbursement plans in place.Social capital Opportunities: Centralized meeting space and transfer hub; community space for normalcy and stability

(the community living room).Challenge: Temptation to overcommit library capacity and staff capability beyond the library mission.

Information andcommunication

Opportunities: Redundant communication channel; central information source; repository for personalstories and experiences.

Community competence Opportunities: Adaptation of services offered based on community needs.Challenges: Lack of long-term disaster plans; lack of coordination with government officials.

week after the storm, and several had volunteersfrom sister libraries show up to help. In some cases,patrons were new to technology and first had to betaught how to use the computer, set up an email ac-count, and navigate the Internet to find the FEMAforms. This finding aligns with the previous researchidentifying libraries as a hub for connectivity follow-ing a disaster.(11) Also, as noted, individuals fromlower socioeconomic backgrounds are not only morelikely to live in areas prone to hazards, but also lesslikely to have the financial resources to rebuild andrecover from a disaster, which means they are alsomore likely to need access to technology resources toapply for assistance.(28)

Although access to public libraries is always free,typically fines are issued when items are lost and pa-trons must pay a small fee to use the copy and/orfax machine. However, not one of the libraries is-sued fines for books lost in the storms, and all of thelibraries waved the fees for the copying and faxingof FEMA and insurance documents. As one librarydirector said, “I think it’s just common decency.Do what the human thing is. We are not worryingabout books, fines, charges . . . In the grand schemeof things, they aren’t worth anything . . . it’s nothingthat can’t be replaced.” Because many communitymembers were without power for several days oreven weeks after the storm, the libraries also set uppower strips for people to charge cell phones andlaptops. Free copies and cell phone charging mayseem like minor services, but when emotions arerunning high following a disaster this can provide asense of relief and comfort. Small gestures, like be-ing able to make free copies of receipts for home im-provement expenses, recognize the hardships facingthose who may have limited resources for disasterrecovery. An opportunity identified is that librariesserved as a free home office for those affected by thestorms.

In several communities, FEMA workers used thelibraries as their office as well until the regional of-fices could clear space. One librarian stated: “Wehad a lot of FEMA workers come here to completetheir reports – printing, faxing, emailing things . . . wedidn’t have the higher ups, but we had the FEMAworkers with their feet on the road who were able todiscover ‘oh yea, the public library.’” In one library,FEMA workers continued to meet one-on-one withindividuals in the library conference room even afterthe FEMA office was up and running because the li-brary was more familiar than the makeshift FEMAoffice. Another library, in a community where theentire downtown area was destroyed, housed boththe city unemployment office and a local bank inits conference rooms for months after the tornado.Thus, the library became a home office for govern-ment and for-profit organizations as well. Althoughnot described as a challenge by the participants,our previous experience with municipalities seekingreimbursement for extended resources suggests achallenge could be not outlining expectations for re-imbursement before an organization moves into thelibrary. However, in the interviews, the sentimentwas simply that “space was available to everyone.”

4.2. Social Capital

Throughout the interviews, individuals com-mented on how much the local community cametogether. One librarian said that they didn’t needto plan and train for how to respond in a disas-ter: “We’re in the Ozarks where it’s neighbor help-ing neighbor. You don’t need to train for that. Youjust help where you can.” Another commented: “Ina community your worst neighbor becomes yourbest friend before FEMA can respond.” Those in-terviewed suggested that the library played a centralrole in bringing the community together by becoming


the place to meet and connect, even staying open latebecause “people were coming by looking for peo-ple.” One librarian said: “We were operating almostas an old switch board, people called the library to getphone numbers.” Individuals also used the library asa transfer hub and lost and found center for every-thing from documents to lost pets. “People droppedthings off for people who could pick them up later.”When asked why the library was willing to take onthis role, the library director simply said: “That’s thenature of librarians anyway – that’s our whole pur-pose in life – to help people.” An opportunity iden-tified is that libraries can enhance social capital byserving as a centralized meeting place to bring com-munity members together.

Most poignant in the interviews with patrons wasthat the libraries provided a place that felt “nor-mal,” like a living room in the midst of the chaos andcleanup outside. One patron whose library did nothave a back-up generator to remain open the firstweek after the storm said, “the library was like ournormal, and when it wasn’t open we couldn’t be nor-mal. It sounds silly, it’s just some books and somepeople, but it seemed like it was everything.” A pa-tron from another library whose home was destroyedwith her and her children still in it brought her sonsin several times a week following the storm. She com-mented: “Maybe the library was not critical for us –providing food, clothing, shelter. But it was comfort– familiarity, a luxury. My one son is still in therapy.Comfort can be critical. . . . Our house was gone andit’s the only place that felt like home.” At least to thepatrons interviewed, an opportunity identified wasthat the library clearly fostered attachment to place.A librarian from one of the libraries that had to closebecause of structural damage said the city made a re-ally big deal about the library reopening. She said, “itwas like the library opening again was a sign that thecommunity was recovering.”

The libraries also served as a drop-off and pick-up site for donated food, water, tarps, and supplies,delivered supplies for Red Cross using the libraryvans, stationed portable toilets for volunteers in theiroverflow parking lots, and, as noted, housed entirebusinesses. Several libraries considered serving asFEMA centers or community shelters but quickly re-alized the building was not equipped to serve in thatcapacity. As one librarian said: “The role of librariesis to supplement what FEMA does – not attempt tobecome a FEMA center – but rather to help in theways libraries are able to help.” Noting the lack ofshowers and a full kitchen, a library director stated

simply: “It is not the function of the libraries to housepeople.” A challenge identified in this study was thatlibraries located in communities with fewer economicresources and redundancies may feel the need to domore than perhaps they should or can to supportthe community. Having a plan in place could assistlibraries in better assessing what activities they cantake on so as not to overwhelm library capacity andstaff capability.

4.3. Information and Communication

Information and communication include respon-sible media, skills, and infrastructure, trusted sourcesof information, and communal narratives. Whilethose not directly affected by the disasters watchedthe tragedies unfold in Tuscaloosa, Joplin, Hen-ryville, West Liberty, and other communities on tele-vision, very little was mentioned about the media inour interviews with the librarians and patrons. Com-ments were made that the national media were ev-erywhere one day and gone the next, but the roleof the media in providing information was notice-ably absent. This is primarily because power was outfor days and weeks in some communities. Telephonelines and cell phone towers were also operating at alimited capacity. Community members went to the li-brary to seek out information because there was noother way to get information. As Former FEMA Di-rector Paulison said, “where else are they going togo?” Libraries enhance communication and informa-tion by serving as the last redundant communicationchannel in a community. When everything else fails,unless physically destroyed, the library is still there.And, as we found in this study, when the library isdestroyed, patrons go to another library.

All of the libraries able to open their doors, eventhose without power, provided FEMA informationand deadlines and sought to locate what serviceswere being offered by aid organizations and reliefcenters to maintain a list for individuals who calledor stopped in for information. One librarian said thatto him it just made sense: “By word of mouth webecame the central location for information. Infor-mation, that’s what the library is all about.” Anotherlibrarian said: “The strongest trait here is that regard-less of the question – it deserves an answer and if wedon’t know we’ll find out. It’s our mantra . . . that wedon’t let any question go unanswered.” Thus, an op-portunity identified was that libraries are a central in-formation source.

730 Veil and Bishop

Patrons were also welcomed to tell their storiesof the disaster. One librarian said: “Everybody has astory, and people needed to be able to tell their sto-ries. It might just be to the circulation clerk but theyneed to be able to express what went on.” Anotherstated: “The community as a whole was shocked,they just needed someone to listen to them.” An op-portunity identified was that the library served as thecommunity’s living room, beyond work and home,where patrons could share their personal experiencesof the storms. Some libraries used the story time cen-ters to have the children write their stories of thestorms. Other libraries worked with the local news-paper to organize and bind the images and newsstories from the tornado coverage. By capturing thecommunal narrative of the disaster, libraries are ableto support community healing and emotional recov-ery and further engender a sense of community.

4.4. Community Competence

In the midst of a recession, assisting with e-government forms has become as much a part ofa librarian’s job as hunting down a resource to an-swer a research question.(5) Libraries also tradition-ally serve as open meeting places for the communityand will often work with organizations to promotecommunity events. Thus, many of the services andactivities identified thus far are simply extensions ofthe services always offered by libraries. However, thefact that the libraries were flexible and adjusted tothe community needs demonstrates community com-petence. As library director stated: “We just did thesame things we always do, but we did more and weremore accommodating to the circumstances.”

Although all of the libraries in this study had aplan that detailed the steps to take to ensure the im-mediate safety of librarians and library users in a tor-nado, only two of the libraries had a plan in place forhow they would assist the community after the storm.In one library system, experience prompted the cre-ation of a more in-depth disaster plan. Five of the sys-tem’s seven facilities experienced a tornado withinthe previous decade. These experiences motivatedthe system to create a plan that included processesfor drying out and salvaging resources as well as howto request additional computers and volunteers fromstate and sister libraries. The other library with aplan that included community response efforts hadalso established partnerships with other communitygroups to coordinate disaster recovery efforts. Thedirector of that library attended quarterly meetings

of a countywide task force that discussed many differ-ent issues, including disaster planning. However, thiswas the only library that coordinated with govern-ment officials. In contrast, one library director saidshe had trouble getting the word out that the libraryhad services to offer because the city’s public infor-mation officer did not read her email until weeks af-ter the storm. The library director stated: “We wereready for them, but they just didn’t know to come tothe library.” In another community, after interview-ing two librarians and two patrons who had docu-mented all the additional services the library offeredand how the library worked with FEMA to get indi-viduals aid, we interviewed the city emergency man-ager who had no idea the library had done anythingto help with the disaster. He then stated: “It’s nottheir job to help with the response, but they couldplay a secondary role I guess.” Another challengeidentified is that most of the libraries lacked coor-dination with local emergency managers and othergovernment officials.

5. DISCUSSION

Researchers have called on libraries to “lever-age their position as a primary source of trust-worthy information” and “become active par-ticipants in community emergency planning andresponse activities.”(11) The results of this study in-dicate there are several opportunities for libraries toenhance community resilience by offering technol-ogy resources and assistance; providing office, meet-ing, and community living room space; serving as thelast redundant communication channel and a repos-itory for community information and disaster narra-tives; and adapting or expanding services already of-fered to meet the changing needs of the community.However, libraries also face challenges in enhanc-ing community resilience, including the temptation toovercommit library capacity and staff capability be-yond the library mission and a lack of long-term dis-aster plans and collaboration with emergency man-agers and government officials.

Libraries are beginning to understand the impor-tance of disaster planning. When asked, the librari-ans in this study all said they had gone back throughtheir disaster plan since the tornado and made up-dates. One library now has a memo of understand-ing with both its electric and cable companies thatafter city government, libraries are the next priorityfor reestablishing connection. In some states, includ-ing Alabama after the 2011 storms, libraries are now


required to develop a disaster plan in order to receivestate aid. While the required plans focus primarilyon how to manage facilities, it is a much-needed firststep. We suggest the next step is to develop a detailedcommunity response plan. Considering the similari-ties between the services offered in this study and theservices offered in previous studies, libraries shouldbe able to outline what they will and won’t do tosupport disaster recovery well before disaster strikes.Having a plan in place will allow for a less haphazardresponse and a smoother delivery of needed services.Having a plan will also address the first challenge bymaking sure libraries do not extend library capacityand staff capability beyond the library mission.

To address the challenge of a lack of collabora-tion with emergency managers and government of-ficials, researchers have already urged libraries toreach out to community services organizations andgovernment offices to form partnerships with themfor the benefit of the community.(43) FEMA hasdirected emergency managers to engage public li-braries as part of the whole community approachto emergency management, and several examples ofsuccessful collaborations do exist.(5,10) But despitebeing listed as one of FEMA’s essential communityorganizations, there is currently no standard role forpublic libraries in disaster preparation, response, andrecovery.

We suggest one of the reasons why libraries donot have an official role is because emergency man-agers are not using the library services. As found inthis study, emergency managers may not see the ef-forts extended by public libraries to assist in recov-ery. If library directors want a seat at the table whencommunity disaster response and recovery plans arebeing outlined, they need more than a policy changesaying they are essential. In some communities, li-brary directors may be able to get an invitation toplanning meetings by simply calling the emergencymanager, who may respond in the same manner asthe FEMA workers, “oh yea, the public library.” Inother communities, libraries may need to demon-strate how they can serve as a resource for emer-gency managers and not just community members toremain on the radar.

Based on one of the opportunities identified inthis study, we suggest libraries can firmly insert them-selves in the community resource network and em-brace the role of government partner identified byFeatherstone et al. by adapting a service they al-ready offer.(16) A common thread throughout theinterviews was that people came to the library to

share their story of the disaster. In some communi-ties, these stories were collected and archived by thelibraries along with the news coverage of the storms.In other communities, the librarians simply listened.But each of these stories contributed to the commu-nal narrative of the disaster. Communal narrativesgive shared experiences meaning and purpose. Theydefine a group’s identity and shape how it adapts toand recovers from adversity.(27) A shared narrativecan enhance sense of community and promote com-munity recovery as a basis for personal recovery.

Research on crisis renewal has already identifiedthe importance of documenting and memorializingdisasters for community healing and recovery, butcommunal narratives can also “reinforce social bondsand . . . establish norms of helping, cooperation,and reciprocity.”(18,44) Thus, narratives can assist inboth community recovery and planning for futureevents if communities use their memory and experi-ence to learn, innovate, and reorganize resources.(21)

The National Academies suggest that “[w]hen socialmemory is lost, communities can forget how they sur-vived previous disasters, individuals and institutionsmay not retain skills needed for response and re-covery, and policymakers may make decisions with-out regard for the hazards that exist” (p. 113).(18)

Libraries can take advantage of opportunities theyalready have and meet the challenges they currentlyface in enhancing community resilience by collect-ing, organizing, archiving, and sharing disaster sto-ries, media coverage, government reports, and otherinformation on the disaster.

By serving as a repository for this information,libraries are acting firmly within their mission whilecommitting the experience to social memory. As onelibrarian said: “Information, that’s what the libraryis all about.” Just as one library in this study didwith children, libraries can invite community mem-bers to use the public computers to record theirstories of the disaster. These stories can be com-piled with other disaster information and providedto emergency managers and other officials to helpthem identify lessons learned and assist with eval-uating the community response and recovery. Ineffect, to get a seat at the table in emergency plan-ning, response, and recovery, libraries should firstinvite emergency managers and government offi-cials to their tables. We suggest libraries are al-ready enhancing community resilience through theservices they are currently offering. However, by ex-panding their service of collecting communal nar-ratives and disaster information and sharing this

732 Veil and Bishop

information with emergency managers and officials,libraries can truly “leverage their position as a pri-mary source of trustworthy information” and “be-come active participants in community emergencyplanning and response activities.”(11)

5.1. Future Research

In addition to the implications for library andemergency management practice identified, thisstudy also raises important questions about the ex-panding roles of libraries. The traditional image ofthe library as the quiet place to check out and reada book is now just a tiny fraction of what the li-brary is today. This research demonstrates what animportant part of the community safety net librarieshave become. For example, to cut government costs,aid applications have moved almost entirely online.So now, those least likely to have high-speed Inter-net access must rely on other community services,like the public library, to apply for assistance. Fu-ture research could examine the robustness of thepublic library system as a resource in relation to theeconomic vulnerabilities identified to quantitativelymeasure the effect of libraries in enhancing commu-nity resilience.

This study also demonstrates how public librariesserve as a last redundant resource for communica-tion and information. When all other communicationchannels fail, where do you turn? Communicationpractitioners and researchers alike devote significantresources to chasing the latest technology. However,not everyone has access to the same communicationchannels, and not everyone trusts the same commu-nication channels.(45) Although the best practices inrisk and crisis communication have recently been re-vised to add consideration of cultural differences andthe channels that reach segmented publics, furtherresearch is needed to explore how to communicatewhen both traditional media and new media channelsare not functional.(46–48) After all, the most powerfultechnology is worthless without power, and power isalmost always one of the first casualties of a majordisaster. Crisis communication researchers need toincorporate redundant communication channels likepublic libraries in future research.

Finally, this study provides a foundation for in-corporating community resilience theory into riskand crisis research. Most of the research on com-munity resilience has been conducted in geography,community psychology, and environmental sciencedisciplines. Similarities between the role of commu-

nal narratives in enhancing community resilience andcrisis renewal theory were identified in this study.Future research, perhaps examining a library systemthat embraces the suggestions of this study, could digdeeper into whether community resilience influencescrisis renewal and crisis renewal influences commu-nity resilience. Also, considering chaos theory, as ini-tial conditions, could the robustness, redundancy, ra-pidity, and resourcefulness of community resiliencecapacities lead to a predictable pattern to commu-nity self-organization following a crisis?(22,27,49) Fur-ther examination of community resilience theory incrisis research could lead to the development of amore holistic approach to crisis research that includesa broader network of resources.

As a FEMA-designated essential community or-ganization, public libraries should be included inemergency planning, response, and recovery efforts.This study sought to bridge a gap between pub-lic library and emergency management policy ver-sus practice by identifying the opportunities andchallenges of public libraries to enhance commu-nity resilience. The recent report of the NationalAcademies describing disaster resilience as a na-tional imperative indicates that policies and direc-tives that integrate resource robustness and adap-tive capacities into emergency planning may soonfollow.(18) Thus, this study lays the groundwork forhow public libraries can insert themselves in the com-munity resource network and embrace the role of agovernment partner in community resilience.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research was funded by a grant from theUniversity of Colorado Natural Hazards Centerthrough its Quick Response Grant Program, which isfunded by National Science Foundation Grant num-ber CMMI1030670.

APPENDIX: INTERVIEW GUIDE

(1) Describe your experience related to tornadopreparation. We are particularly interested inthe role of you and your library (the plans,services, and activities in which you and yourlibrary were engaged).

(2) Describe your experience related to tornadorecovery. We are particularly interested inthe role of you and your library (the plans,services, and activities in which you and yourlibrary were engaged).


(3) Please summarize your experience into keyroles (e.g., plans, services offered to the pub-lic, activities).

(4) What resources or training were needed foryou to perform those key roles?

(5) Which government and/or private organiza-tions assisted in your key roles?

(6) What are the most vital factors that enabledyour library to recover from the disaster?

(7) What role did your library play in enabling thecommunity to recover from the disaster?

(8) What would you want other libraries to knowto prepare for other disasters? (For example,what worked well/what are you most proudof? What did not go well/what would youchange?)

REFERENCES

1. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). FEMARecovery Policy, 2010. Available at: http://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/pa/9253 3.pdf, Accessed September 25,2013.

2. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). A WholeCommunity Approach to Emergency Management: Princi-ples, Themes, and Pathways for Action, 2011. Available at:http://www.fema.gov/whole-community, Accessed September25, 2013.

3. IMLS (Institute of Museum and Library Services). PublicLibrary Data Files, 2011. Available at: http://www.imls.gov/research/pls data files.aspx, Accessed September 25, 2013.

4. Donnelly FP. The geographic distribution of United Statespublic libraries: An analysis of locations and service ar-eas. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 2013;45(4):1–20.

5. Bertot JC, McDermott A, Lincoln R, Real B, Peterson K.Public Library Funding and Technology Access Survey: Sur-vey Findings and Report. College Park, MD: Information Pol-icy and Access Center, University of Maryland College Park,2011–2012.

6. Koontz CM. A history of location of U.S. public librarieswithin community place and space: Evolving implications forthe library’s mission of equitable service. Public Library Quar-terly, 2007; 26(1/2):75–100.

7. McClure CR, Ryan J, Mandel LH, Brobst J, Hinnant CC,Andrade J, Snead JT. Hurricane preparedness and responsefor Florida public libraries: Best practices and strategies.Florida Libraries, 2009; 52(1):4–7.

8. National Telecommunications and Information Adminis-tration (NTIA). Exploring the Digital Nation: Computerand Internet Use at Home. NTIA, 2011. Available at:http://www.ntia.doc.gov/report/2011/exploring-digital-nation-computer-and-internet-use-home.

9. Mandel LH, Bishop BW, McClure CR, Bertot JC, JaegerPT. Broadband for public libraries: Importance, issues, andresearch needs. Government Information Quarterly, 2010;27(3):280–291.

10. Bishop BW, McClure CR, Mandel LH. E-government serviceroles for public libraries. Public Libraries, 2011; 50(3):32–37.

11. Zach L. What do I do in an emergency? The role of public li-braries in providing information during times of crisis. Scienceand Technology Libraries, 2011; 30(4):404–413.

12. Jaeger PT, Langa LA, McClure CR, Bertot JC. The 2004and 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes: Evolving roles and lessons

learned for public libraries in disaster preparedness and com-munity services. Public Library Quarterly, 2006; 25(3–4):199–214.

13. Paulison David (FEMA). Conversation with Shari Veil(Department of Communications, University of Kentucky,Lexington, KY). March 17, 2011.

14. Skinner RE. “Nor any drop to drink”: New Orleans libraries inthe aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Public Library Quarterly,2008; 25(3–4):179–187.

15. Bayliss S. Libraries respond to Hurricane Sandy, offeringrefuge, WiFi, and services to need communities. SchoolLibrary Journal, 2012. [Available at: http://www.slj.com/2012/11/featured/libraries-respond-to-hurricane-sandy-offering-refuge-wifi-and-services-to-needy-communities/.]

16. Featherstone RM, Lyon BJ, Ruffin AB. Library roles in disas-ter response: An oral history project by the National Libraryof Medicine. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 2008;96(4):343–350.

17. Bishop BW, Veil SR. Public libraries as post crisis informationhubs. Public Libraries Quarterly, 2013; 32(1):33–34.

18. National Academies, The. Disaster Resilience: A Na-tional Imperative. Washington, DC: National AcademiesPress, 2012. [Available at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record id=13457.]

19. Colten CE, Kates RW, Laska SB. Three years after Kat-rina: Lessons for community resilience. Environment, 2008;50(5):36–47.

20. Wyche KF, Pfefferbaum RL, Pfefferbaum B, Norris FH,Wisnieski D, Younger H. Exploring community resiliencein workforce communities of first responders serving Kat-rina survivors. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 2011;81(1):18–30.

21. Longstaff PH, Armstrong NJ, Perrin K, Parker WM, HidekMA. Building resilient communities: A preliminary frame-work for assessment. Homeland Security Affairs, 2010; 6(3):1–23.

22. Bruneau M, Chang S, Eguchi RT, Lee GC, O’Rourke TD,Reinhorn AM, Shinozuka M, Tierney K, Wallace W, vonWinterfeldt D. A framework to quantitatively assess andenhance the seismic resilience of communities. EarthquakeSprectra, 2003; 19(4):733–752.

23. CDC. Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication: 2012 Edi-tion. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Preven-tion, 2012.

24. Sledge M. Hurricane Sandy leaves 1.3 million still withoutpower as nor’easter approaches. Huffington Post, Novem-ber 5, 2012. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/05/hurricane-sandy-power-outages n 2077407.html.

25. Llanos M. Nor’easter snow layers Sandy destruction: Moreevacuations, more power outages. NBC News, November 7,2012. Available at: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/ news/2012/11/07/14987947-noreaster-snow-layers-sandy-destruction-more-evacuations-more-power-outages?lite.

26. Fitzgerald B. Where to find Internet, phone service in NewYork City after Hurricane Sandy. Huffington Post, November1, 2012. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/Internet-service-new-york-hurricane-sandy n 2057934.html.

27. Norris FH, Stevens SP, Pfefferbaum B, Wyche KF, Pf-efferbaum RL. Community resilience as metaphor, the-ory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness.American Journal of Community Psychology, 2008; 41:127–150.

28. Cutter SL, Barnes L, Berry M, Burton C, Evans E, Tate E,Webb, J. A place-based model for understanding communityresilience to natural disasters. Global Environmental Change,2008; 18:598–606.

29. Frisby BN, Veil SR, Sellnow TL. Instruction in health-relatedcrises: Essential information for self-protection. Health Com-munication, 2013:1–8. DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2012.755604.

734 Veil and Bishop

30. Phillips R. Tornado survivors rebuild, a year later. CNN,April 27, 2012. Available from http://articles.cnn.com/2012–04–27/us/us tuscaloosa-tornado-anniversary 1 mayor-walt-maddox-tornado-survivors-tornado-victims? s=PM:US.

31. NOAA. Joplin tornado offers important lessons for disasterpreparedness. NOAA, September 20, 2011. Available at:http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110920 joplin.html.

32. Young L. Joplin tornado: One year later. Boston.com,May 23, 2011. Available at: http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2012/05/joplin tornado one year later.html.

33. Dillingham S. Kentucky tornado cut 95-mile trench,weather service says. CNN, March 7, 2012. Availableat: http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/07/us/weather-long-track-tornadoes/index.html?iref=allsearch.

34. Lykkeslet E, Gjengedal E. Methodological problems asso-ciated with practice-close research. Qualitative Health Re-search, 2007; 17:699–704.

35. Lindlof TR, Taylor BC. Qualitative Communication ResearchMethods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995.

36. Frey L, Botan C, Kreps G. Investigating Communication.Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 2001.

37. Patton MQ. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods,2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991.

38. Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA:Sage, 1985.

39. Boyatzis RE. Transforming Qualitative Information: The-matic Analysis and Code Development. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage, 1998.

40. Coffey A, Atkinson P. Making Sense of QualitativeData: Complementary Research Strategies. London: Sage,1996.

41. Hyde KF. Recognizing deductive processes in qualita-tive research. Qualitative Market Research, 2000; 3(2):82–89.

42. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The Discovery of Grounded Theory.Chicago, IL: Aldine, 1967.

43. Cox RS, Perry KM. Like a fish out of water: Reconsideringdisaster recovery and the role of place and social capital incommunity disaster resilience. American Journal of Commu-nity Psychology, 2011; 48(3–4):395–411.

44. Veil SR, Sellnow TL, Heald M. Memorializing crisis: The Ok-lahoma National Memorial as renewal discourse. Journal ofApplied Communication Research, 2011; 39(2):164–183.

45. Lachlan KA, Burke J, Spence PR, Griffin D. Risk perceptions,race, and Hurricane Katrina. Howard Journal of Communica-tions, 2009; 20:295–309.

46. Seeger MW. Best practices in crisis communication: An expertpanel process. Journal of Applied Communication Research,2006; 34(3):232–244.

47. Sellnow TL, Vidoloff KG. Getting communication right. FoodTechnology, 2009; 63(9):40–45.

48. Veil SR, Buehner T, Palenchar M. A work in-progress litera-ture review: Incorporating social media in risk and crisis com-munication. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management,2011; 19(2):110–122.

49. Murphy P. Chaos theory as a model for managing issues andcrises. Public Relations Review, 1996; 22:95–113.

opportunities and challenges for public libraries to enhance community resilience

Documents