|
 Do natural hazards have to be natural
disasters? There is now a growing realisation worldwide, that the
vulnerability of many people in the developing world could be
reduced if more effort and resources were spent on risk-reduction
strategies rather than purely responding to the aftermath of
disasters.
Increasingly, aid agencies like the Red Cross are moving to
build in risk-reduction, rather than being purely reactive in the
aftermath of disasters.
It might appear to be an extreme view, but when a natural event
creates a disaster, many now feel there has been a failure in
political preparation because by definition, the State cannot cope
with the aftermath and this has political consequences.
Researchers at King's College London have been studying natural
disasters dating from 1899, when a major hurricane hit Puerto Rico,
through to the Asian tsunami; in all they have examined over 25
major events.
Their initial findings show that in the wake of natural
disasters, radical political changes can occur. In most cases a
power vacuum opens up and different agents can fill it, creating
the conditions for potential political change.
The impact of Hurricane Katrina and the authorities' inability
to respond swiftly - in the world's richest country - serves to
emphasise the vulnerability of people in the developing
world.
The research indicates that planning for natural hazards should
be a major part of everyday development work, both at a local and a
national level, in order to reduce the vulnerability of poorer
communities worldwide.
Images:
- Tsunami aftermath
- Relief work
- Hurricane Katrina
- Floods and stranded people
Interviewees:
- Dr Mark Pelling, Reader in Human Geography Dept of Geography,
King’s College London
- Professor Michael Redclift, Dept of Geography, King’s
College London
- Anthony Spalton, International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies
|
