"Poor countries are more at risk from natural hazards than rich countries" How far do you agree with this statement?

Authors Avatar

“Poor countries are more at risk from natural hazards than rich countries" How far do you agree with this statement?

        

Natural hazards occur worldwide and have different negative impacts on many people, but always to different degrees and ways. Impacts can be classified into social, economic and environmental categories. Impacts can therefore vary greatly both spatially and temporally and deciding whether some impacts are more of a problem than others is difficult precisely because of this variation. However, the perception of the extent of the impacts is often influenced by the wealth of an area; LEDCs have little capital to spend on the technology to help predict and prepare for natural hazards that is often more readily available in MEDCs, generally creating a more vulnerable population in the former. This still does not prevent hazards from occurring and cannot influence the magnitude, frequency or nature of the event; three factors which are crucial in causing and affecting the extent of the impacts.

The level of development in an area is an important factor that affects the impacts of natural hazards. Typically, LEDCs are seen to experience hazards with impacts considered worse than those in many MEDCs, even from the same hazard type. This is partly due to the fact that LEDCs often do not have the capital to invest in 'up-to-date' prediction and monitoring technology. They may even have a poor education system because of restricted capital, meaning that there are very few specialists in the country with the knowledge of hazards needed to prepare for them. Even in countries such as Mozambique that has modern and hi-tech meteorology prediction equipment, communication is often a problem. Poor infrastructure means that information about impending hazards does not always reach those who are to be affected, leaving little time to prepare or evacuate. This increases the vulnerability of the population and therefore the risk of problematic impacts. This occurred in the Mozambique floods in February 2000. Whilst there is an annual flood, and some forecasters knew there was to be a larger than usual flood, no one had experience of an event of such magnitude. Most of the local population living in remote rural areas simply did not have access to information and were caught unprepared, leaving 500 people dead and one million homeless. This is direct contrast to the floods in Britain in the winter of 2000 when homes and businesses at risk were notified and evacuated by local authorities, minimising the impact on human life. It was mostly property that was damaged and being an MEDC, it is easier to recover.

Join now!

Long-term and short-term impacts also have to be taken into consideration and can also be affected by the level of development. Short-term impacts are the direct impacts caused by the event such as flooding, loss of life, damage to buildings or infrastructure. Long-term impacts are more indirect and are related to factors such as disease, future farming prospects or rebuilding damaged areas. Long-term effects are often more devastating because of the wide ranging impacts and their lasting effects. MEDCs often have the capital to recover quickly and minimise the long-term effects. LEDCs can find this more difficult. Disease is a ...

This is a preview of the whole essay