The extent to which volcanic processes represent hazards depends on where and when they occur.

One of the factors that does significantly evidence that due to volcanic eruption is when it occurs will surely have an impact on the aftermath. Volcanoes on a constructive plate margin frequency of eruption usually regular and can be continuous whilst on a destructive plate margin it’s from time to time, long dormant of periods. When the volcanic eruption occurs is a factor that leads to how big the hazard from the impact of the volcano can be for example if a volcano takes place early in the morning, people isn’t really conscious and act fast to prevent themselves. This can’t be prevented as people wouldn’t know when exactly a volcano will take place, the exact time. The time of the eruption is an issue for example; Mount Pinatubo of the Philippines is a prime example of this, along with Mount St. Helens, located in Washington, USA. Volcanoes are natural events which cannot be prevented; the timing is a large factor in this. For example in Mountain Pinatubo, Philippines erupted at 1:42 PM, when many people were densely populated on the Island of Luzon which is 55 miles of North West of Manila. Population density is another factor which can contribute to how volcanic activity will have different impact on where and when they occur.

In most LEDC countries such as Mount Merapi, located on the border between Central Java and Yogyakarta city, Indonesia and Soufriere Hills volcano on the southern part of the island of Montserrat in the Caribbean people live near volcanoes. This is because Active and dormant volcanoes have the same mineralisation, so like extinct volcanoes; they are rich sources of minerals, Land ownership and Heritage burial site and lastly fertile soil (crop plantations for food supply to support their own family living). Also, in LEDC people are highly reliant on agriculture as this supports their own family living, therefore when volcanic activity takes place most of the people are reluctant to move away. This can be seen in Mount Merapi eruption, on 25th October 2010, the Indonesian government raised the alert for Mount Merapi to its highest level (4) and warned villagers in threatened areas to move to safer ground. People living within a 10 kilometres (6.2 mi) zone were told to evacuate. The evacuation orders affected at least 19,000 people however the number that complied at that time remained unclear to authorities. It was poorly effective as many locals are refusing to evacuate and remain staying in the villages, as some villagers were desperate to check on crops and possessions left behind. Therefore if an area is densely populated near the volcanoes, will have a higher impact as the place are isolated, and not all people will have radio to heard if warning is broadcast to the locals to evacuate the danger zone. In contrast, in the past people don’t live close to the volcanoes,  therefore less people and less infrastructure wouldn’t be as hazardous whereas an area at the present where it is densely populated near the location of the volcano. So Location of where the volcano eruption occurs is a prime factor to how the impact of volcanoes represents hazards. But on the other hand, volcanoes are also seen as recreational area or tourism opportunities (attract for geographical study), this generates income and is therefore it may not perceive as hazardous.

Preparation before a volcano eruption in countries differing levels of development may have resulted different hazards. Mount Pinatubo of the Philippines along with Mount St. Helens, located in Washington, USA, in contrast both countries predicted that the volcanoes were going to erupt within a short period of time.  On the 31st march 1980 the USA issued a 20 mile radius around Mount St. Helens but by the time of the eruption which is on the 18th of May 1980, many people had moved back to the region. Also, on the 12th June 1991, in the Philippines as 18.6 mile radius was placed around Mount. Pinatubo, 3 days before the eruption. This saw the evacuation of 58,000 people reducing the volcano’s impact significantly. This shows that prediction technology such as seismographs exists near most tectonic margins and suggests that level of development is not an issue in the impact of volcanoes. But how countries manage preparation before the volcanic eruption occurs ay will show significantly differences of the impact and another factor that may help reduce the hazards from the volcanic processes is if people are educated about how dangerous is to stay near volcanic zones.

Clearly where and when volcanoes eruption occurs represent its hazards through volcanic processes. It is the nature of the volcano which unleashes the level of the impact and causes the real devastation. If development had not taken place near to the volcano and the exclusion zone around the volcano had included a larger area then some of the effects from a volcano eruption may have been reduced with some of the deaths avoided. Also, management of preparation before a volcanic eruption, prediction technology such as seismographs and educating people about volcano hazard also plays an important role to how the effects aftermath and devastation of how volcano eruption can be reduced.