It is logical to think that the hazards impact depends on a countries level of development. For example, a hazard in a MEDC might cause huge amounts of damage because of the costs of buildings there
Discuss the view that the impact of hazards depends on a countries level of development.
It is logical to think that the hazards impact depends on a countries level of development. For example, a hazard in a MEDC might cause huge amounts of damage because of the costs of buildings there and the amount of people located in one small area. On the other hand in a LEDC the hazard may cause more damage because the people are less developed and the buildings are less adapted to resist a hazard.
When thinking about earthquakes we have to take into consideration the infrastructure of the MEDC and LEDC in question. Certain MEDCs that experience frequent earthquakes try to make their buildings ‘earthquake-proof’. Examples include Japan, and San-Francisco in America. The Oct. 17, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake occurred in the least-populated area of the generally urban San Francisco peninsula. Construction standards in the area are relatively high, and the populace relatively prepared. However, soft, highly-saturated soils near San Francisco Bay caused some spectacular failures of large highway structures unusually far away from the event. Even though it was rush hour, many fewer cars were on the roads due to the start of the opening game of the World Series, being played locally. Thus deaths were limited to about 75. In 1995 the Kobe earthquake was one of the most devastating earthquakes ever to hit Japan; more than 5,500 were killed and over 26,000 injured. The economic loss has been estimated at about $US 200 billion. Despite Japan using the most up to date technology and numerous methods to try and predict earthquakes, they couldn’t. And despite their attempts to earthquake proof buildings the economic damage was still massive, with highways such as the Hanshin Highway collapsing, and many buildings being damaged or destroyed.