Theme 1: Geography of Natural Hazards

Social Science
1. 1. The Risk
  1. How accurate are predictions ?
    1. Some are very e.g. flood risk maps - only if looking from a physical perspective
    2. Models are only as good as the human beings who made them
  2. The Nature of consequences over time, space , scale etc.?
    1. Always going to be different making the predictions of consequences highly problematic
  3. People's perception of likelihood and consequences
    1. Fundamentally problematic , we don't perceive risk in the same way
  4. Traditional ideas about being prepared
    1. If a place rarely/has never experienced a particular hazard e.g. floods then they are less likely to be prepared
      1. Long Term recovery is dependant on importance of the area (i.e. popular trade route) and monetary strength (richer can rebuild / stay somewhere else in the mean time).
2. 2. Vulnerability and Impact
  1. Material wealth and assets, connections
    1. In USA planning and zonal laws have put many ethnic people at risk.
  2. Social and Environmental justice
    1. Hurricane Katrina (2005) highlighted disparity between ethnicities , many black people were living in New Orleans which was one of the worst hit areas.
3. 3. Perception
  1. Understanding big risks around and seeking to take action
    1. e.g. extra insurance or believe life is for living.
  2. 'Psychology of denial' Complexities of a simple idea (Wright 2012)
    1. We deny that personal change is possible either from not expecting any change to be available, or by denying that our failed attempts at change needed more understanding.
4. 4. Resilience
  1. A. Engineering
    1. Build more and more to stop the hazard
  2. B. Ecological
    1. Most common form, reflection on how nature deals via adaptations.
  3. C. Evolutionary
    1. More radical , understand why people are put in risky situations e.g. New Orleans.
      1. Politicised agenda - structural issues in society, can’t just help them to adapt.
  4. More positive term. developed by physical scientists but taken on by social scientists to see how people cope with shock
KEY THEMES
1. Idea of Risk and frame according to culture
2. Understanding Risk as a social construct
3. Determining and evaluating vulnerability
  1. Psychological state
  2. Monetary State
4. Policy and Politics of risk communication
  1. Politicians hate risk
    1. Cannot assume and protect people completely
5. Managing & Governing Risks
  1. Hard Engineering
    1. Build to prevent e.g. Flood barriers from concrete
  2. Soft Engineering
    1. Flood plain zoning, warning systems , ultimately letting nature do it's bit
    2. People may not feel as safe compared to hard solutions
6. Creating Resilience (Heavily contested idea)
  1. Can't protect 100% but asks individuals to consider their actions
Why Social Science Matters
1. 1. Natural hazards have differential impacts
2. 2. People don't act rationally
  1. We don’t calculate risk in the same way as scientists
3. 3.People and societies' resilience depends on individual and social psychology, political and economic factors
4. 4. Human societies are inherently fragile , especially our 'hyper-technical' society
5. 5. Hazards are complex
  1. Some are 'natural' whilst others are human induced: Anthropogenic climate change, resource security and new forms of disease

Next up

Theme 1: Geography of Natural Hazards

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by blondaylibra almost 10 years ago