ApplicationToEarthquakesAndVolcanoes

ApplicationToEarthquakesAndVolcanoes - Application of PAR...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–7. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Application of PAR and Access Models to Earthquake and Volcano from At Risk Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters Ben Wisner, Piers Blaikie, Terry Cannon, and Ian Davis
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Introduction Earthquakes and volcanoes are highly energetic natural events that occur irrespective of social actions Human actions can, however, impact upon the OUTCOMES of these events Two events which occurred 100 years apart will be discussed for comparison Volcanic eruption in Mount Pelée in Martinique (The Caribbean) in 1902 Earthquake in city of Catas (Peru) in 2001 Classic case studies of Guatemala (1976), Mexico (1985), and Kobe (1995) earthquakes will be discusses PAR and Access models along with the release of ‘pressures’ will be presented for the Mexico event PAR model for the Kobe event critically analysed Montserrat volcanic eruptions (1995-1998) is presented
Background image of page 2
Comparison of two hazard events Events 100 year apart in time Volcanic eruption in Mount Pelée on the island of Martinique (in the Caribbean) Earthquake in the city of Catas in the southern coastal region of Peru Root causes: interests of the powerful, bureaucratic incompetence and ignorance 1902 eruption – irresponsible and opportunistic political leader refused to order the evacuation of Martinique due to an impending election A mass evacuation of St. Pierre would have created an enormous administrative headache Conspiracy to down-play the possibility of a disaster 2001 Peru earthquake – Evacuation order to relocate a community, supposedly for their protection, was, in fact, due to a discovery of oil on their land
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Determinants of vulnerability to earthquakes Location of the earthquake Seismic belts places can be mapped for probability High density region suffer more casualties Temporal characteristics Time of the day Festive season, market day, weekday/weekend Winter/summer Characteristics of buildings Unsafe structures – not resistant to earthquakes as well as to withstand secondary impacts, such as landslides, flooding, fire Protective measures Detailed seismic risk assessment Enforcement of land-use planning controls Building safety codes Effective search and rescue capacity
Background image of page 4
Classic case studies: Guatemala February 4, 1976 – 22,000 killed Unsafe housing in rural highlands – indigenous Mayan population Squatter settlements in Guatemala City (slums) Upper and middle classes virtually unscathed - named a ‘class-quake’ No assistance from the government 13 years after, in 1989: Houses still exist on steep slopes but not as crowded and precarious Survivors vacated the most dangerous slopes for flat sites Illegal ‘invasion’ was legalised later on After legalization, concrete was being used as building material which is more harmful
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
The Mexico City earthquake, 19 September 1985 Very different impact to that of Guatemala
Background image of page 6
Image of page 7
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 24

ApplicationToEarthquakesAndVolcanoes - Application of PAR...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 7. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online