Teach Secondary Issue 14.7

Tracing the FAULT LINE Steve Brace considers the framing at work when geography classes study ‘natural disasters’ – and why even the term itself is up for debate... T here’s no such thing as a natural disaster.” So says Ilan Kelman, professor of disasters and health at University College London. The study of natural hazards – popularly termed ‘natural disasters’ – their impacts and peoples’ exposure to themhas become a popular part of the geography curriculum. Case studies might feature as tectonic and flooding hazards in KS3, extreme weather at GCSE, or more in-depth study of what can cause natural hazards at A Level. In connecting physical and human processes, such hazards provide a context for better understanding how geographical processes are both interdependent with, and an influence on different areas locally and globally. Choices and decisions However, geography teachers will be mindful of the need to bring careful nuance to bear on how they teach about hazards – and particularly how and when a ‘hazard’ becomes a ‘disaster’. Professor Kelman reminds us of this in his seminal work, Disasters by Choice . The book argues that it is the actions of humans , through peoples’ choices and decisions, that can turn a natural hazard into a catastrophe. He observes that there is no such thing as a ‘natural disaster’; rather, it is “ Nature that produces phenomena – such as earthquakes and floods. But they are only hazardous because of human choices .” He illustrates his argument by citing the hypothetical example of a housing development – without earthquake proofing – being approved in an earthquake zone. Were this to occur, would the resulting hazard be the fault of the earthquake, or actually the fault of the people who made the decision for the development to go ahead? (see tinyurl.com/ts147-G1 ) Variable risk There is also spatial difference in how vulnerable different types of people will be to the risks presented by a natural hazard. This might result in some people being harmed and their properly damaged, whilst others might only experience low impact, despite comparable levels of risk. Dr Martin Parham, a lecturer in disaster management, has argued that natural hazards are likely to have greater impacts for poorer people, those who might be displaced, children under 5 and disabled people. Factors that can help to reduce such vulnerabilities include effective and working infrastructure; access to healthcare; water and sanitation; disaster preparedness; and access to communications that can inform and warn people, support decision-making and facilitate responses by emergency services. Given the ready availability of social media and 24-hour news coverage nowadays, it might be tempting to believe that the world is constantly beset by an almost perpetual series of disasters. A useful corrective to this mindset is the work of geography teacher David Alcock, whose Hopeful Geographies approach highlights how positive progress can be explored in the classroom (see tinyurl.com/ts147-G2 ). Elsewhere, Dr Hannah Ritchie, via her Our World in Data website (ourworldindata.org ), has shown that there has, in fact, been a steep fall in the number of fatalities resulting from such disasters over the last 100 years. As she points out, “ Deaths haven’t declined so steeply because disasters are becoming less frequent or intense. The main reason that fewer people are dying is that we’ve gotten better at protecting ourselves and each other .” Partial views This positive trend is further illustrated by the way in “Natural hazards are likely tohave greater impacts forpoorerpeople” “ 56 teachwire.net/secondary