Case study of the management of a Tropical Storm in an LIC

I did this research a long time ago so data may be different to what you've collected, and I've tried to include as much detail as possible so you don't have to do extra research. It's all here.  You can now develop your own response for those hideous 9 mark questions that tend to ask about Case Studies. Hope this helps and if you have any comments, spot any errors etc, just let me know. :) 

Case study of the management of a Tropical Storm in an LIC: Bangladesh Cyclone, 1991

Prediction and monitoring

Bangladesh ranks as the world’s foremost disaster-prone country. Yet people cannot afford to live elsewhere as poverty is a huge issue and so they cannot leave the danger zone. The government does nt have the money to fund adequate disaster plans either. The frequent natural disasters in Bangladesh have a heavy toll on them as their economy cannot grow. Thus their technology is not as advanced as they cannot afford to do more scientific research on it. Their satellites and remote sensing technology is outdated and have been in existence since 1972. Meaning that by 1991 it would have been ineffective and less accurate. The Bangladesh Meteorological Department (BMD) are responsible for preparing weather forecasts, the data they received may have come late or were inaccurate thus they could not analyse it properly. This would affect when they warn citizens.  Also, because Bangladesh is an LIC, they cannot afford to send highly advanced, specially built planes up into the atmosphere through the cyclone to gather information on it, whereas the US can. If they do not know exactly how strong or how the cyclone is, they cannot be properly prepared for it.

Preparation for the cyclone hazard

The Storm Warning Centre (SWC) of the BMD provides forecasting and warnings. However, the warnings they sent out did not give people much time to react and prepare. Their megaphone warning system is ineffective, it involves people riding on bicycles between paddy fields and yelling out warning through their megaphones. This means the warnings do not reach everybody, and most people only had a few hours of warning and didn’t know where to go for shelter. Due to the lack of cyclone shelters (raised, reinforced concrete shelters) and safe places to go, people stayed at their poorly constructed house which are unable to withstand strong winds. (It was mostly flat land anyway, where would they go? The embankments were also ineffective against the storm surge.) Their houses were so weak that there was no point in boarding anything up. The lack of transportation also meant that people could not leave the danger zone and find a safe place. Some refused to evacuate thinking that the storm would not be as bad as forecasted. The citizens were uneducated in this respect, not knowing the effects of a cyclone and they were also unaware of the storm surge that would follow. This was what caused the most damage (90%), not the high speed winds. Without a proper evacuation plan, everything was chaotic so people were not prepared for the cyclone. Due to poor education and information available, citizens were unsure how to prepare themselves and react to the situation leading to more deaths. In the year 1991, these poor people had no hand phones, television or radios so they could not access information or keep updated. Few of them were in urban areas, in the rural areas there was no electricity to power these appliances anyway. The government did not prepare emergency supplies of food and water, this led to starvation and diseases.

Short-term response after the cyclone (e.g. disaster relief, emergency aid)

Training for disaster relief, emergency aid and local rescue workers was not thorough. The inexperienced workers were momentarily dazed by the disaster and were not prepared. Their slow reaction meant that many more people were injured and killed. Their equipment would not be as abundant and useful like in HICs such as USA, because that requires money. Due to a lack of transport, local rescue workers could not reach some stricken areas. Important things like band-aids and medical supplies ran out fast because they are expensive. With so many people needing help, there were simply not enough supplies to aid everybody. Simultaneously, the government failed to provide sufficient cyclone shelters for everybody affected. Thus the number of homeless people increased. Emergency electricity supplies and telephone links failed to work. Due to hundreds of acres of farmland and crops destroyed, there was insufficient food and a shortage of clean water—leading to further deaths from starvation and disease. With little help from richer countries, Bangladesh had to face huge costs they could not sustain, and people were left homeless and unemployed. American soldiers returning from war were redirected to Bangladesh and they save thousands of people. The government provided seeds for farmers to replant their crops.

Long-term response after the cyclone (e.g. improving prediction, making  adjustments to the previous preparation plan, redesigning buildings etc.)

Bangladesh looked to strengthen their cyclone warning system and make sure everybody is informed next time. Now they use television, radio, megaphones, house-to-house visits and other ways to inform people. Now, Bangladesh uses much more modern technology to predict the path of the cyclone. Recent statistical methods have been introduced for the forecasting of cyclone paths. Before they only used old subjective methods based on synoptic maps. Now SPARRSO (Bangladesh Space Research and Remote Sensing Organisation) has installed a model named TYAN to predict the track of a cyclone based on climatology of Bay of Bengal Cyclones for the last 100 years. The model has shown promising results for the forecast of cyclone movement, some 24 hours ahead of landfall—giving more time to announce the cyclone’s coming and allow people to evacuate and prepare. Many strongly built houses have been constructed high above sea level to serve as shelters for people in low-lying areas in the coastal region. Trees have been planted along the coastal area to help absorb some impact from the storm surge. A Flood Action Plan has been developed in case of emergencies. Now, each rescue worker team has basic warning equipment: handheld sirens, megaphones, signal lights, first aid kit and a transistor radio. School teachers, social workers and other people have raincoats, life jackets, torch lights and other equipment to help them in dangerous situations. But they do have other priorities as Bangladesh is still an LIC, so not that much has changed. However, the government is still more experienced and knowledgeable now.

Managing natural hazards

'Managing' natural hazards is really about learning to live with them and knowing what's best to do in times when the hazard is actively taking place. There are at least 6 major steps here:

1. Risk assessment: determining the probability of a particular hazard happening and the scale of its possible damage
2. Prediction: putting in place monitoring systems that might give warning about an imminent (forthcoming) hazard
3. Preparation (adjustment): finding ways of reducing the possible death toll and the scale of damage of property. Educating people about the hazards of the areas in which they live and what to do in case of an emergency is important here
4. Hazard event: the natural hazard that has been anticipated and planned for happens
5. Recovery: first emergency aid then repairing the damage. 
6. Appraisal: an examination of what happened after the event with many questions to be asked and answered. Were there emergency plans ready to put into action? How effective were the preparations that had been made before the event? What should be done to make them better in the future?

Case Study of the Management of a Tectonic Event in an HIC:

http://askmichellegeography.blogspot.com/2012/04/kobe-earthquake-1995.html

Why are the effects of natural hazards generally less harmful in HICs than in LICs?

Why are the effects of natural hazards generally less harmful in HICs than in LICs?

Preparation and prediction in HICs are usually better than in LICs thus the effects are less harmful. HICs are generally wealthier thus they can afford better prediction technology. For example, USA has top-notch satellite technology that feeds back to the National Hurricane Centre in Miami. This allows them to check the weather and satellite images to see if there is a hurricane forming; or to see if there is a possibility of a hurricane forming (for example if the ocean is at 27˚C). If one is forming, they can send out a warning to people at least 24-hours in advance. In LICs such as Bangladesh, they can’t afford such technology thus their citizens don’t have much time to prepare to evacuate-leading to more injuries and deaths. Japan is another example of a wealthy country that has good prediction equipment albeit for earthquakes.

Preparation in HICs is much better in several ways. Firstly, the warning systems are much better. For example in Florida, there are sirens, messages sent to mobile phones as well as news broadcasted via the radio, internet and television. This is much more effective than in LICs such as in Bangladesh where megaphones are used. A person cycles through the farms and city yelling out warnings through a megaphone. This is ineffective as there is a chance that many people won’t hear them. Also, many people in Bangladesh had no idea how bad the cyclone was going to be, and they did not know how to prepare. (Some did not believe the warnings.)

Moreover, their housing was of poor quality, so they did not need to strengthen it whereas in Florida people boarded up their windows. Furthermore, they had nowhere else to go for lack of hurricane shelters, and there was no transportation they could take. Thus they stayed at home. This resulted in more deaths as their houses may collapse on them, or they would be swept by the storm surge as they remained in low lying areas. (Due to lack of education in LICs, many people did not know the after effects of some natural disasters. For example, in Bangladesh, many people did not know about the storm surge that could flood areas and drown people. They also did not know about the eye of the storm, where it is calm. So they go outside to survey the damage only to be swept up by the hurricane when the eye passes. In other LICs prone to earthquakes, some people may not know about the aftershocks that could be quite high on the Richter scale too.)

Another reason why effects are less severe in HICs is they have stockpiles of food and water. These are kept in the shelters built in case of emergencies. (For example, in Florida, there are elevated shelters built along the coastline for people living near the coast to protect them from the storm surge.) In LICs, there isn’t as much food surplus so people can’t store cans of food; nor do they have the money to do so anyway. One effect of natural disasters in LICs is starvation and disease spreading. The water sources like reservoirs are contaminated, often with cholera, and people drinking it get sick and spread the disease. Agriculture is important in LICs, and with the crops destroyed by the disaster the people have no food to eat. Many people die of starvation. On the contrary, in HICs, people can still survive with stockpiles of canned food and water prepared beforehand.

There are less deaths in HICs because the people are well prepared. They have constant drills and practices so that they know what to do when an emergency occurs. For example in Japan, all the schools have frequent earthquake drills where people practice evacuating or hiding beside tables. In Florida, there are even evacuation routes and road signs directing people to safe areas. In LICs, the transportation system is less organised and there aren’t any safe places for people to evacuate to. Also, the infrastructure is weak leading to bridges and highways collapsing. This could injure a lot of people. Traffic lights also cease to function, hence leading to traffic jams-so even if people want to evacuate, they would be stuck. In HICs, there are buildings designed to be resistant against natural disasters. For example, the Taipei 101 in Taiwan is designed to be earthquake-resistant. It has a tuned mass damper that swings in the opposite direction the building does in an earthquake to prevent it from collapsing. In Japan, buildings have to comply with regulations to make it earthquake resistant so that less people are harmed by falling debris from collapsing buildings.

The responses in HICs really help reduce the effect of natural hazards. Short-term responses such as rescue teams (firefighters, search and rescue teams, ambulances etc) have had regular training thus they know what to do. They won’t panic, they have the transport to get to places in need of help, and they also have sufficient equipment. This is good because they can save a lot more people if they are well prepared. In LICs, training, transport and equipment need a lot of money and so they cannot afford it. The response is sluggish and poor as people are momentarily dazed and do not know what to do. For example, in Bangladesh, the rescue teams did not have enough medical equipment and they did not have enough simple things like plasters. They did not have torches or blankets to provide people with comfort and many people died without sufficient aid and medical treatment. In HICs, there were backup electricity and water sources so people were able to live quite comfortably. They also set about to repair any damaged telephone lines so that people could contact family. This reduced any trauma people suffered as they felt more secure and they knew their family was informed.

The long term responses in HICs such as rebuilding any collapsed infrastructure and housing was much better as they could afford to do so. HICs such as Japan and Florida managed to rebuild most of the buildings, transport infrastructure and housing units within a decade of the disaster. They also improved building designs to make it more resistant. In LICs such as Philippines, there are still people displaced from the Mount Pinatubo eruption as the country does not have the money to rebuild all the houses. They also don’t have money to build it well. Many people still have to live in temporary housing with poor facilities. The resettling of people in LICs is not effective and it is often very slow. LICs such as Bangladesh and Philippines are interdependent, they have to rely on other countries to give them financial aid and more.

Kobe Earthquake, 1995

Based on my own research, some data could be different to what you find.. 

Case Study of the Management of a Tectonic Event in an HIC: Kobe Earthquake, 1995

Intro facts: Cause of the earthquake:

• The earthquake was caused by the Philippines Plate being subducted under the Eurasian Plate.
• The focus was very shallow; it was only about 15km.
• The epicentre was very close to Kobe, around 20km away.

Intro facts: Short term impacts of the earthquake

• Nearly 200,000 buildings were destroyed.
• A 1km stretch of the elevated Hanshin Expressway collapsed.
• 120 of the 150 quays in the port of Kobe were destroyed.
• Electricity, gas and water supplies were disrupted.
• Fires caused by broken pipes and ruptured electricity lines, swept the city.
• An estimated 230,000 people were made homeless.
• The number of deaths was put officially at 5500.
• At lest 40,000 people suffered serious injury.

How Was The Earthquake Disaster Managed?

Before the earthquake: Prediction

• The Japanese government established the Imperial Earthquake Investigation Committee in 1892 in response to the Nobi earthquake (1891) which caused significant damage in Japan. However, they failed to predict the Great Hanshin Earthquake.
• Even though Japan has one of the most advance Earthquake prediction systems, they failed to predict it. Kobe had not had a major earthquake for more than 400 years so there was less prediction equipment there than in other areas of Japan.
• Although people on duty could see that there were many tremors (prior to the earthquake), they did not raise the alarm. It could be that they were getting complacent because they had not received a huge earthquake for a long time.

Before the earthquake: Preparation 

-        Illusion of preparedness made people complacent-caught unaware.

-        There were still many old, traditional houses in Kobe. They had heavy tiles on the roofs to withstand typhoons; but they injured many people when the wood supporting the roof collapsed.

-        Most new buildings built had been designed to be earthquake proof; but because of liquefaction, they still toppled over. The houses were not retrofitted, resulting in many elderly people injured.  Transport infrastructure not retrofitted either.

-        They didn’t have sufficient emergency supplies. Especially water-couldn’t fight fire efficiently.

+        Schools and factories had regular earthquake drills.

After the earthquake: Response In The Short Term

·         They had to get clean, fresh water from other parts of the country.

·         The Japanese government evacuated people into temporary shelters because they still faced the dangers of fires and unstable buildings. The government was criticized for being so slow in mobilizing the army-sluggish response.

·         Bulldozers were brought in to clear fallen buildings.

·         The local fire department put out the fires.

·         Civilians helped to rescue others who were trapped.

·         Medical aid centres were set up.

After the earthquake: Response In The Medium & Long Term

• By January 1999, 134,000 housing units had been constructed. All homes and buildings had to be built to strict regulations and they were made more earthquake resistant. (Flexible frames, steel support.)
• Water, electricity, gas and telephone services were fully working by July 1995.
• Within a year, 80% of the port was working but the Hanshin Expressway was still closed.
• The railways were back in service by August 1995.
• More instruments were installed in the area to monitor seismic activity.
• Major transport routes were reinforced so they do not get destroyed or damaged in the event of another major earthquake.
• Earthquake resistant shelters were constructed in local parks.
• The city plan was more spaced out, buildings were further apart so that if one collapsed, it would not create a domino effect. Buildings were not allowed to be built on unstable land.
• Developed more open space in the city so that people had a large area to evacuate to.
• Japan refused international aid for a while then finally let them in.