Political Risk assessment
What politicians are required to do is to ask questions and determine the merits of the risk assessment associated to the answers given, in turn leading to action.
Also there will need to be agreement of all interested parties in any action.
What motivation and agenda they may have also has its input.
Politicians also have to weigh up the vast array of needs and the best uses of limited resources.
The world population growth changing as it is, risk assessment needs to change at a similar pace.
With more people in more densely populated areas the risk probability of large loss to human life and that of the financial infra-structure will only increase
Another interesting effect in this information age is our dependence on communications, this can tell us about events in a matter of seconds, in the past we may have had to wait months before it was reported in a newspaper, this information can help us respond to our global village and airlift vital support promptly. One side effect is the vast coverage we have of selected events that happens on the planet as they unfold as media chooses to report, some items never get reported.
Here is a few examples of natural disasters
Hurricanes
Katrina, was a major international story. It struck the vulnerable US Gulf Coast in August 2005 and brings the still-rising death count to over 1,000, which is serious but not remarkable for a major disaster. But together with extensive urban flooding that was a secondary effect, damage estimates from insurance costs alone are at $30 billion, with total rebuilding likely to exceed Kobe. This is easily the most expensive disaster ever to hit the US, eclipsing Andrew in 1992. Interestingly both hurricanes landed twice, first in Florida, then in Louisiana. From Andrew the death toll was 'only' 26, but the property damage added up to (what was then) a staggering $25 billion. The event in 1737 that may have killed some 300,000 people around Calcutta, India, is now ascribed to a typhoon (the Asian equivalent of a hurricane) combined with massive flooding. Originally thought to be an earthquake, this is unlikely from a tectonics point of view - the major Himalayan seismicity is well to the north. This could be the most catastrophic atmospheric event ever recorded in terms of casualties.
Volcanoes. Nevado del Ruiz (Columbia) in 1985 ended the lives of 25,000 people, most of them caught in a massive mudflow that poured down the stricken mountain. By comparison the Mount St. Helens eruption (1980) shattered the peak but had few victims. The Tambora, Indonesia volcano of 1815, in which 80,000 people died of the subsequent famine, or the famous Krakatoa explosion, again in Indonesia, in 1883 in which more than 50,000 people perished, many of them like Sumatra engulfed in a tsunami.
Earthquakes
12 Jan 2010 magnitude 7.0 earthquake in Haiti estimated over 150,000 lives, October 8, 2005 magnitude 7.6 earthquake in Pakistan was not especially large, but the more than 40,000 victims has raised it to the level of a major catastrophe. Without doubt, however, the most devastating loss of life in recent years was the much larger 9.3 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake (the third largest ever recorded) / tsunami in late 2004 that is now estimated to have claimed 275,000 lives. The tsunami was responsible for the bulk of the damage and casualties. The total costs of these events are still to early to measure, but probably won't exceed the property damage caused by the 1995 Kobe earthquake, now estimated at more than $150 billion. Within the US (excluding earthquake-prone Alaska), neither the Los Angeles Quake (1994) nor even the great San Francisco event of 1906, were nearly as damaging. 1976 Tangshan magnitude 8 event in China, whose toll varies between the official 255,000, and a possible 655,000. This event truly began the modern era of intense seismic hazard monitoring in China and the West. Little is known of an earlier lethal earthquake that struck the Chinese city of Shaanzi in 1556. No magnitudes are quoted, and of course no recordings exist, but it is said to have taken the lives of 830,000 people.
How do we decide what needs to be done to be ready, how do we asses the risk?
CASE STUDIES
We can look at some more local case studies at action taken that have alleviated or in some cases even prevented possible disasters with hope of understanding our now more global view.
A very effective case is that of the Thames flood barrier, this is a simple cost effective solution in response to research, as with most things the danger is a mixture due to both natural and man made factors.
First to realise; London like many large city's is built on the mud and silt of a tidal river, the river flow was then restricted and walled in with embankments, our understanding of tides improved due to space research and improved surveys in the English channel as we planed to build the channel tunnel. The government realised the risk of a major flood in London was very high and acted. This has saved many lives and untold financial disaster to Britain. The long term scientific evidence will require we look again into this threat, scientific opinion is showing that southern Britain is sinking and sea levels may rise.
What can we learn from a global prospective from this for the future build of cities? As our scientific knowledge increases we should try to be more aware of how population growth in cities is effected by its local geology. Is it wise to keep increasing the size of city's built on fault zones, in river basins, flood zones, typhoon/Hurricane areas etc????
End of the World: Ten Disasters? (don't Panic)