The main aim of hazard management should be to reduce the effects of hazards, not manage their cause

Hazard c atomic number 18 at long last aims to reduce the attempt that a misfortune put up adopt to gentles. This idler be do by the quadruplet steps of modifying the prepare, answer, vulnerability and take. I entrust that the ca white plague of much an(prenominal) natural gambles, much(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) as geophysical and meteorological risk of infections can non anticipateed, hence the dressment of the cause of a incident is irrelevant in the circumspection of many an(prenominal) jeopardizes. As such, it should be the subject area that the briny aim of hazard management should be to reduce the effects of hazards rather than manage their cause.The issue of decrease the effect of hazards would be discussed in the four parts of the hazard management framework. I agree with the relation to a large extent that hazard management should non be refer on managing the cause. The few focusings in which the cause of the hazard can be modifie d testament be discussed. Although the most ideal method would be to keep back the occurrence of the event in the commencement ceremony place, to stop a hazard from occurring every last(predicate) in all is a feat that usually would be only be feasible in terms of half-size scale, isolated phenomena, taking the example of a downpour.Floods are examples of small scale hazards that can be sustained through proficient means. Often, levees can be strengthened to proscribe a river from overflowing, such as the levees built along the Mississippi River in North America, or the Scheldt River in the Netherlands. Also, dams can be built to retain wet in a lake, and can be used to control the water flow, on that pointfrom preventing rivers from overflowing too quickly. A salutary example of a dam that has prevented tell make full occurrence is the Hoover dam up along the Colorado River.It is recorded that to begin with the building of the dam, there was frequent flooding at t he low lying areas of the river during spring. season physical methods can be employed to prevent the occurrence of these isolated hazards deal floods and landslides, large scale hazards such as quakes, tsunamis and wind storms cannot be prevented. As such, apparelting of the cause is highly limited to a few hazards, thus making it more feasible to consider various approaches in reduction the effects of the majority of hazards which will almost inevitably occur. season applied science cannot be used to prevent the causes of all hazards, technology can also be used to modify the event. Earthquakes is a rock-steady example of a hazard where the earthquake itself does not usually cause the loss of lives, rather, it is usually its effect on other structures that causes the most destruction, such as the toppling of buildings or create landslides. As such, a safe method of earthquake management would be to equip buildings with the ability to withstand the concussion of ear thquakes, using various architectural designs.A famous example of an earthquake repelling building is Taipei 101, which foundation is reinforce 80 metres deep into the ground and has a steel ball known as a tuned mass damper which balances the building. During its structure in 2002, Taipei experienced a 6. 8 magnitude earthquake, and yet the skyscraper did not topple and experienced no geomorphological damages. Sometimes, such as in authentic Japanese house designs, the houses are not built to withstand earthquakes but such that it moves along with the earthquake, using grooves rather than nails to fit the house together.Furthermore, the light wood has trim back probability of killing tidy sum if it topples. These divers(prenominal) designs show how it is possible to use intimacy of engineering and architecture to reduce the feign of hazards. Modifying vulnerability is another approach to hazard management which aims to increase preparedness of raft themselves to fishing tackle the hazard when it occur, including methods such as increasing friendship preparedness, computer programning, developing exemplification systems, and changing perceptions.Community preparedness is inborn in all communities where hazard occurrence is frequent, to train and educate people as to how to respond to a hazard and potation out emptying plans, and stocking up pinch supplies of food, water and medicine. Also, people can be trained in first instigate, account and rescue, and firefighting, etc. In some causes, this is untold more feasible than using technology, when the woo is too high. A case composition of Norway, where avalanches are frequent, is a good example. payable to the fact that neither relocation nor retrofitting buildings was a feasible option, the most cost in force(p) plan would be to decrease vulnerability. This was done brinyly through setting up a warning system, and coming up with a plan to organize an evacuation, by appointing a group of representatives from each biotic union and training the people on how to react. The plan was highly successful, showing the merit in proper planning and preparedness.In many ways the perception and awareness of the club to hazards is very important. Changing the perception of people is also essential in reducing the impacts of hazards, for negative perception by a group of people can ultimately melt many deaths, in cases where communities, curiously in LEDCs, are resigned to the fact that cryptograph can be done to prevent hazard occurrence and that hazards are undeniable and look upon them as a way of life. Even in MEDCs, perceptions can cause problems.There is a case where, during the evacuation for Hurricane Katrina, some of the elderly did not postulate evacuate, because of fear of new living conditions, or that they do not want to offer their home. This contributed to the majority of the deaths be the elderly in these events. Thus, changing the perceptions of vario us peoples in different cultural contexts plays a large employment in hazard management, ensuring that the community would want to lighten themselves in the first place. In all, modifying vulnerability can ultimately lead to people knowing how to react to hazards and thus reduces the negative effects of them.In many cases, managing the cause of natural hazards whitethorn bring sure disadvantages, for most natural hazards, season posing a threat to humans, are actually only natural phenomenon, and at times have benefits to us and the environment. A very good example is the case of a flood, where people have tested to create physical barriers to contain the flood water such as levees and dams. While this may be applicable to MEDCs, for many agricultural communities, such an approach is inapplicable, for they depend on the floodplain where there is a high amount of nutrients, deposited by flooding, and tot up of water.In these contexts, such as in Bangladesh, where the people depe nd on these floods, the legal profession of the hazard would uproot their way of life. In this way, floods need not always be treated as negative phenomena, causing damage in only certain contexts. In my opinion, modifying the vulnerability, not the cause should be the of import aim of hazard management. This holds since there are two factors contributing to risk hazard and vulnerability. Since eliminating the hazard is totally impracticable in many large-scale hazards, the scoop out thing to manage should be human vulnerability.Since the main aim should be center on on that can be applicable to all communities, it should be something feasible in contexts where there is lack of economic and technological resources, thus ruling out modifying the event as a potential main aim. As such, hazard management should not be centered on technology, such as the retrofitting of buildings, but rather something kindred education, which is more cost effective. In all, the main aim should be t o increase the resiliency of the people themselves to tackle the hazard.For example, in the case of Bangladesh, people adapt to the floods and learn to use it to their own benefit, neither seeing it as a negative phenomenon, nor something they should fear. After changing any negative perceptions of hazards in communities, community preparedness is essential. A bottom up approach equips people with the ability to save their own lives rather than being hooked on others. In fact, it has been shown that this approach whole caboodle much better than international aid or rescuers from the military.For example, the rescue efforts to the floods in Mozambique in 2001 was a success, not because of anything else, but more of the fact that the people were trained in how to respond, and that there was a clearly raddled out evacuation plan and ordained leaders in the community. Mozambique, though being one of the poorest countries in the world, has managed to increase community preparedness, thus showing how this approach to hazard management, may just be the most universal method of tackling hazards, which works no matter of affluence.In conclusion, it is true that hazard management should be primarily about reacting to the hazards and reducing the damage it brings, rather than trying to prevent it. Still, as technology continues to develop, we cannot eliminate it as an essential part of hazard management, for what may not be possible to prevent now, may be in the future. So, two sides of the equation must be considered to tackle risk effectively, depending on the context.