Recently, there have been flash floods and torrential downpours in South America. This water has especially affected Peru and Bolivia. In Bolivia, rivers near Cochabamba have overflowed and houses have been displaced. In Peru, the torrential rains have affected many small communities and a number of serious injuries have even resulted according to the source Al Jazeera. Many blame these floods on El Nino, a year long series of extreme weather patterns. While El Nino is definitely a factor to consider it is important to not neglect climate change and its effects on weather patterns and therefore disaster throughout the world.
In an unlikely twist this disastrous situation had a few positive results. Peru, and specifically northern Peru have been in the midst of a intensive drought which has affected crop production, safe water access and much more. The heavy rains brought much needed rain to the area and created a situation where agriculture become a viable option once again. A non profit in the area, MOCHE, says that the rains destroyed clean drinking water sources but also added valuable moisture to the current crops. This begs the question if disasters should still be considered disasters if they have positive results? Should there be a measurement system in place to weigh the negative and positives and at a certain point does it even matter if it is classified as a disaster if disastrous events are occurring as a result.
David Stromberg, a researcher and professor at the University of Stockholm identifies three factors that go into the decision of whether an event is a disaster or not. These classifications include population exposed to the event, the vulnerability of that population, and the triggering of the natural hazard event. In addition to these factors, it would be interesting to examine and look at how positives results of an event such as this flooding influence the choice to classify it as a disaster or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment