IB Geography D.2.3 Hazard Risk as a Product of Human Factors Notes

Hazard Risk Combines Physical Events with Human Conditions

1. Risk relationship can be expressed conceptually as hazard multiplied by exposure and vulnerability, with capacity reducing the losses that follow.
2. Dynamic conditions mean risk changes as cities expand, buildings age, inequality shifts and preparedness improves or declines.
3. Unequal distribution means the same event can produce sharply different outcomes between neighbourhoods, households and livelihood groups.
4. Exposure is the presence of people, infrastructure, housing and other assets in hazard-prone areas.
5. Vulnerability is the set of conditions that makes people or assets more susceptible to harm.
6. Capacity is the knowledge, institutions, resources and relationships available to manage and reduce risk.
7. Disaster risk rises when a hazardous event overlaps with high exposure and vulnerability and when capacity is limited.
8. Hazards may be physical, but disaster losses reflect decisions about settlement, construction, inequality and preparedness.

A hazardous event becomes a disaster through its interaction with society.

Economic Factors Shape Buildings, Protection and Recovery

1. Public investment funds monitoring, resilient infrastructure and emergency services, but benefits depend on maintenance and whether spending reaches high-risk communities.
2. Livelihood sensitivity raises vulnerability where households depend on land, livestock, tourism or a single workplace that can be lost in one event.
3. Recovery finance can accelerate reconstruction, although loans and insurance exclusions may transfer long-term costs to households least able to absorb them.
4. Household income: low-income households may occupy cheaper land near unstable slopes or faults and may be unable to strengthen homes.
5. Infrastructure and technology: monitoring networks, resilient transport and communications improve warning, rescue and continuity of essential services.
6. Insurance and savings: financial protection speeds repair and spreads losses, while uninsured households may sell assets or take on debt.
7. Economic concentration: a hazard in a capital city, port or industrial corridor can interrupt national income and supply chains.

Social Factors Affect Information, Support and Unequal Loss

1. Risk culture develops through education, drills and memory of past events, shaping whether people recognise warnings and trust official advice.
2. Tenure insecurity can discourage residents from improving homes or reporting unsafe conditions when they fear eviction or lack legal ownership.
3. Community capacity strengthens response when local organisations know who needs help, where resources are stored and which routes remain usable.
4. Education and risk awareness: people who recognise warnings and know safe actions can respond faster during shaking, ashfall or slope failure.
5. Language and communication: warnings fail when they are inaccessible, mistrusted or issued in a language that exposed groups do not understand.
6. Health and disability: mobility, sensory or health needs can affect evacuation speed and access to shelters or medical care.
7. Social networks: neighbours, community groups and local organisations can locate vulnerable residents and provide support before outside help arrives.

Demographic Factors Change Exposure and Evacuation Needs

1. Dependency needs rise where large shares of children, older people or people with disabilities require assistance during evacuation and recovery.
2. Household composition affects risk because carers, people living alone and multi-generational households have different warning and shelter needs.
3. Population turnover reduces local knowledge where migrants, temporary workers or tourists are unfamiliar with hazards and evacuation procedures.
4. Population density raises the number of people and assets that can be affected within a compact hazard zone.
5. Dense cities can also have more emergency services, so density changes exposure but does not determine vulnerability by itself.
6. Age structure affects mobility, supervision needs, health risks and the design of warning messages.
7. Rapid migration can expand informal settlements faster than safe housing and infrastructure are provided.
8. Seasonal populations such as tourists may be unfamiliar with evacuation routes and local warning signs.

Political Factors Determine Whether Rules Work

1. State capacity includes the ability to collect risk data, enforce land-use rules, coordinate agencies and maintain services before and after an event.
2. Accountability reduces risk when inspections, procurement and relief allocation can be scrutinised rather than diverted by corruption or patronage.
3. Participation improves legitimacy when exposed communities influence zoning, relocation and reconstruction decisions that affect their homes and livelihoods.
4. Governance affects whether risk maps, building codes and evacuation plans are funded and enforced.
5. Corruption can allow unsafe construction, while transparent inspection can turn a written building code into real protection.
6. Conflict can damage infrastructure, displace people and restrict access for emergency services.
7. Public trust affects whether residents act on warnings and cooperate with evacuation orders.
8. International assistance can add expertise and supplies, but national and local coordination determines whether aid reaches exposed groups.

Risk Factors Interact Rather than Operate Separately

1. Feedback occurs when disaster losses deepen poverty, reduce savings and force households into more hazardous locations before the next event.
2. Compound disadvantage emerges when weak housing, poor health, insecure work and limited political voice overlap in the same population.
3. Capacity building can interrupt this chain through safer housing, trusted warnings, social protection and reliable local institutions.
4. Low income can push households onto hazardous land, while weak governance allows unsafe buildings to remain.
5. A dense population raises exposure, but education, strong buildings and trusted warnings can reduce vulnerability.
6. Damage to one transport route can isolate a community and reduce its capacity after the event has begun.
7. A useful assessment traces the chain from hazard to exposure, vulnerability, capacity and final loss.