UNIT 1 HAZARD, RISK AND VULNERABILITY

Structure
1.0 Learning Outcome
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Theoretical Understanding of Relevant Concepts
1.2.1 Hazards and Disasters

1.3 Understanding Risk

1.3.1 Risk Assessment and Evaluation

1.4 Understanding Vulnerability

1.5 Vulnerability and Risk Assessment
1.6 Vulnerability Factors
1.7 Conclusion
1.8 Key Concepts
1.9 References and Further Reading
1.10 Activities

1.0 LEARNING OUTCOME

After studying this Unit, you should be able to:

Acquire conceptual understanding of relevant disaster terminology;

Discuss vulnerability factors in brief; and

Understand vulnerability and risk assessment.

1.1 INTRODUCTION
The understanding of disasters has progressed from a purely techno- centric perspective
to a social and ecological perspective to unraveling the phenomena associated with
disasters. Through most of the twentieth century, the theory and practice of disaster
management had been dominated by the scientific perspective, whereby, disasters were
thought of purely as a geological or a climactic problem, the solutions for which lay in
engineering and management sciences. In the last two decades, there has been a
paradigmatic shift in the understanding of disasters in that the human factor, which had
been neglected in the earlier approach, is now in focus. The attempt consequently is to
inquire into sociological processes that determine or undermine a community’s resilience,
coping capacity and response to disasters. Understanding of disasters hitherto had been
limited to natural hazards. Presently, the term disaster is a more inclusive concept, in that
it includes man- made, and technological hazards, as also terrorism, which has added a
new dimension to its understanding.
 2 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis

There are two important perceptions on disasters. According to one school of thought,
disasters are natural, vengeful acts of nature: an opportunity for man to atone for his sons,
wherein death and destruction are inevitable. As per the other perspective, disasters are
man-made. An event whether a product of natural phenomena or human activities, turns
out to be a catastrophic disaster, if the community or society fails to adequately cope up
with it. By systemic understanding, hazard simply acts as a ‘catalyst’ in that it brings forth
underlying tensions that are always present as potential pressure (Watts, 1983).
By the ecological perspective, “disasters are totalizing events in which all dimensions of
a social structural formation, involving organised human action in the environmental context
in which it takes place is studied. The ecological concept of disaster as a total event
involving interaction between environment and nature follows the social perspective on
disaster by which hazards are understood to arise when there is lack of mutual relation
between the environment and man” (Hoffman and Oliver Smith, 1999). As a society
interacts with the environment, with its values and perceptions and engages in a series of
processes over which it has incomplete control and knowledge, for example, development
and planning processes, production and distribution of goods, over long periods of time,
underlying hazards turn to disasters (Oliver Smith, 1999).

1.2 THEORETICAL UNDERSTANDING OF RELEVANT

CONCEPTS
For the sake of conceptual clarity, it is desirable to clear the semantic confusion between
three interrelated terms, viz. hazard, risk, and vulnerability, which are used often in disaster
literature. Such an exercise is necessary in view of the fact that a major part of disaster
management theory and practice involves scientific precepts and analyses, which requires
precision in terminology used. Project planners are required to present an inventory of
risks from specific hazards, risks and vulnerability factors that require exactitude in
definitions. Hence, hazard is defined as a potential or a latent/dormant cause, which is
activated when the right configuration of factors; natural or man made or both, present
themselves. For example, a chemical plant in a populated area is a potential threat to life
and property within defined vicinity; hence a hazard. Disaster is the actual occurrence of
the apprehended catastrophe. Hence, disaster is “any occurrence, that causes damage,
ecological disruption, loss of human life, deterioration of health and health services, on a
scale sufficient to warrant an extraordinary response from outside the affected community
or area.” World Health Organisation (WHO)
A hazard technically is not a disaster unless the ‘trigger’ (natural or man- made) sets it
off. The trigger could possibly the be weak legislation that failed to regulate the functioning
of the facility, as was the case in Bhopal gas tragedy. Hence a “disaster should be defined
on the basis of its human consequences, not on the phenomenon (hazard) that caused it.
That precisely brings out the difference between disasters and hazards. Earthquakes,
floods and cyclones are ‘natural hazards’ which cause large-scale loss of life and property
(disaster) when the trigger mechanism (natural or man made) is activated. Till then, they
are simply events in nature. A hazard may or may not lead to an event, or the event in
itself may or may not cause damage. Such probabilities are determined by the vulnerability
of ‘elements’ at risk. Vulnerability is the extent to which an ‘element’ (animate/inanimate)
is harmed in the event of a disaster; in other words, is susceptible to a given hazard.
‘Elements’ are identified as life and property likely to suffer damage in the event of a
disaster. Observation and perception of risk involves ascertaining, specifically, such
Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability 3

‘elements’ at risk. Identification of risk involves inquiring into the specific natural,
technological or chemical etc., processes that create the vulnerability of the elements
identified for risk analysis”. Vulnerability can be natural or man made. It can be physical,
owing to factors such as weak buildings, habitation in hazard prone areas; or socio
economic, arising due to poverty or marginalisation of the weaker sections of society who
lack the wherewithal of defending themselves in the event of a disaster. Aforesaid
concepts are discussed below in detail:

1.2.1 Hazards and Disasters

The International Secretariat for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) defines a hazard as “a
potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon or human activity that may cause the
loss of life or injury, property damage, social and economic disruption or environmental
degradation.” Hazards could be, natural (geological, hydro-meteorological and biological)
or induced by human processes (environmental degradation and technological hazards).
Hazards can be single, sequential or combined in their origin and effects. Accordingly,
Hazard analysis entails the identification, study and monitoring of a hazard to determine
its potential, origin and characteristics.
A fine line separates environmental hazards and environmental resources, as between
water out of control (flood hazard) and water under control (reservoir resources). The
atmosphere is considered ‘benign’ when it produces holiday sunshine but ‘hostile’ when
it produces damaging ‘loo’. (Smith, 1996).
Classification of Hazards
Though hazards could be classified on many criteria; some of the general classifications
are as follows: (S. Gopalakrishnan).

Sudden onset hazards: geological and climatic hazards such as earthquakes, tsunamis,
floods, tropical storms, volcanic eruptions, and landslides.

Slow onset hazards: (environmental hazards) drought, famine, environmental
degradation, desertification, deforestation, and pest infestation.

Industrial/Technological: system failures/accidents, spillages, explosions, and fires.

Wars and civil strife: armed aggression, insurgency, terrorism, and other actions
leading to displaced persons and refugees.

Epidemics: water and/or food-born diseases, person-to-person diseases (contact and
respiratory spread), vector-born diseases and complications from wounds.
Hazards could also be classified as direct and indirect. For example, earthquake hazard
would lead to direct and indirect consequences, tabulated as under (ibid):
Direct Hazards:

Ground shaking

Differential ground settlement

Soil liquefaction

Immediate landslides or mud slides, ground lurching and avalanches
 4 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis

Permanent ground displacement along faults

Floods from tidal waves, sea surges & tsunamis
Indirect Hazards:

Dam failures

Pollution from damage to industrial plants

Delayed landslides.
Site risks in an earthquake prone area, as explained by S. Gopalakrishnan, would be:

Slope Risks: Slope instability, triggered by strong shaking may cause landslides.
Rocks or boulders can roll considerable distances.

Natural Dams: Landslides in irregular topographic areas may create natural dams,
which may collapse when they are filled. This can lead to potentially catastrophic
avalanches after strong seismic shaking.

Volcanic Activity: Earthquakes may be associated with potential volcanic activity and
may occasionally be considered as precursory phenomena. Ash falls and/or pyroclastic
flows, volcanic lava or mudflows, and volcanic gases normally follow explosive
eruptions
Besides, hazards can be of both short-term and long-term duration, as per the
classification proposed by K. Smith (1996).
Classification of Disasters
Hazards and the disasters they cause are classified as “rapid onset or cataclysmic, and
long-term or continuing”. In a cataclysmic disaster, one large-scale event causes most
of the damage and destruction but soon dissipates. Recovery, in the sense of restoration
of equilibrium conditions is relatively faster. In a long-term, continuing disaster, the situation
following the event remains constant or may even deteriorate further. Examples of
cataclysmic disasters are earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, cyclonic storms, and floods.
Examples of continuing natural disasters are droughts, crop failures, environmental degradation
such as deforestation and desertification, etc. The damaged area in a cataclysmic disaster
is usually relatively small, while the area affected in a continuing disaster stretches over a
wide expanse, spatially and temporally (long- term impact which affects the past, present
and future of communities).
Disasters are also classified as compound and complex. A Compound disaster is
explained as one crisis leading to other contingencies, such as famines followed by civil
strife, mass displacement of people etc.
Complex disasters are those that lead to collapse of the political authority or lead to some
other complexity where the problems involved/generated are intensely political in nature,
such as communal bias in distribution of relief, relocation of communities, compensation
disbursement, etc.
Identification of Hazards
Identification of hazards involves analyses of scientific data to trace the causal path of
events leading to a disaster. For example, identification of chemicals causing water
Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability 5

pollution; their source, impact on specific ‘elements’ such as human health, etc.; inquiring
into the nature and characteristics of a hazard with a view to distinguishing the man made
and natural components thereof; for example, floods, which are caused by both natural
and man made factors. Manmade factors include bad land use management policies such
as allowing habitation and location of critical facilities in flood prone areas, which increase
the vulnerability of ‘exposed’ populations, etc. It also entails policy analysis in that the
unintended consequences of environment related legislation has to be examined with a
view to framing more environment friendly legislation in the future. Hazard analysis is the
basis of ‘sustainable development’ policies; for example desertification is a slow-onset
disaster. Desertification arises as a result of interaction between a “difficult, unreliable and
sensitive dry land environment” and the human use and occupation of it in an effort to
make a living.” Following a hazard analysis of the process of desertification effective
strategies can be devised to address the problem.
Pollution of water, fire hazard and air arise due to high levels of carbon monoxide (CO)
and sulphur dioxide (SO2) in the atmosphere. Other man-made hazards include oil spills,
pesticides, etc., which build up in the environment as a result of excessive/ repeated
application of chemicals by agriculturalists, and flooding and erosions resulting from
inappropriate land management practices. Flooding, for example, has been promoted by
policies, which have allowed building and intensive land use on flood plains and flood-
prone regions.

1.3 UNDERSTANDING RISK

Risk is a technical concept, which is used by engineering and management specialists to
arrive at an estimation of losses in the event of a disaster and the expected probability
of its occurrence. Risk is precisely defined by the ISDR as “the probability of harmful
consequences, or expected losses (deaths, injuries, property, livelihoods, economic activity
disrupted or environment damaged) resulting from interactions between natural or human-
induced hazards and vulnerable conditions”. Conventionally, the notation expresses risk:
Risk = Hazards x Vulnerability. Some disciplines also include the concept of exposure to
refer particularly to the physical aspects of vulnerability.
Risk is different from threat. Threat is a more abstract concept while risk is an
expression of perceived threat in specific terms. Threat is a danger that has an extremely
low probability of occurrence. For purposes of public policy, threat has to be articulated
objectively in terms of risks, the probability of their occurrence and the damages involved
in each specific case. For example, apprehension of terrorism was a threat in America.
No policy could be devised to meet the threat, since threat had not been articulated as
risks for the sake of preventive policy. Vulnerability is understood as system faults or
weaknesses, which threat exploits to create the negative ‘impact’ known as disaster. Risk
management involves minimising the vulnerabilities so as to reduce the impact of the threat.
Risks are both inherent in social systems; are created, or exist due to inherent
characteristics in the system. The ecological context is therefore significant in the
understanding vulnerabilities of people in different cultures.
Risk is sometimes taken to be synonymous with hazard, but risk has an additional
implication of the probability of a particular hazard actually occurring. Risks are created
due to excessive resource use that leads to serious degradation of the environment.
Factors behind such intensified resource use are rapid population growth, market induced
 6 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis

demand, greed of the rich and resource exploitative public policies such as mining for
which rocks are blasted and poisonous substances are released in the environment.
Invariable consequences are the disruption of conditions conducive to biophysical processes
that ultimately harm the stability and sustainability of mountain environments.
Presentation of Risk
Risk is a matter of precise quantification. Risk may be expressed in terms of average
expected losses from a given hazard to a given element at risk, over a specified future
time period, for example, as; “25000 lives lost over a 30 year period or as 75000
houses experiencing heavy damage or destruction within 25 years or alternatively, on a
probabilistic basis, as a 75% probability of economic losses to property, exceeding 50
million dollars, in the town of Puerto Neuvo, within the next ten years”.
The term specific risk is used to refer to risk or loss estimations of either type which
are expressed as a proportion of the total; the first two examples might also be expressed
as; 10% of the total population killed by natural hazards within 30 years or 50% of
houses heavily damaged or destroyed in the next 25 years. Specific risk is also used for
financial losses to property where is usually refers to the ratio if the cost of repair or
reinstatement of the property to the total cost of replacement. Frequently, the shorter-term
risk is used to refer to what are strictly ‘specific risks.’
Specific risk gives the average rate of loss or attrition rate. While this is useful for
estimating losses over a long period of time it can give a misleading idea of the nature
of risk from natural hazards. Most of the losses actually occur through infrequent single
large events, rather than in the form of a slow continuous process of destruction. (Coburn,
Sspence, Pomonis, Disaster Management Training Programme, 1994)
Precise quantification of risk, however, is difficult. At best, a gross estimation of risk is
possible, taking, for example, number of deaths and the number of people exposed to a
hazard. Such crude estimates give only a limited idea of the likely damage from a hazard
for different peoples at different places or even the probability of its occurrence. For
example;
“… the probability of being killed in an earthquake in Iran during any one year
is obtained from the total number of killed by earthquakes in Iran this century
(120,000) divided by 90 years. This gives an average of 1, 300 people killed
annually. The population of Iran, currently (55 million) averaged over the past
ninety years is less than 30 million, so the average probability of being killed
in an earthquake is given as one in 23,000.6…”
(Source: Disaster Management Training Programme, 1994)
The assumption seems to be that everybody in Iran is equally at risk, which may not be
true. Vulnerabilities of communities and regions within Iran will vary with differential
physical (poor quality housing, etc.) socio economic vulnerability. Vulnerability Analysis
entails assessing the loss of life and property from a particular hazard striking at a
particular intensity. For example, x number of people are expected to be killed and
property worth y destroyed if a cyclone strikes with strong winds at 130km/hr.

1.3.1 Risk Assessment and Evaluation

Risk Management has two components (a) Risk Assessment (b) Risk Evaluation.
Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability 7

Risk Assessment is understood as “the methodology to determine the nature and extent
of risk by analysing potential hazards and evaluating existing conditions of vulnerability that
could pose a potential threat or harm to people, property, livelihoods and the environment
on which they depend.” “The process of conducting a risk assessment is based on a
review of both the technical features of hazards such as their location, intensity,
frequency and probability; and also the analysis of the physical, social, economic
and environmental dimensions of vulnerability and exposure, while taking particular
account of the coping capabilities pertinent to the risk scenarios….”(I.S.D.R.)
Risk evaluation entails assessment of proposed risk reduction measures from the point of
view of cost efficiency. Efficiency is examined by means of cost-benefit comparisons,
which imply assessing benefits procured or expected to be procured from a measure
against costs likely to be incurred.
Assessment has significant administrative implications in that precise understanding of the
underlying process of a hazard enables formulation of targeted risk reduction policies.
Precise quantification of risk is often difficult in the absence of adequate data and proper
analyses techniques. Moreover, certain areas are multi-hazard prone, which poses challenge
for risk assessment. Risk reduction policy for such areas requires risk assessments
regarding each type of hazard to arrive at an estimation of losses involved. Besides, risks
are not amenable to simple quantification in that intangible factors are involved that cannot
be easily identified and quantified.
Disaster risk is seen as a function of the hazard, exposure and vulnerability, denoted
by the mathematical function:
Disaster Risk = function (hazard, exposure, vulnerability where “exposure” refers to
the element which is affected by natural disasters, people and/or property. To reduce
disaster risk, it is important to bring down the level of vulnerability and to contain
‘exposure’ by relocating populations and property away from the hazardous zones
(Wisconsin Disaster management Center).
Risk Perception
Risk perception is understood as the ‘awareness’ of risk, which differs in different
cultures/societies. Poor countries, with other more pressing problems, do not attach much
priority to disaster mitigation. General level of awareness among people regarding the
significance of disaster mitigation and preparedness is also quite low. Consequently, there
is less interest articulation for policy in this area. On the other hand, risk perception is
found to be quite high in the developed world where much effort has been put into
disaster mitigation efforts, though vulnerability is low as compared to developing countries.
The role of the media is significant in creating ‘awareness ’regarding disaster management
among people, particularly those ‘at risk.’ Risk perception depends on certain subjective
and objective factors. Risk Perception depends on four specific factors:
Exposure: actual quantitative risk level, as articulated through risk assessments
Familiarity: personal experience, which makes one alive to the dangers of disasters
Dread: horror of the disasters’ scale and consequences, which makes policy imminent
Preventability: belief in prevention methods, which leads to disaster mitigation policies.
(DMTP, 1994)
 8 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis

Risk Identification
In a general way, political representatives informally undertake/attempt risk assessments by
way of informed/subjective judgements as part of daily governance to justify legislations
in foreign policy, the judicial reform, law enforcement, etc. Risk assessments are now
being conducted in more sophisticated ways, particularly in the field of environmental
legislation.
Risk has to be ‘empirically’ ascertained, for which subjective biases arising due to cultural
or ideological inclinations need to be kept out of policy judgements. The best example of
risk assessment comes from the insurance industry where “insurers have well-defined roles
of actuary, underwriter, agent, auditor and adjustor.” Each of these is an assessor in
somewhat different circumstances or stages of the insuring, reinsuring, adjustment, recovery
and claims payment processes. Hence, risk assessment is a continuous process of
‘articulation’, which needs to be undertaken periodically at every stage/, phases in said
activity/process. Objectivity of the risk assessment depends on the availability of adequate
and timely data. Lack of the same has inhibited risk assessments.
Risks are divided into ‘systematic’ and ‘cumulative’ (K. Smith, 1996). In a ‘systematic’
risk, the cause and effect phenomenon underlying a disaster is ‘immediate’ and ‘direct’ on
the global system and results from production related policies, for example, global
warming due to emission of green house gases. In cumulative risks, the relation is indirect,
entailing long-term consequences; and resulting due to policies in disregard of environment
protection lead to accumulation and compounding of risks over time, for example,
groundwater depletion, soil depletion, deforestation, etc. The effect of bad policy affects
the global system, which suggests that commitment to sustainable development has to be
equal in the developing and the developed world.
A technical evaluation process is usually undertaken, commonly called hazard assessment,
vulnerability analysis, and risk analysis for risk articulation. These are structured
analytical procedures for identifying hazards and estimating the probability of their
occurrence and anticipating consequences. These estimations are compared in relation to
a standard criterion in order to decide whether or not an action is desirable to reduce
the probability of damage or to protect the people, property, or environment. Realistically,
it is necessary also to consider to what extent perceived constraints of time and resources
might slow down the application of desirable countermeasures.
In the case of extreme events and very high level of damage, such as dam break or
nuclear power plant accident, the risk is ascertained/ estimated by the number of persons
affected (victims, injured, etc.) and / or the damage in monetary terms that can be
expected on an average per year. Risk is also linked to fragility. Fragility denotes the
stage of deterioration to a point where damage will occur. Fragility reflects the properties
of human-ecosystem interactions. It may be defined as “ the sensitivity of a particular
ecosystem to human induced perturbations and its resilience to such perturbations.”

1.4 UNDERSTANDING VULNERABILITY

Vulnerability gives the extent to which a community is affected by a disaster. It involves
the measure of ‘resilience’ and ‘coping capacity’ of a community in the face of disasters.
Vulnerability is an ‘inclusive’ concept in that vulnerability of a particular community to a
particular type of disaster (flood or earthquake) is a resultant of a number of factors;
including physical factors, (geographical perspective) social (sociological perspective) and
Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability 9

economic factors (income and employment, involving micro and macro economic policy),
besides institutional or administrative, which are essentially governance related issues.
The process of vulnerability has been evidenced as proceeding along phases such as; root
causes, dynamic pressures that translate these into active problems, which are a result
of a priori decision-making in governance related matters over time, for example, drought
in a dry land area, leading to a famine in the absence of disaster mitigation efforts.
Social scientists and climate scientists often mean different things when they use the term
“vulnerability”. Social scientists tend to view vulnerability as representing the set of socio-
economic factors that determine people’s ability to cope with stress or change (Allen,
2003); climate scientists often view vulnerability in terms of the likelihood of occurrence
and impacts of weather and climate related events. Related terms are fragility, stability,
resilience and sensitivity of a system. These are the constituents of ‘vulnerability’.
Resilience and coping capacity develop over time as a result of proactive government
policies. Stability is the balance, which is disturbed by events such as disasters; hence
restoring balance means correcting distortions. Stability depends on fragility; or the
weakness of the system owing to physical characteristics of its ecology; sensitivity refers
to the extent of alteration that is brought about due to exogenous pressures exerted by
events such as a disasters. Though disaster related, these are standard sustainable
development terminology.
Vulnerability Identification
Vulnerability identification implies examining the root causes of vulnerability that could lie
in technological, physical, or socio economic conditions and addressing the same through
empirical research and policy. Identification of vulnerability is challenging in that complex
processes interact in resultant vulnerability of a system or a specific region/ people(s).
Tackling vulnerability involves both short- term and long-term mitigation measures in that
the problem of vulnerability is essentially a problem of development. The solution lies in
developmental planning, which addresses the problems of poverty, class and gender
discrimination, public health, education and hygiene on a sustained basis. Vulnerability is
studied in detail in subsequent Units in the course.

1.5 VULNERABILITY AND RISK ASSESSMENT

The international community pioneered by the United Nations has attempted to analyse
disasters overtime and prepare an inventory of causes that lead to them, the extent of
damage suffered, what and how mitigation needs to be applied, and where, successfully.
Vulnerability assessment is a subset of risk assessment, which analyses differential
vulnerability of communities in differential areas of disaster impact (such as increasing or
decreasing degree of hazard proneness).
An attempt should be made at redefining disasters in a dynamic and integrated perspective,
integrating socio-cultural, developmental and ecological outlooks.
The desirables in an academic analysis of vulnerability with the practical perspective of
policy design would include:

Development of an integrated perspective, taking into account socio-cultural,
developmental and ecological perspectives to develop a comprehensive framework of
disaster mitigation; and
 10 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis

Emphasis on poverty alleviation and community empowerment, sustainability of

livelihoods through grass roots democracy through local governance.

1.6 VULNERABILITY FACTORS

As has been rightly pointed out, “The study of the vulnerability of human and natural
systems to climate change and variability, and of their ability to adapt to changes in
climate hazards, is a relatively new field of research that brings together experts from a
wide range of fields, including climate science, development studies, disaster management,
health, geography, policy development and economics, to name but a few areas. There
is need for an integrating framework to bring together these diverse traditions in a
coherent yet flexible fashion, allowing researchers to assess vulnerability, and the potential
for adaptation in a wide variety of different contexts”(IPCC, 2001).
Both natural and man-made factors contribute to vulnerability. Some of the contributing
factors are discussed below:
Population Displacement
Population displacement is both a cause and a consequence of disaster. There is
evidence of positive correlation between poverty and economic inequality and rural to
urban migrations, in that more the level of poverty and income inequality, more is the
extent of rural to urban migrations. The phenomenon is most observed in poor third world
countries where the poor migrate from rural to urban areas in search of livelihoods. The
social order remains basically ‘oligarchic’/ ‘oligopolistic’ in that inequality in income and
wealth distribution persists over time. System change through ‘soft’ democratic options,
such as legislation and rhetoric is not successful as entrenched powers are hard to
reconcile to socialist ideas. Result has been corruption and implementation hurdles, more
specifically at the implementation change. This largely explains why land reforms and social
forestry legislations have not met with expected success. While the size of agricultural
holdings has gradually reduced, ‘exploitation’ of the small and marginal framers at the
hands of rich and the resourceful farmers has persisted. Frequent droughts have compounded
existing problems. The cumulative effect of such conditions has been mass migration of
rural folk to urban metropolitan towns.
In the last decade, issues related to natural disasters and development-led population
displacement and resettlement and rehabilitation have generated considerable debate.
Focus on population displacement, direct and indirect, resulting from five natural and
human processes wherein data and information is still far from adequate. These processes
are natural disasters, urbanisation and industrialisation, natural resource development,
agricultural transformation and infrastructure expansion. There is also a concern that
especially vulnerable social groups, including women, ethnic minorities, and landless people
have generally suffered more than others from displacements.
On the other hand, population displacement is also a consequence of disasters. In the
event of disasters, large-scale displacement of populations from affected areas takes place,
which leads to temporary to permanent loss of livelihood for people. Small-scale industries
and micro enterprises are particularly hit. Much work has not been done on providing
insurance against disasters to people residing in hazard prone areas. Though some
initiatives have been taken, all disasters have not yet been covered properly and resource
mobilisation also is far from adequate (Dhar, 2002). Relocation options have also to be
Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability 11

carefully weighed so as not to result in unintended consequences that negate the very
purpose of the exercise. Unintended consequences as different forms of vulnerability that
might be induced because of relocation for example, loss of livelihood for small
businessmen because of increased distance from urban commercial centers.
Urbanisation
Rural to urban migration has led to unmanageable urbanisation and urban congestion that
has forced human and physical capital extension in high-risk zones. Consequently, the loss
potential of hazards has gone up. Urbanisation has brought in its wake, growth of informal
settlements, unsafe living conditions, disease, class conflict and social capital depletion as
some segments have been socially and economically marginalised. Globalisation has also
contributed in many ways to increasing the vulnerability of the urban poor by creating
‘uncertain’ employment though the obvious impact seems to be betterment of life and
better opportunities for all. Though urbanisation is a worldwide phenomenon, it is more
pronounced in the third world, because of the above recounted factors. As per the 1991
census figures, (provisional) 217 million out of 844 million persons lived in 4,689 cities
and towns in India. In terms of proportion, slightly more than one- fourth of the country’s
population lived in urban areas. Corresponding figures from the first census of the present
century (that is, the 1901 census) indicate that 25.8 million persons, that is, one-tenth of
the total population lived in 1,917 cities and towns. It thus shows that while the number
and proportion of total population living in cities and towns has more than doubled, urban
population itself has increased by more than eight times during the last 90 year period
(Jain, Ghosh, 2005).
About 25 per cent of the world’s population lives in areas of high risk from natural
disasters. Most of these people are in poor regions, where vulnerability arises from
poverty, discrimination and lack of democratic functioning hampers the development
process. The poorest people often have little choice but to live in unsafe settings, whether
it is urban shanties or degraded rural environments. In terms of loss of life and relative
economic impact, disasters hit hardest where poverty stricken people are concentrated. In
less developed countries, rural inhabitants outnumber people in the urban areas. Even
then, now there are more urban dwellers in the third world than in Europe, North
America and Japan combined. Metropolitan cities are growing at a faster rate. It is
estimated that in urban squatter settlements, population densities may reach as high as ten
times of present level. Many buildings are erected on steep slopes or flood prone land,
exposed to strong winds and landslides without suitable material or construction skills. In
highly populated rural areas, population density can exceed 1000 per km² and life is a
recurrent struggle to secure cultivable land. Many people are landless and disadvantaged
by land tenure systems, which deny them access to the means to support themselves.
Migration also has significant cultural impact, besides the more obvious, physical dislocation
of populations in that mass migrations introduce communities to alien cultural practices
which disturb the cultural homogeneity of the community. In extreme conditions they cause
civil strife. Different building practices and construction technologies may be introduced,
which might be unsuited to the requirements/ cultural ethos and practices of those
particular area/ inhabitants. Besides, administrative and political problems are caused due
to the influx of refugees, which disturbs the political and social matrix of the region, like
the influx of Bangladeshi refugees in India, following the 1971 war. Epidemics and
congestion are other administrative problems caused due to mass influx of refugees.
 12 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis

Gender
Vulnerability due to Gender is a result of accretion of unfair social practices over time,
which has caused disempowerment of women in social economic and political spheres.
Gender inequality in social, economic and political spheres has resulted in vast differences
between men and women in emergency situations, concerning matters such as, household
decisions about use of relief assets, voluntary relief and recovery work, access to
evacuation shelter and relief goods, and employment in disaster planning, relief and
recovery programs among other areas of concern in disaster relief. Disaster mitigation as
also response policy, particularly concerning control over relief resources have to factor
this component in decision- making with a view to making it more equitable and on the
whole, more effective.
Economic Factors
Positive correlation has been evidenced between poverty, disasters and environmental
degradation. Relative vulnerability of people is comparatively much higher in third world
countries than in the developed world. As per United Nations estimates, although least
developed countries show less physical exposure to hazards (11%) they account for far
greater number of casualties, (53%). On the other side, the most developed countries
represent more (15%) physical exposure to hazards and account for significantly less
(1.8%) victims. The inference drawn is that the magnitude of disaster suffered is directly
correlated to the level of development, which explains largely the fact of the Third World
accounting for significantly more losses than the developed countries. This difference is
shown by a list of disaster events and fatalities over 1960-81. Japan suffered 43
earthquakes and other disasters and lost 2,700 people that mean 63 deaths per disaster.
Peru suffered 31 disasters with 91,000 dead, a vast majority lost in the single event of
the 1970 earthquake.
The world economy functions and works against the poor who have little opportunity to
process and market what they produce and are largely dependent on the imports from
the industrialised nations for manufactured goods which are quite often unstable. The poor
regions have little opportunity to process and market what they produce and are
dependent on the import from the industrialised nations of manufactured goods, which are
often highly priced or tied to aid packages. The progressive hardship for the small-scale
farmer, combined with a foreign debt burden that may be many times the normal annual
export earnings, takes resources away from long-term development in a process that has
been described as a transfusion of blood from the sick to the healthy. The cycle is
reinforced when natural disaster destroys local products and undermines incentives for
investment. Major disasters, such as the droughts, disrupt and destroy local economies
and bring about shortages in neighbouring regions resulting in innumerable international
refugees and stimulate aid programmes to the extent that the consequences of environmental
hazards are truly global.
Poverty situation increases vulnerability to disasters and contributes in enabling poverty. In
order to facilitate sustainable development, it is essential to eliminate this vicious circle.
Sustainable development, with emphasis on the long-term and intergenerational aspects
enables us to face challenges. Compatibility between economic growth and sustainable
development demands a method to measure the kind of growth that encompasses all
important aspects pertaining to quality of life, such as human exposure to risk situations
and lifestyles.
Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability 13

While all countries may be confronted with natural hazards, the poorer developing
countries, in particular, are disproportionately vulnerable to hazards. Disasters can bring
poor communities to even greater poverty, as households may be forced into increased
debt to rebuild homes and meet basic needs.
There is also the paradox that the economic aid that may flow to a country for
devastation by a natural disaster will be recorded as an increase in GDP, thus hiding the
real economic situation in the recovery phase.
Effects of disasters on poorer developing nations are long-lasting and cause excessive
disruption in the GDP (United Nations, 2004). The effects are more severe than in
developed countries, often depleting scarce financial resources and diverting important
funds towards post-disaster relief.
Poor nations have been known to sanction activities like forest clearance for commercial
activities and export of hardwood, since sizeable numbers of their population depend on
such activities for livelihood. Unsustainable agricultural practices followed in developing
countries, particularly by small and marginal farmers harm the environment. The poor are
forced to live in high-risk zones that increase their vulnerability (Ayson, 1999). Poverty is
not a single dimensional economic concept. Poverty affects the ‘positioning’ of the
affected segment in relation to the ‘haves’, which is a situation of political disempowerment,
economic deprivation and social marginalisation. As has been recently reported, relief
and rehabilitation assistance does not reach the backward sections of society adequately.
During the recent tsunami, it was found that society in coastal areas comprises generally
farmers and fishermen who have strict social hierarchies. This differentiation was reflected
in relative access of communities to relief provisions. Affirmative state action as per
constitutional provisions (Article 14, 15(1) 15(4), and Article 21(right to life) would have
be enforced to ameliorate the iniquitous situation. Directive Principles of State Policy,
namely Article 39 (a) (right to livelihood) 41(public assistance in cases of ‘undeserved
want’) and 47 (raise the level of nutrition) reaffirm the obligation of the state to protect
livelihoods of those discriminated against.
It is proposed that risk reduction strategies targeting poverty should involve local
institutions more meaningfully and focus on providing alternate livelihood options to the
poor and providing safe working environment by reducing occupational hazards which
increase the vulnerability of the poor to hazardous events (Ayson, 1999).
Geographical Factors
Global warming threatens to disrupt agriculture in developing countries though most green
house gas emission has taken place from the developed world. Global warming has
particularly increased the vulnerability of coastal areas, especially small island development
states (SIDS) in that sea level rise will threaten the fragile eco system of these regions,
raising the frequency and intensity of natural hazards like tsunamis, cyclones, floods and
storm surges. Coastal zones, wetlands and coral reefs are likely to be harmed which act
as natural buffers against hazards like cyclones. The magnitude of disasters is also likely
to be greater because of the increased pace of infrastructure development that has taken
place in these regions in the last few years, owing to population pressure and growing
attractiveness of these regions from the point of view of tourism (UNDP, 2002).
SIDS are subject to excessively high impacts from natural hazards and disasters. As has
been noted, “they are particularly vulnerable to tsunamis, tropical cyclones, which can in
 14 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis

one go negate years of development effort. Numerous small island developing states are
facing water scarcity. Drought, sea-level rise and natural disasters have a profound impact
on fragile freshwater lenses in SIDS. Water availability is also climate-sensitive. Countries
such as the Bahamas that traditionally depended almost totally on groundwater, now also
have to use desalination, which contributes to their vulnerability. In addition, the economies
of many SIDS are dominated by agriculture and tourism. Agriculture can cause degradation
of water quality by agro-chemicals as well as harm the coral reefs; tourist hotels use
excessive quantities of water; and wastewater discharges from towns and hotels, are
damaging fragile coastal and marine ecosystems on which these islands rely” (Herrmann,
et al.).
Livestock Vulnerability
Livestock at times is the poor man’s only asset. Unlike other forms of property, livestock
loss is irreplaceable. The contingent issue here is immediate provision of alternate
occupation, which is the most difficult part of rehabilitation. Shortage of food affects
livestock before it starts to affect human beings. Malnutrition and disease reduce their
productive capacity, which results in reduced income for the farmer. Diseases among
livestock also spread during disasters. These still remain less considered aspects of
disaster management. Insurance is the best option but it still needs to be duly considered
in India. Vulnerability factors would be discussed in detail in subsequent units.

1.7 CONCLUSION
Shift of emphasis from disaster response to risk reduction has opened up areas of
exploratory research in the subject of disaster management. Vulnerability analysis seeks to
preempt disasters by ensuring timely preparedness on the part of people and institutions
and government agencies involved. Disaster management is an imminent administrative task
for reduction of disasters through prevention, preparedness, mitigation and response. There
has been a paradigmatic shift of emphasis in the last decade from disaster relief and
rehabilitation to prevention and mitigation strategies. Post-occurrence treatment of disasters
has proved an insufficient measure for proper protection of lives and property. There is
also an emphasis on mainstreaming disaster management in everyday governance by
treating it as integral to policy formation and implementation processes. Disaster management
as a growing arena of state action raises questions related to new public management and
public choice paradigms. Though civil society, typified by non- government organisations,
has taken/is set to take an active part in restorative and rehabilitation measures, it is the
government agency that is expected to function as the ‘prime mover’ besides being the
regulator and the facilitator. It is pertinent to refer, in this context, to the social contract
theory of the origin of state, which is widely accepted, as a secular explanation of the
evolution of the state. According to social contract stipulates, people impart authority to
a state abdicating a measure of their personal liberty and ‘delegating’ the same to the
state, in return for protection of life, liberty and property. By this theory, people are the
sovereign entity and state, the instrumentality to carry out the delegated responsibility.
The emerging arena of disaster management as an integral aspect of development planning,
policy formulation and implementation is of particular significance in the wake of the new
public management contention of expected roll back of the state and ascendant civil
society and private corporate sector. Despite assumptions to the contrary, new vistas
continue to emerge for state action/ intervention. The basic question remains, can the state
Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability 15

roll back? Any answer would only be diffident in view of the fact that despite public
choice assertions, and new public management propaganda of the economy and efficiency
of alternate service delivery mechanisms, the government remains the major player. It is
the government that is called upon to bear the major share of responsibility and
accountability for protection of life, liberty and property of its citizens. It is the government
that is looked upon for responsibility and accountability in almost every regard, more so,
in emergencies.

1.8 KEY CONCEPTS

Biological Hazards : Biological hazards emanate from processes of organic
origin or those conveyed by biological vectors, including
exposure to pathogenic micro-organisms, toxins and
bioactive substances, which may cause the loss of life
or injury, property damage, social and economic
disruption or environmental degradation. Examples of
biological hazards are outbreaks of epidemic diseases,
plant or animal contagion, insect plagues and extensive
infestations
Disaster : Disaster is explained as a serious disruption of the
functioning of society, causing widespread human,
material or environmental losses which exceed the
ability of the affected people to cope using their own
resources. Disasters are natural and man made
Geological hazard : Geological hazards emanate from internal earth
processes or are of tectonic origin, such as
earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic activity and emissions
as well as external processes such as mass movements:
landslides, rockslides, rock falls or avalanches, surface
collapse, expansive soils and debris or mud flows.
Geological hazards can be single, sequential or
combined in their origin and effects floods, debris and
mud floods; tropical cyclones, storm surges, thunder/
hailstorms, rain and wind storms, blizzards and other
severe storms; drought, desertification, wild land fires,
temperature extremes, sand or dust storms; permafrost
and snow or ice avalanches
Hazard : A precise definition of hazard is difficult. The
International Secretariat of Disaster Reduction has
defined hazard as a potentially damaging physical
event, phenomenon or human activity that may cause
the loss of life or injury, property damage, social and
economic disruption or environmental degradation.
Hazards have both natural and human components.
For example, flood problems may be exacerbated by
fluctuations in climate, such as increased storm
frequency, and also by certain human activities, such
16 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis

as land drainage and deforestation. The loss of life

caused by a tropical cyclone will depend to some
extent on storm severity but it can be greatly reduced
by means of a warning system. Attempt has continually
been made to employ science and technology to
harness nature and better living conditions.
Hydro meteorological hazards: These hazards are of atmospheric, hydrological or
oceanographic nature. Hydro-meteorological hazards
include: floods, debris and mud floods; tropical
cyclones, storm surges, thunder/hailstorms, rain and
wind storms, blizzards and other severe storms;
drought, desertification, wild land fires, temperature
extremes, sand or dust storms; permafrost and snow
or ice avalanches. Hydro-meteorological hazards can
be single, sequential or combined in their origin and
effects.
Risk : Risk is explained as the likelihood or probability of a
loss (es). Risk could be voluntary as for example, a
game of boxing or bull fighting, or involuntary, which
is unforeseen and unprepared for. The word is
employed in general usage as also technical usage
whereby it denotes the extent of likely damage or the
hazard potential of a particular event.
Sustainable Development : Sustainable development is development that meets
the needs of the present without compromising with
the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs. It contains within it two key concepts: the
concept of “needs”, in particular the essential needs of
the world’s poor, to which overriding priority should
be given; and the idea of limitations imposed by the
state of technology and social organisation on the
environment’s ability to meet present and the future
needs (Brundtland Commission, 1987). Sustainable
development is based on socio-cultural development,
political stability and decorum, economic growth and
ecosystem protection, which all relate to disaster risk
reduction.

1.9 REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING

“A Climate Risk Management: Approach to Disaster Reduction and Adaptation to
Climate Change” UNDP Expert Group Meeting, Integrating Disaster Reduction with
Adaptation to Climate Change, Havana, June 11-21 2002.
Allen, K, 2003, “Vulnerability Reduction and the Community Based Approach” (Ed.),
Natural Disasters and Development in a Globalising World, Pelling.
Anderson, D.R, 2000, “Catastrophe Insurance and Compensation: Remembering Basic
Principles”, CPCU Journal, 53(2) 76-89.
Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability 17

Anderson, John W, 1968, “Cultural Adaptation to Threatened Disaster”, Human

Organisations, 27.
Anderson-Berry, L. J, 2000, Cyclone Rosita, Post-Disaster Report, Centre for Disaster
Studies, James Cook University, Cairns.
Aysan, Yasemin, 1999, “Putting Floors under the Vulnerable’: Disaster Reduction as a
Strategy to Reduce Poverty”, Presented at the World Bank Consultative Group for
Global Disaster Reduction Meeting, Paris.
Basic Terms of Disaster Risk Reduction read online at http://www.unisdr.org
Blaikie, P, T. Cannon, I. Davis and B. Wisner, 1994, At Risk: Natural Hazards,
People’s Vulnerability and Disasters, Routledge, London.
Blaikie, P. and H. Brookfield, 1987, Land Degradation and Society, Methuen and
Company Ltd., London.
Carr, Lowell Julliard, 1932, “Disaster and the Sequence Pattern Concept of Social
Change”, AIS, vol. 38.
Climate Change 2001: Working Group II: “Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability”, online
at http://www.gridano/climateipcc_tar/index.html
Coburn A.W, R.J.S. Sspence and P.W. Pomonis, 1994, “Vulnerability and Risk
Assessment”, Disaster Management Training Programme, Cambridge Architectural Research
limited, Artifax Services, U.K.
Cutter, S.L, 1993, Living with Risk, Edward Arnold, London.
Definition of Risk at http://www.encyclopaedia.labourlaw.com
“Definition of Disaster Risk: Total Disaster Risk Management: Good Practices”, at http:/
/www.adrc.or.jp/publications/TDRM2005/TDRM_Good_Practices/PDF/Chapter1_1.2.pdf
“Displaced Populations and Human Settlements” online at http://www.unhabitat.org/
programmes/rdmu/documents/dpopulations.pdf.
“Gender and Women’s Health: Gender and Disaster”, online at http//: www.w3whosea.org/
EN/Section13/Section 390_7455.htm
“Health Disaster Management: Guidelines for Research in the “Up stein style”, Chapter
Four, Conceptual Model: Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability, and Damage, at, http://
pdm.medicine.wisc.edu/Guidelines/Chapter4.pdf
Green, 1990, “Perceived Risk, Past, Present and Future Conditional in Hazards and the
Communication of Risk”, J. Handmer and Roswell E. Penning (Eds), Hazards and the
Communication of Risk, Gower, England.
Herrmann, Thora Martinna, Espen Ronneberg, Marcia Brewster and Manuel Dengo,
“Social and Economic Aspects of Disaster Reduction, Vulnerability and Risk Management
in Small Island Development states”.
Holling, 1986, “The Resilience of Terrestrial Ecosystem Local Surprise and Global
Change” in W.C. Clarke and R.E. Nunn (Eds), Sustainable Development of the
Biosphere, Cambridge University Press, London.
Holling, C.S, 2001, Understanding the Complexity of Economic and Social Systems,
Ecosystem 4(5).
 18 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis

Gopalakrishnan, S, “Disaster”, online at http://www.icm.tn.gov.in/dengue/disaster.htm#eff

http://www.ewc2.org/upload/downloads/Policy_brief.pdf
http://www.proventionconsortium.org/files/microfin_020200/yodami.pdf.
http://www.sidsnet.org/docshare/other/20050126112910_Disaster_Reduction_and_Small_
Island_States
http://www.undp.org/bcpo/disred/documents/wedo/icrm/riskadaptationintegrated
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Third Assessment Report, WMO,
Geneva.
Jain, M.K.and Minati Ghosh, 2005, “Emerging Trends of Urbanisation in India: An
Analysis of 1991 Census Results”, Office of The Registrar General and Census
Commissioner, India, at http://www.auick. Org
Jigyasu, Rohit, 2002, Ph.D.Thesis, “The Case of Earthquake Prone Rural Communities in
India and Nepal,” Trondheim.
Medury, Uma, 2003, “Disaster Risk Reduction: A Preparedness Approach”, Pardeep
Sahni and Madhavi Ariyabandu (Eds), Disaster Risk Reduction in South Asia, Prentice-
Hall of India, New Delhi.
Mohan, Niraj, Arvind Narain, Deepu and Clifton Rozario, 2005 “Relief and Rehabilitation:
Ensuing, Inclusion”, Economic and Political Weekly, April 9 Issue.
Munasinghe, Mohan, 1996, “Natural Disasters and Sustainable Development: Linkage and
Policy Options”, World Bank, Washington.
“Natural Hazards: Causes and Effects”, Lesson 1, “Introduction to Natural Hazards,”
Disaster Management Center, University of Wisconsin, at http://www.dmc.engr.wisc.edu/
courses/ssenglish.htm
Peduzzi, Pascal, “Risk and Development: Natural Disasters Do Not Exist”, Head of The
Early Warning Unit, UNEP/Dewa/Grid-Europe.
Smith, K, 1996, Environmental Hazards, Routledge, London.
Smith, Oliver A, 1999, “Peru’s Five Hundred Year Earthquake: Vulnerability in Historical
Context,” Oliver Smith A and S. Hoffman (Eds), The Angry Earth, Rouletdge, New
York.
Talwar, Prem P, “Urban Scenario in Asian Countries” at http://www.auick.org
Timmerman, P, 1981, “Vulnerability, Resilience and the Collapse of Society”, Environmental
Monograph, Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto, Canada.
Twigg, 2001, “Disaster Mitigation and Preparedness Among NGOs in Gujarat State,
India”, based on Research at the Disaster Mitigation Institute, Ahmedabad.
UNDP, “Nothing Natural about These Disasters”, UNDP report read online at http://
www.infochangeindia.org
UNDP, 2004, Reducing Disaster Risk: A Challenge for Development, UNDP, Geneva.
UN-ISDR, 2004, “Living with Risk: A Global Review of Disaster Reduction
Initiatives”, International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, United Nations Inter-Agency
Secretariat, Geneva.
Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability 19

United Nations, l989, “Prospects of World Urbanisation” Population Studies No.112 ST/
SEA/Ser.A/112, Department of International Economic and Social Affairs; United Nations,
New York.
Watts, 1983, “On the Poverty of Theory, Natural Hazards Research in Context”, K.
Hewitt (Ed), Interpretations of Calamity.
“World Disasters Report”, 2002, Integrating Early Warning into Relevant Policies,
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, EWC-II Version, 18
October 2003.
Yodmani, Suvit, “Poverty, Vulnerability and Disaster Risk Reduction for the Poor”, on line
at Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) web site.

1.10 ACTIVITIES
1) Define disaster and list out important perceptions on disasters.
2) Identification of hazards involves analyses of scientific data to trace the causal path
of events leading up to a disaster. Discuss.
3) Discuss important vulnerability factors with illustrations.