Nature - autonomous learning

120 de-naturalisationACTIVITY 3.2Think about a natural hazard that seems incontrovertibly ‘natural’ (like anearthquake). What, in your view, is natural about this hazard?If we take earthquakes as our example, then an answer to the Activityquestion might be as follows. First, earthquakes are natural because they arecaused by geophysical processes that humans can do little to influence.These processes unfold well below the earth’s surface where continentalplates torque and collide. Second, earthquakes occur regardless of whatpeople think about them and regardless of whether or not people experiencethem. In short, earthquakes seem self-evidently natural and theybecome ‘hazards’ if and when people suffer their effects (like collapsedbuildings). A recent, shocking example that appears to confirm this wasthe earthquake that hit the ancient city of Bam in Iran. Measuring almost7 on the Richter scale, the December 2003 earthquake killed a staggering40,000 people and injured thousands of others.This discussion of the naturalness of ‘natural hazards’ may seem obviousand uncontroversial. If we took any number of natural hazards – floods,hurricanes or tsunamis, say – most people would readily agree that they areprimarily natural events.Within the world of hazard analysis and management,what Hewitt called the ‘dominant view’ comprised the followingbeliefs (1983: 5–9):• Hazards are extreme natural events, low in frequency but high inmagnitude.• Because the impact of hazards can be ameliorated but rarely controlled,hazards are independent variables to which societies must adapt andadjust.• Hazards are best managed using technical means that either stymie thegeophysical causes of those hazards or else reduce the physical impactsof hazards.In sum, Hewitt saw the dominant view as fixated on technical solutions towhat were seen as naturally occurring events that were largely unpredictableand capricious. In this view, the risk people ran of being harmed by natural