Moreover, as demonstrated it is human interaction
Moreover, disasters are further made worse by humaninteraction and vulnerability. To put this into context, disasterreconstruction more often than not deepens the exploitation of the marginalised(Smith, 2006). After the disaster struck New Orleans with Hurricane Katrina andthe dead became unaccounted for it was found that developers had already beganto look for a new opportunity. The takeover of the developers was compared to a”developers’ gold rush” (Streitfield, 2005, as cited in Smith, 2006, para 3). This is a common theme after disasters asdevelopers seek to rebuild. However, the poor and marginalised often become worseoff after the disaster due to a decrease in wages, an increase in stigma and anincrease in costs for alternative housing (Smith, 2006). Therefore, again thereis a theme of the marginalisation of the poor as the money focused developersstrive to make a profit and as a result the poor are displaced.
Smith (2006,para 16) claims that “There is no such thing as a natural disaster, and thesupposed naturalness of the market is the last place to look…” I agree withthis because as demonstrated it is human interaction as proved which almostalways links up with disasters and often this worsens them, especially in thecase of post Hurricane Katrina.To sum up, the argument put forward by theorists suchas Squires and Hartman (2006), Smith (2006) and Sheller (2012) that there is nosuch thing as a natural disaster. I believe is accurate. Firstly, I am insupport of the claim because if it was not for the marginalisation of the poorin Haiti and Hurricane Katrina then the damage and death toll could have indeedbeen reduced, or even prevented.
Moreover, if it was not for the ignorance ofwarning given pre-disaster then again, the damage could have been on a muchlower and less damaging scale. Additionally, I believe it is important to takethe stance like theorists Smith (2006) and Sheller (2012) by insisting thatthere is no such thing as a natural disaster because through taking this stancewe are able to take responsibility as a society and also take action tominimise the possibility of such disaster, or hazard happening again.On the other hand, it is important to recognise thatthere is a weakness to the argument formed by the social scientists,geographers and disaster scholars in that there is no such thing as a naturaldisaster. In the second half of this discussionessay I am going to consider nature and humanity as intertwined concepts. Iwill explore why it could be argued that there is such thing as a naturaldisaster.
I will achieve this by using theFoot and Mouth disease case which visited the UK in 2001 and again the Haitiearthquake of 2010 to demonstrate this point of view.