Notes on Media and Disaster

For one thing, history shows that the world tends to lose interest in disasters in developing world once people stop dying in large numbers. If we don't think now about our commitment to helping these communities recover and rebuild after the immediate crisis has passed, we never will. (Architect, re-build Project. Tsunami 2005)

New channels everyday bring the destruction and to us, making it personal, raising concerns, curiosity about the cause, effects and dynamics of a disaster. Issues relating to a disaster get pondered over and discussed, raising the social awareness. In the post Silent Spring era where environmental degradation has become an all pervasive issue, it is discussed relating to the effects and causes of the disaster, and also how human intervention is affecting the environment. This social mobilization lays down foundation for various action groups and creates space for existing social groups to put forth their concerns. Corporates respond to the concerns and issue regulations and standards, advertising their efforts in turn helping social movements to gain momentum. These groups are responsible for involving the masses and also play part in formation and implementation of government regulations.

Social groups and NGO's working in the field of disaster management have only recently come to accept environmental awareness as a important part of the recovery and mitigation cycle. The first links between natural disasters and environment were drawn in the late 1990's. The international symposium in Japan, 2005 concluded that environmental protection is a component of disaster management and that an integrated approach to risk reduction is required. After the Berlin symposium 2002 there are four UN organizations including the UNEP, ISDR and many other implementing agencies responsible for identifying ecosystems in danger and spread of environmental awareness.

Many laws and directives have been passed by governments and regulatory agencies at all levels relating to environmental and disaster mitigation issues, but globally it has been seen that the lawyers who are major players in the fight for the environment, we need more scientists, ecologists, environmental engineers and less lawyers and politicians. We cannot hope to manage a complex system such as the environment through litigation; also most environmental "principles" (such as sustainable development or the precautionary principle) have the effect of preserving the economic advantage of the west and thus continue modern imperialism toward the developing world (B. Wilfred. A Poverty of Reason...).

Globalization is bringing people closer, and with the social movement gaining momentum globally, scientists, architects, designers, ecologists and people from various spheres come together to form international forums. Responses to disaster also foster growth of a community of experts and amateurs who think and document, raise issues regarding degradation and help create a rich knowledge pool with the internet as a platform. This is especially interesting because, in the present nobody is really sure what nature is really about, our understanding of natural processes is extremely shallow.

Such forums ¹ experiment with various aspects and create open-ended platforms for people to put forth their ideas, free of control from administration, politics, and other organizations, who always have a particular outcome in mind. Also in view of the modern revolution in science that gives a new understanding of nonlinear dynamics, complex systems, chaos theory, catastrophe theory, our view of evolution and ecology has undergone a major change (S. Riece, The Silver Lining). People from various areas are essential to undertake a fruitful discussion on the complex processes and ways of nature.²

The human pool of knowledge is not rich enough to explain even the most trivial of nature's ways; we are just specs in space-time and even as a race can know very little about the greater plan of nature

Micro-habitats and environments change. If a tree falls in the forest, and lands in the river, it will change all of the flow patterns near it. What was once a fast reach can be stilled. As the water seeks a downstream path around the log, a new chute will form. The microhabitats have all changed, and the community must change, too. What was once an excellent blackfly habitat is no longer suitable for the flies. The animals have to to survive. Some won’t make it. Some were crushed when the tree fell on them. Some will get stranded and die. Some will get up and go. Change is endless and has consequences for all living things. It is as obvious as day follows night and the change of the seasons. What is rare is constancy (S. Riece. The Silver Lining)

We need to understand that in the larger scheme of things we are just one of the billions of implements of nature, and it is more probable than not, that we have little or no capability to harm, or cause destruction in nature, or our purpose in the dynamics of nature is to destroy, just like many destructions in history have allowed for growth of new species, it is nature's way to maintain biological diversity.

Every Tornado’s funnel, every forest fire’s cloud of smoke has tremendous benefits for the ecosystem. (David, Victor. Climate of Doubt)

We think of ourselves as 'thinking' beings capable of changing the world, but it is easy to see that we are not any different from the countless cells in our body, we are cells of our planet, look from beyond with the earth as an organism then we are the cells, important one's we would like to believe, but the behavior of our collective mass can be described as simplistic.

Another analogy to this is the portrayal of the landlady in 'Tom and Jerry', from the view of Tom and Jerry, the landlady is just like a natural disturbance in our view, the face of the lady is never shown, and drawing attention to the fact from other viewpoints we are not the center of things. Tom tries to do all that he can to be safe from the bashing by the lady, but he also must get Jerry, and this is analogous to our dilemma, choose between rapid development or safety. It can be argued that a middle path can be taken, and therefore it is important to study all facets of human society and the science of nature, to reduce the effects of disaster. It is important that economics and politics do not interfere with learning and research in nature.