Natural Disasters in South East Asia and Bangladesh - Vulnerability Risks and Consequences (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters - International Center for Training Exchanges in the Geosciences, 1998, 83 p.): PART IV - SYNOPTIC ASSESSMENT OF NATURAL HAZARDS ON A NATIONAL SCALE: 4. From a typological to a hierarchical classification of the territories prone to risks

Natural Disasters in South East Asia and Bangladesh - Vulnerability Risks and Consequences (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters - International Center for Training Exchanges in the Geosciences, 1998, 83 p.)

(introduction...)

INTRODUCTION

Context and objectives

General characteristics of the region under study

Study plan

PART I - THE CONSEQUENCES OF NATURAL DISASTERS IN SOUTH EAST ASIA AND BANGLADESH

(introduction...)

1. Overall assessment of natural disasters (events, human implications)

2. Economic consequences

PART II - NATURAL HAZARDS AND DISASTERS: DISTRIBUTION AND FREQUENCES

1. Types of natural hazards and their distribution

2. Disaster frequency and distribution

PART III - ASSESSING VULNERABILITY CRITERIA AND GLOBAL RISK LEVELS

1. Analysis of the vulnerability criteria (figure 30)

1.1. Socio-economic indicators (wealth, health and education)

1.2. Demographic indicators (population density and growth)

1.3. Synthesis

2. Global risk levels (figure 33)

PART IV - SYNOPTIC ASSESSMENT OF NATURAL HAZARDS ON A NATIONAL SCALE

(introduction...)

1. Criteria used to identify territories prone to risks

(introduction...)

1.1. Hazards

1.2. Different population types and consequences as concerns vulnerability

2. Five types of territories prone to risks

(introduction...)

2.1. Deltas

2.2. Inland basins

2.3. Coastal plains

2.4. Coastal mountains

2.5. Inland mountains

3. National distribution of the territories prone to risks

4. From a typological to a hierarchical classification of the territories prone to risks

CONCLUSIONS

Part I - The consequences of natural disasters in South East Asia and Bangladesh

Part II - Natural hazards and disasters: Distribution and frequencies

Part III - Assessing vulnerability criteria and global risk levels

Part IV - Synoptic assessment of natural hazards on a national scale

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 - Map of events distribution according to the nature of disaster phenomena (1900-1996)

Appendix 2 - Map of events distribution according to the nature of disaster phenomena (1900-1971)

Appendix 3 - Map of events distribution according to the nature of disaster phenomena (1972-1996)

Appendix 4 - Physical maps of the seven target countries

4. From a typological to a hierarchical classification of the territories prone to risks

It is difficult to establish a hierarchy in terms of risks of the five territories. Each of the territories has specific types of natural hazards and particular forms of vulnerability even though it is easy to regroup the deltas and coastal plains on one side, and the coastal mountains and inland mountains on the other, and distinguish the inland basins. Therefore a typological classification of zones prone to risks is proposed here more than an attempt of hierarchical organization based on risk levels. This approach aims at providing a basis of reflection and decision-making for some of the solutions that would reduce the risks and cannot be standardised on a national scale but be adapted to the different types of situations.

This being stated, it might be possible to establish priorities. Taking all the human and physical criteria together, the deltas are logically within the very highest risk zones. For the other territories, the hierarchical organization depends on the criterion considered.

Considering the demographic criteria (population size and densities), the inland basins are of main concern. On the other hand, the risks in the coastal plains appear more significant given the striking diversity and potential intensity of the natural hazards alone. Basing on the socio-political factors ^among others the minorities groups), it is the coastal or inland mountains that appear to be the areas of high risk because of the vulnerability. From this point of view the reduction of the vulnerability can not be a simple technical task. The determination of the priority sectors prone to risks cannot therefore be based on scientific, physical or human criteria only, but also on political choices and considerations.