Describe the difference between a hazard and a disaster.

Explain why some sections of a community are more vulnerable to hazards than others.

Compare the effectiveness of the methods used to predict the occurrence of two different natural hazard types.

A hazard constitutes a threat to people, property and/or the environment [1 mark]. It can be natural or human in origin [1 mark].

A disaster results from a hazard event that has major impacts on people, economic and/or environmental impacts [1 mark] and which the area or country cannot deal with unless there is outside aid [1 mark].

Award up to 3 marks for each section of a community whose vulnerability is well explained or for a single factor which is well explained.

Vulnerable sections could include: different age categories, income groups, people with disabilities, location, gender, and ethnicity. (Do not accept MEDC/LEDC differences.) Not all of these are needed for 6 marks.

6 marks may also be awarded for a brief explanation of six valid factors. Factors might include: knowledge of the hazard, education level, warning systems, insurance, communications, population density, income level, building types and construction codes.

Answers depend on the hazard types chosen.

The two hazard types should be clearly identified and must be natural hazards. (It is expected that these will be chosen from volcanic hazards, earthquakes, hurricanes or drought, but other natural hazard types such as tsunamis may be credited.) Answers should clearly outline the methods used to try to predict the named hazard types and make comparisons as to their reliability in forecasting hazard events.

Responses that compare the effectiveness of methods used to predict one of the hazard types should be credited, but comparisons between the methods used for different types of hazard should form the bulk of the argument to essentially determine which hazard is the more predictable.

To access bands E and F, answers should effectively compare the methods used.

Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.

Candidates either knew the IB definitions of hazards and disasters or they did not – this differentiated those who scored 2, 3 or 4 out of 4.

There were some excellent answers which identified parts of the community (aged, young, women, infirm, poor, disabled) and explained why they are at increased risk. However, too many went for the MEDC/LEDC contrast and did not appreciate the scale involved in the question.

Answers frequently examined the methods used to predict their chosen hazards rather than evaluating their effectiveness. The two most frequent natural hazards chosen were hurricanes and earthquakes, which lend themselves to a very good contrast. However, answers needed to compare the effectiveness of the methods to predict to access the higher bands (E and F).