Identify which hazard:

(i) affected the least number of people in 2012;

(ii) affected the greatest number of people between 2002 and 2012.

Suggest two reasons why the number of people affected by storms in 2012 is lower than in previous years.

Explain what is meant by the:

(i) rehabilitation response to a hazard event;

(ii) reconstruction response to a hazard event.

Examine why some areas of the world have a high hazard risk for either earthquakes or volcanoes

(i) Volcanoes

(ii) Droughts

In each case award [1] for a basic explanation of why the 2012 figure is smaller and [1] for some development (using knowledge of the hazard) or the applied use of an example, such as a large named hazard event occurring in 2002–2012.

• There may have been fewer hurricanes in 2012 [1] – may suggest reasons eg ENSO [1].
• There is natural variation in the strength of large hurricane events [1] and may link to higher return period idea (or similar) or may quote known case study data for 2002–2012 period, or may use Saffir–Simpson scale [1].
• Not all tracks reach populated areas [1] and may give details or know case studies of “near misses” in 2012 [1].
• Credit suggestions of climatic variability or ENSO cycles [1] linked to critical temperature of 26°C [1].
• Prediction and monitoring [1] – allows for evacuation and therefore fewer affected [1].
• Other valid suggestions.

(i) Award [1] for definition and [1] for further development or exemplification.

For example: Rehabilitation describes treatment or help for people who have been harmed in some way [1]. It involves different types of help (eg counselling alongside surgery) [1] or after the Haiti earthquake 300 000 people needed help/rehabilitation [1].

(ii)  Award [1] for definition and [1] for further development or exemplification. 

For example: Reconstruction describes the replacement of buildings damaged by a hazard event [1] (allow rebuilding of a country’s economy). It involves different types of work (eg repair work or new building) [1], or the reconstruction cost after Hurricane Katrina was US$81bn) [1].

Hazard risk distribution comprises both the spatial distribution of earthquakes/volcanoes and population patterns and characteristics.

The physical explanation should include key factors such as tectonic margins, processes (subduction), possibly types of margin, and/or hotspots. Human factors may include coastal distributions of population, vulnerable megacities, income levels and property risks (the examination may compare the pattern of property risk in high-income countries with the pattern of mortality risk in low-income countries), adaptation measures.

If a candidate considers both earthquakes and volcanoes, only credit the first.

Good answers are likely to provide a structured examination of different human aspects of hazard risk (people/property) and may also distinguish between different physical aspects of the hazard risk (primary/secondary hazards). Another approach might be to use the concept of scale (eg examines how risk vary at both a macro-scale/continental scale and also at a micro-scale, such as along specific fault lines).

For band D, expect some description of plate margins and/or the existence of countries/populations at different levels of economic development.

At band E, expect either more detailed explanation of why margin movements bring risk(s) to different locations or a structured examination of the human risks for different areas.

At band F expect both of these elements.

Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.

The vast majority had no problem with this.

This posed few problems. Few, however, realized that the 2002–2012 figure was an average and that events such as Hurricane Katrina could have skewed the results. Most referred to improved prediction and increased preparedness.

Most could explain the difference between the two terms, often with examples and case studies. There was some confusion over the terms. Reconstruction was stronger than rehabilitation.

A few candidates referred to both earthquakes and volcanoes, and if both are used only the first one mentioned was credited. The large majority chose earthquakes. To access the higher markbands, explanation should refer to both physical factors, such as tectonic margins, and human factors such as population distribution and contrasting levels of economic development. The physical factors were not detailed enough to show knowledge and understanding and the human factors were generalized and descriptive.