Using data from the diagram, describe three trends shown.

Suggest how a community’s vulnerability to hazards is affected by:

(i) the demographic characteristics of its population; 

(ii) the socio-economic characteristics of its population.

Using examples, contrast the strategies adopted to minimize the risk from future droughts and hurricanes.

Award [1] for each valid statement, up to [3].

Possibilities could include:

• total population increases [1]
• over-65s no change 1915–65 then rise in 2015/after 1965 [1]
• poverty % rises then falls [1].

Award [1] for each valid point up to a maximum of [3]. The final [1] is reserved for some quantification.

(i) Responses may use own knowledge or may refer to the diagram.

In each case, award [1] for each basic link between a valid population factor and some aspect of vulnerability/risk (such as preparedness, resilience, response) and up to [2] for further development using applied knowledge of a hazard, an example, or data from the diagram.

Possibilities could include:

• more people means greater numbers are at risk [1] may give example of a place [1]
• more migrants who speak a different language and do not understand warnings [1]
• older people may have greater knowledge of dangers and are better prepared [1].

For example: Vulnerability increases if more elderly people are in a place at risk of flooding who might be unable to move quickly [1], this might be the case for a coastal town in Florida [1] with large numbers of elderly there who also may struggle to hear warnings [1].

(ii) Responses may use own knowledge or may refer to the diagram.

In each case, award [1] for each basic link between a valid population factor and some aspect of vulnerability/risk (such as preparedness, resilience, response) and up to [2] for further development using applied knowledge of a hazard, an example, or data from the diagram.

Possibilities could include:

• high levels of poverty may mean more people living in hazard-prone areas [1]
• poorer people/areas have lower quality housing that is vulnerable to hazard events [1]
• lower income groups may not be able to afford insurance so are more vulnerable [1]
• high levels of affluence means more valuable possessions at risk [1]
• people with less formal education may have less knowledge of risks [1]. 

For example: Low income groups cannot afford insurance and so are vulnerable [1], and also may not have a television so do not get the warnings in time [1]. The poor were badly affected when Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans [1].

There are multiple aspects of adjustment and response, including building construction, land-use planning, insurance, education and community capability-building, planning for rescue and rehabilitation.

Answers may also highlight the possibility of climate change, making hurricanes and droughts more frequent/less predictable, and thus management strategies would need to plan for the future.

Good answers may highlight and comment on the clear contrasts that emerge from the analysis, and the way these relate to the varying nature of the risk (hurricanes are sudden onset, powerful, destructive events and this ought to be factored into the way buildings are constructed; whereas droughts are slow onset, pervasive periods of water shortage and this may require better governance in relation to water management/food storage).

Answers that do not deal with predicted/future risk, but instead contrast the emergency/reconstruction response to events that have occurred already should be judged on their merits and might reach band D.

At band D, expect a basic description of strategies used for the two hazards (do not expect balance).

At band E, expect either greater, well-exemplified detail of the varied strategies and/or risks, or some critical evaluation of the contrasting character of the responses/risks.

At band F expect both.

Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.