What, then, accounts for the increase in the frequency and destructiveness of natural disasters that we read about? If the forces of nature are not to blame, the finger of guilt seems to point to the human element. And, indeed, authorities have recognized that human activities have made our environment both more prone to natural disasters and more vulnerable to them. In the developing nations, a growing need for food forces farmers to overcultivate what land they have or to reclaim land by clearing away vital forest covering. This leads to serious soil erosion. Expanding population also hastens the growth of slums and shantytowns haphazardly built in unsafe areas. Even in the more developed nations, people, like the millions living along the San Andreas Fault in California, have exposed themselves to danger in spite of clear warnings. In such circumstances, when an unusual turn of events​—a storm, a flood, or an earthquake—​occurs, can the disastrous result really be called “natural”?

A typical example is the drought in the African Sahel. We normally think of drought as the lack of rain or water, leading to famine, starvation, and death. But is the massive famine and starvation in that area due simply to lack of water? Says the book Nature on the Rampage: “Evidence gathered by scientific and relief agencies indicates that today’s famine persists not so much from prolonged drought as from prolonged abuses of land and water resources. . . . The continuing desertification of the Sahel is largely a man-caused phenomenon.” A South African newspaper, The Natal Witness, observes: “Famine is not about lack of food; it is about lack of access to food. In other words, it is about poverty.”

The same can be said of much of the destruction resulting from other catastrophes. Studies have shown that the poorer nations suffer disproportionately higher death rates from natural disasters than do the richer nations of the world. For example, from 1960 to 1981, according to one study, Japan had 43 earthquakes and other disasters and lost 2,700 lives, averaging 63 deaths per disaster. In the same period, Peru had 31 disasters with 91,000 deaths, or 2,900 per disaster. Why the difference? Natural forces may have provided the triggers, but it is human activity​—social, economic, political—​that must bear the responsibility for the large difference in the loss of life and destruction of property that resulted.

[Pictures on page 8, 9]

Human activities have made our environment more prone to natural disasters

[Credit Lines]

Laif/​Sipa Press

Chamussy/​Sipa Press

Wesley Bocxe/​Sipa Press

Jose Nicolas/​Sipa Press