Global Disasters More Frequent Because of Population Growth

The Boxing Day tsunami of 2004 killed almost a quarter of a million people. A hurricane wiped out the city of New Orleans at the end of August. Several hundreds of Central Americans have perished in mudslides brought on by a different hurricane. Over the week-end, tens of thousands died in Pakistan (a not a few in India and Afghanistan) after an earthquake measuring 7.6 on the Richter scale hit. Those of an apocalyptic bent may see the Four Horsemen’s hoof prints in these disasters, but there is a simple explanation. There are more humans living in more dangerous places than ever before.

Taking Pakistan as a convenient example, the Population Resource Center estimates that the British-administered territory that is currently Pakistan had a population of about 17 million in 1901. Its first census came in 1951, three years after independence, and the nation had doubled to 34 million souls. The 1998 census resulted in a headcount of 132 million. The CIA estimate in 2005 for the country is 162.4 million. Where does one put them all?

In 1901, the population of Pakistan lived in fertile farm country, in decent grazing land, and in cities of manageable size. Today, they live in those same areas, but the population has had to build up its cities and to spread into less attractive rural areas. The earthquake hit in a tectonically active area far to the north in the foothills of the Himalayas, where a century ago, a far smaller population resided. Fewer people means fewer possible fatalities. Still, in the 1935 Quetta earthquake, estimates are that 30,000 to 60,000 died, similar to the death toll now. There were no helicopters in those days nor dogs to sniff out survivors in the rubble. Distributing water, food and medical supplies (which lacked antibiotics anyway) was much harder. Technology holds down the mortality rate, balancing out to a degree the greater at-risk population.

New Orleans has experienced a similar situation. The infamous Ninth Ward that was under water until just a couple of days ago, was not inhabited when the city was founded. Only as the levee system grew, and the poor of the city increased in number did that district gain residents. The older sections of the city that are above sea-level, where the French originally settled, drained nicely and have been open for business for quite some time now.

As the global population increases, people must take to more dangerous sites to reside. Some is by necessity, like in Pakistan, and some is by choice, like the fire-prone canyons near Los Angeles. Disasters increase because there are more people living in those places. The world isn’t ending, but CNN is able to put the suffering of the distant millions right in everyone’s living room. If there are more millions, there will be more disasters.


© Copyright 2005 by The Kensington Review, J. Myhre, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent.
Produced using Fedora Linux.

Home