Using examples, evaluate the success of adjustment and response strategies for a named hazard type.

The success of adjustment and response strategies for hurricanes and earthquakes is very different depending on the country or area that was hit. An example of a hazard where there were issues with adjustment and response strategies but also successes with these was the Haiti earthquake in 2010. In this disaster around 230 000 people were killed, another 250 000 injured and around one million people left homeless. A disaster that accounts mainly for challenges with adjustment and response strategies is the New Orleans Hurricane Katrina in 2005, where in comparison only 2000 people died and 800 000 were left homeless. About 60% of the people affected were from the poorer sections of the city and the ethnic minorities.

In both of the named hazards, there were successes of adjustment and response strategies. In New Orleans, even before the Hurricane Katrina there were defence strategies in place to prevent any disasters like flooding or hurricanes. These levees were made at a very high price order to prevent any hurricanes up to type three. Unfortunately the Hurricane Katrina was a type four hurricane and left the city devastated. In an attempt to reconstruct these levees and defence systems, $14.3 billion was given to this project which was the only adjustment that should protect the city in the future and according to economists, it cost the US around $80 billion to repair all of the damage caused by the hurricane. In Haiti on the other hand there was a lot of short term aid from many countries including the United Nations, Britain, Germany and many others. Even though after the first seven days the UN was only able to get food to 200 000 people, a month after the disaster the world food program had brought food to nearly 2.5 million people. Even months after the earthquake, these shelters were overcrowded as people were too scared to go back to their homes. Many of these homes were destroyed and would take years to be reconstructed. In the long term, Haiti has made blue prints in order to build infrastructure that is less vulnerable to disaster such as these.

However, especially the US failed to succeed in responding to the disaster massively. There was little aid given to all the homeless people in the short term after the disaster by the federal government and the little aid that was given was only to the rich native Americans and not to the most heavily affected people living in the poorest areas, whom many of which were ethnic minorities. The flood levees that the US invested in after the disaster were still only built to withstand category three hurricanes, as the US said it would be too expensive to build them for higher category hurricanes. In the Haiti disaster, there was no way in which the country had prepared for any disasters such as this earthquake. All of the housing was poor quality as it was built as fast as possible and as cheaply as possible for the rapidly growing population, which was increasing by 1.4% a year. After the disaster it was estimated that around $8-14 billion had to be spent on the repair of infrastructure. This estimate was extremely rough, making it difficult for other countries to decide on how much financial aid they should give Haiti.

Overall, after the Haiti disaster the country and other helping countries were much more successful with responding strategies than the US was after the Hurricane Katrina as the US did not want to receive any outside help form other countries, because they thought it would make them look weak. They themselves did not provide the appropriate aid for the people living in the poorest neighbourhoods which were hit the worst and adjustments for the city that should have been provided were not made.

Essay: Using examples, evaluate the success of adjustment and response strategies for hurricanes.

Hurricanes are intense hazards, which have potentials to cause loss of lives, injuries, property damages, socio- economic disruptions or environmental degradations. They are characterized by strong winds, heavy rainfall (up to 500 millimeters in 24 hours), high waves and cause other hazards, such as flooding and mudslides. Hurricanes form between 5 ° and 30 ° latitude and move westwards, often on erratic, unpredictable courses and slightly towards the poles. Hurricanes occur when temperatures, pressure and humidity are formed over a wide area in the lower troposphere for an extensive period of time, and anticyclonic conditions exist in the upper troposphere. Therefore, these conditions are essential for the development near the Earth’s surface, of intensive low pressure and strong winds. To allow a hurricane to move, there must be a presence of a continuous source of heat to maintain the rising air currents and a large supply of moisture to provide the latent heat, released by condensation. An average hurricane travels about 650 km per hour and up to 4,800 km before it dies out. Since the path of a hurricane is erratic, it’s not always possible to give more than 12 hours’ notice. Therefore, it is insufficient for proper evacuation measures. However, the most powerful hurricanes don’t always cause the greatest damage. Hurricane mitigation depends on the effectiveness of the human response to natural disaster and this is exemplified in the hurricane Katrina and cyclone Nargis. The adjustments and response strategies for hurricanes are successful to an extent, where a specific area is economically developed in order to modify the hazard and change the loss of potential.
On 29 August, 2005 at a speed of 225 km/hour hurricane Katrina hit the land near New Orleans. Katrina was a category 4 hurricane on the Saffir Simpson scale. Unlike other hurricanes, Katrina was gradually building up and flooding 80% of the city, killing over 1,800 people and damaging 204000 homes, making over 800,000 people homeless. As a more economically developed country, the US government spend $80 billion on reconstruction and rehabilitation. The government was not able to predict or modify the hazard. However, the Office of Coastal Protection spent $ 1.5 billion over four years on wetland restoration, integration hurricane protection, storm damage reduction, flood control, coastal protection and restoration in the state of Louisiana. After the hurricane, the government reduced the vulnerability of structures and infrastructures by designing new wind and water resistant buildings and improved building sites by raising the ground level to protect against flood and storm surges. Consequently, the adjustments and response strategies for hurricane Katrina were successful due to high economic level.
In May 2008, Cyclone Nargis occurred in Burma. It’s find exceeded 190 km/h, devastating the area, killing 134,000 people and destroying 95% of all buildings. Areas were left without any food or electricity.  The reason why the area was so damaged is because it is a less economically developed country, which continues to lose more lives to natural hazards, as a result of inadequate planning and preparation. Burma is a vulnerable land, which doesn’t have money to invest into reconstruction of buildings and rehabilitation. The quality of buildings is very poor and the access to any technical devices is not possible for everyone, due to the lack of money citizens do not even have a television or radio, which are the main sources for warning. As an LEDC the government was not able to modify the hazard or improve its response strategies. Therefore, it is clear that Burma wasn’t successful at adjusting and applying response strategies for a hurricane. 
In conclusion, it is clear that a specific land is successful at modifying and applying response strategies for hazards in order to change the loss potential, in case if its economic status allows to invest the money and reduce the vulnerability.

            On February 28 2001, Seattle suffered an earthquake scoring a 6.6 on the Richter scale and a maximum of eight on the Mercalli scale. The epicentre of the earthquake was in the southern Puget sound yet it could be felt in throughout Washington, Idaho and Oregon Canada. The quake caused $2 Billion of damage to the state of Washington and was vital that the state of Washington insured that the future potential loss through building design, warning systems and land-use planning could be limited.
            Since the earthquake, there has been extensive planning throughout Washington but more specifically in Seattle in order to prepare the city for future earthquake risks. In the aftermath of the quake that hit Seattle in 2001, the citizens of Washington passed a $167 million fire levy in order to provide funding to strengthen the city’s ability to respond after and major disaster. This means that all thirty-two neighbourhood fire stations in Seattle were renovated or replaced in insure maximum efficiency. The renovations that happened to the emergency services included a new training facility for Seattle emergency services, a new fire alarm centre, a new city emergency operations centre, new fire hydrants so that fire fighters can draw water directly from the city’s eight reservoirs. They also placed emergency generators at all community centres and placed emergency supply cashes in four areas of the city. Seattle also started a project called SNAP which was designed to help neighbourhoods take care of themselves and each other post disaster. This includes safety zones, evacuation drills and the storage of emergency water supplies. The Mitigation plan outlines what Seattle has been doing to strengthen City-owned and operated facilities before a disaster strikes to make them better able to withstand both natural and man-made hazards. The city of Seattle has drastically changed is approach to disaster management as one can see with the city preparation for when the next quake is due. This enables the government to save money on damages and rescue lives when the disaster eventually occurs based purely on structure and organisation. The issue however with using all of these strategies is that the state must be able to generate the money in order to fund the operation. The plan sounds nice on paper however if the state raised taxes then people might decide that they’d rather just take their chances. However, these taxes are very beneficial because not only are they for the benefit of the people but also drastically reduce the cost caused by the earthquake itself. Rather spending $2 Billion on reparations like on 2001, the state could reduce that figure to $800 million if the correct procedures are carried out when building large structures and the design of emergency services.
            Despite of all the safety measures that have taken place and the amount of money spent, this still won’t stop the disaster from taking place. Not only does the modern infrastructure have to be able to withstand small earthquakes but the emergency services must also be able to offer aid to those once the quake has happened. The Seattle Gov. has official documents and plans already in action ready for when the disaster hits. Once the disaster has happened, in this case an earthquake, there are logical steps that the emergency services must take in order to retain maximum efficiency. This includes, a basic structure for how the City will work together to re-build itself in key areas like buildings and land use, housing, economics, natural and cultural resources, infrastructure and community coordination and capacity building. Due to the effects of a severe earthquake will be regional, Seattle was a major partner in the creation of an eight-county Puget Sound Regional Catastrophic Plan that outlines how the region will coordinate and manage resources in several key areas such as transportation, health and medical services, firefighting, communications and mass fatality management. Lastly, each year, at least 8,000 people participate in personal preparedness training, emergency skills classes, and neighbourhood organization. The goal is for everyone to be as self- sufficient as they can and take care of themselves and their family for the first 7 to 10 days following a major disaster. Emergency preparedness materials are available in 19 different languages, and bi-lingual instructors teach in their native language. In hindsight it is very hard to be critical of such incredible planning. The Seattle council is clearly a very skilled and organized group and have learned very well from the past. However, it is still very likely that Seattle is quite a well build up place with a much higher average salary than New Orleans for example. It is very possible that such great planning due to the city being able to afford it. The area is predominantly white and are most likely to have voted for the current president thus helping its funding. Nevertheless, one cannot argue that Seattle is a very well organized city and are most definitely well prepared for a major disaster.   
            To conclude, adjustments and response to earthquakes have un proven yet one can tell that they will be very successful in the Seattle area. They are much better prepared to deal with earthquakes and have drastically decreased the damage cost likelihood of the next earthquake.   

Using examples, evaluate the success of adjustment and response strategies for a named hazard type.

There are three stages to a disaster. The first, the preconditions, represents the stage of preparation before the disaster occurs. The second, the disaster, represents the triggering of the event or threshold, and the type of damage it has caused. The third, recovery and reconstruction, represents the development clean-up strategies of reconstruction and restoration. At this point, communities affected by the disaster have to re-establish everyday life by reconstructing the damage caused. This essay will evaluate how well the US government responded to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, in comparison to how the Haiti government responded to the earthquake in 2010. Both the US and the Haiti government failed in providing effective adjustment and response strategies for the hurricane and earthquake respectively.
Hurricane Katrina occurred on August 28, 2005, and it was of category 4 on the Saffir Simpson Scale, hitting land at a speed of 225 km per hour. It hit the Louisiana Coastline, majorly affecting the city of New Orleans. It was the USA’s worst natural disaster in history. Unlike any other hurricane, Katrina didn’t just pass through the city, rather it continued to build. The low pressure at the center of the hurricane and the high winds caused the ocean to rise up by as much as 9 meters in places. The US government held George W. Bush at the time as president, representing the republican party. Hurricane Katrina killed over 1800 people, damaging 204000 homes, thus making over 800000 people homeless. The death toll was exacerbated by the lack of quick and effective aid strategies to evacuate the people. It took Bush days to accept Katrina, while delayed emergency evacuations could not rescue people who could not find a way out from the city, from a landslide. The New Orleans Super dome, of capacity 9 million square feet, was used as a shelter of last resort. Since it’s a football stadium, people weren’t equipped to survive in such rough conditions. During the storm, a large section of the outer covering was peeled off by high winds, putting the people that it hosted at larger risk. The rain damaged the electric system, thus 14,000 people were relying on a back-up generator. Aid strategies were neglected and didn’t help the people in danger. Protection strategies before the hazard also resulted to fail. In fact, the levees built around the city that were supposed to protect it from storm surges collapsed as a result of the underlying pressure of the hurricane. Moreover, these levees were supposed to protect the population against hurricanes of a lower category than Hurricane Katrina. The government did not want to fund protection for upper categories as they were more expensive.
The Haitian population wasn’t however better off in 2010 during the earthquake. On January 12nd, 2010, as an aftermath of the 2008 tropical storms, an earthquake measuring 7.0 on the Richter Scale occurred 25 kilometers west of the capital Port-au-Prince. A third of the population was affected: about 230000 people were killed, 250000 more were injured and around a million made homeless. Most of the emergency aid arrived late for the thousands who were trapped in rubble or awaiting treatment for their injuries, therefore worsening the situation. However, outside help was received from various European countries as Britain, Germany and France, pledging $13.7 million. The World Bank led with a $100 million commitment, while the UN released only $10 million from its emergency fund. A week after the earthquake, the UN had got food to only 200000 people. Around 550000 people gathered in makeshift camps under terrible conditions. Months after the disaster camps were still crowded, as a result of the extensive damage caused. The long-term strategy for rebuilding Haiti was exacerbated by the fact that even before the earthquake, Haiti was environmentally degraded and had few basic services. Therefore, they wouldn’t just have to rebuild what was destroyed due to the earthquake, but also repair the degraded buildings and services that were there before the earthquake. Due to Haiti’s political instability, past tropical storms and the difficulty in predicting an earthquake, Haiti was not able to prepare for what had to come. Being a very poor country, its government was too unstable to fund protection research against any type of hazard.
As analyzed in the essay, both for Hurricane Katrina and the Haiti Earthquake, the countries’ governments failed to provide adjustment and response strategies as a result of the unpredictable hazards. In the case of Hurricane Katrina, thousands of people sought after shelter in the city’s superdome, while in the case of the Haiti Earthquake, locals were relying on international aid, whilst battling against poverty. Since it’s very hard to predict hurricanes and earthquakes, both governments failed to provide response strategies in the event of a hazard occurring.

c) Using examples, evaluate the success of adjustment and response strategies for a named hazard type.

A hazard is a potential danger and risk to human life and wellbeing. Hazards are prone to damage a certain area critically leaving it in need of outside help to rebuild and create a safe environment. In the case of Nepal and Louisiana a natural disaster stuck and created large amounts of damage that required response strategies immediately.

On January 12th 2010 an earthquake hit Haiti 25km west of the capital with a measure of 7.0 on the Richter scale. Aftershocks occurred km below ground 56km south west of the city. 230,000 people were killed and 250,000 people were injured and more than a million made homeless. Due to that lack of resources in Haiti building materials for homes and schools where not built to withstand an earthquake with such a high intensity. This natural disaster is a reminder to how important risk reduction and preparedness is. The city was left with no electricity or phone service. At the time, President Obama and Secretary Clinton and other government officials had responded to the disaster almost immediately, organizing assistance and finding ways to create search and rescue teams and distribute relief and aid. Sending aid into the country was difficult as the airport was barely functional, as well as the corrupt country itself. As rescue teams started digging up people, people that had been killed from the quake where still lying open on the ground. The stench of the corpses blew in the air, residents had to start covering their faces. There was no rescue teams helping remove the bodies causing residents to have to wear masks to be able to leave their homes.

The Port-au-Prince airport was receiving the supplies however they were not accessible as road has been blocked up. People had no access to water, food, medical aid. Haiti was getting international support up to 9 billion dollars however, the money was not spent wisely. The support was overwhelming 94% of humanitarian funding went to donors own civilian and military entities, international NGO and private contractors. Even though money was brought into the country it never reached the civilians. The plan of what was supposed to be build and what was really built was a disaster. There has been no sustainable evidence of where the money has gone however, considering that the money they had received was almost equal to the country’s gross domestic product and yet people are still living in tents, no homes, no shelter and no aid. The success of the response strategies is debatable as they were receiving outside help and aid internationally however the government where not using their supplies usefully.

In comparison Hurricane Katrina had received very little aid coming from the outside of the US. Hurricane Katrina in 2005 the required help they needed any help they could get which they did not receive. The Hurricane Katrina was one of the deadliest hurricanes to have ever hit the US. When the storm made landfall it hit with a category 4 on the Saffir-Simpson scale. With winds going at a speed of 225 kilometers per hour. The hurricane itself damaged New Orleans greatly however, the aftermath was much worse. Due to the high pressure of the storm water levees where overwhelmed and flood walls where broken down. In 2002 the federal government was preparing for a possible large scale disaster in New Orleans. Joe Allbaugh director of FEMA ordered an examination of a possible hurricane hitting New Orleans. FEMA guided a drill for possible storm. Before Hurricane Katrina had made landform a state of emergency was called on Louisiana on 26th of August 2005. Meteorologists are able to predict if there will be a hurricane to a certain extent as they form at sea, calculated areas can vary to hundreds of kilometers from the prediction. A more exact warning can only be given around 12 hours in advance.
Even though it was called state of emergency and the mare of new Orleans announced a
voluntary evacuation the next day the evacuation was mandatory. However even though America is one of the most economically established countries they refused outside help to come into new Orleans and help. The FEMA wanted no help from non-governmental organizations such as the American red cross. The American red cross was not given permission to supplement the government’s response. The superdome was providing shelter for over 20,000 people, there where to many people that it had to be evacuated.

The city enabled the Superdome for people to hide from the storm. Around 1,000 workers from
Homeland security where sent to the sight by the federal emergency management agency sent
in Homeland security workers to offer assistance to the city of the city. Even though the FEMA
sent in their own assistance they wanted no help from non-governmental organizations such as
the American Red Cross. The American red cross was not given permission to supplement the
government’s response. The superdome was providing shelter for over 20,000 people, there
where to many people that it had to be evacuated.

The government was not responding fast enough. People were stranded, missing, dead and yet
the government were unable to proceed in finding a way to help the situation. Firemen where
asked to hand out fliers for FEMA instead of assisting in the search for missing people, clearing
streets, rebuilding houses. The search parties that where obtained in order to find missing people
where the Urban Search and Rescue  and the Civil Search and Rescue, nevertheless they failed to
communicate with one another making the search longer and more tedious. 
Insurance companies had paid around 41.1 billion dollars on 1.7 million claims for multiple
damages to homes, businesses, belongings. The success of the aid given by the FEMA, state and
local-level agencies, federal and national guard soldiers, non-governmental organizations,
charities and private individuals where all trying to help the disaster. Thousands of volunteers
came to support and troupes where deployed to the disaster. Due to the streets it was difficult
to reach people in the water only with boats and helicopters where they accessible.

In comparison, Haiti an economically less developed country than America received outside help
of 9 billion dollars and any aid they needed in order to rebuild roads, homes, schools.
Nevertheless, the money was not spent on the people well-being. The country is corrupt and is
unable to spend the money wisely, the money was controlled by a corrupt government, some of
the money donated went to private companies and NGO. People to this day are still living in non-
permanent housing. New Orleans received no outside help the FEMA had refused the American
red cross to set foot in New Orleans. In footage you can see a man’s body floating in the water
and yet FEMA had refused any other help to rescue these people. Response strategies are
unpredictable weather they are needed in an MEDC or an LEDC. In both examples the help the
countries did not acquire the aid they needed. In the case of Haiti, they received aid however it
was not sustainable the money was never going to reach the people in need whereas New
Orleans never received aid. 

Essay: Using examples, evaluate the success of adjustment and response strategies for a named hazard type.

Earthquakes happen all around the world especially in countries around the “ring of fire”. One of these countries is New Zealand which has been hit by several earthquakes. The earthquake that is considered to be the most dangerous one occurred on the 22nd of February 2011, in Christchurch located in the South Island. It happened at 12.51 pm local time and scored a 6.3 on the Richter scale. Due to the disaster 182 people died and a state of emergency was declared on the 23rd of February.  Before the state of emergency was declared the Civil defence and emergency management controller was in charge of the disaster that had occurred, however it was soon passed over to the Director of the ministry civil defence and emergency management the next day. The state of emergency lasted for 10 weeks. The first step in their response strategies was the rescue stage. The local people who were healthy started helping other people where possible as well as qualified rescue teams and the military (1400 people). The military played a major role in the rescue and rehabilitation stage as they provided “logistics, equipment, transport, air bridges, and supply and equipment shipments; surveyed the port and harbour; provided support (including meals) to other government agencies; helped with desalination plants in the city’s eastern suburbs; assisted the police with security; and provided humanitarian aid, particularly to the port of Lyttelton, which was isolated from the city in the rest days. Importantly, they also managed the CBD cordons.” All the people that were involved with the response strategies had to constantly change and adjust their approach/thinking because something they had planned to do wasn’t possible due to infrastructure damage, communication issues etc. Due to the help that was provided by many different teams and organizations the rescue, rehabilitation and reconstruction process was successful however due to the strength of the earthquake it did come with the side effect of 182 people dead.  After the horrific 2011 earthquake New Zealand decided they needed to improve the aspects that were a danger/threat to kiwi’s during the earthquake so the same end result would not occur for any future disasters that could happen.  The 2011 Christchurch earthquake caused of $2billion of damage for roads water pipes and waste pipes alone. More than half of the city’s roads were damaged, 50,000 potholes needed to be fixed, 300+ bridges and 600+ retaining walls. 424km of water and sewage pipes needed to be replaced or fixed. They decided they needed to deal with this as quickly and efficiently as possible so the “Stronger Christchurch Rebuilding Team with representation from the council, government, and five construction companies have 2000 contractors that will be working for five years to repair and rebuild all the infrastructure.” This strategy has been proven to be very successful as the earthquake that happened two minutes after midnight on the 14 of November  2016 (local time) did not suffer nowhere near the damage that occurred in 2011 due to the success of the adjustment of response strategy. Due to the success of the response strategy plan only two people died in the earthquake. Along with this earthquake came the secondary disaster – a tsunami which arrived only two hours after the earthquake. Officials were able to react quickly and warned everyone along the eastern coast to evacuate to higher grounds. Due to the quick reaction of the official’s no one was killed by the tsunami threat. The earthquakes epicenter was in kaikoura and most of the damage was done here. The rescue teams had to adjust their plan as the roads were cut of due to landslides and the roads being split, unsafe for vehicles to drive on.  In conclusion New Zealand was very successful in adjusting to their response strategies. They were able to switch plans quickly and effectively in order to save as many people as possible and to ensure that further damage that they could stop would not happen. New Zealand learned from the 2011 earthquake that their warning systems were slacking so they improved the warning systems for future disasters which is why it helped the 2016 earthquake to not have such drastic dangers or the same outcome as the 2011 one. This was a great success as the 2016 earthquake was ranked higher on the Richter scale than the one that occurred in 2011.

Adjustment strategies are the strategies that reduce the potential of loss through specific building designs, warning systems and spreading the loss. Response strategies include how people or the government respond to such natural disasters. Hurricane Katrina was the costliest natural disaster and one of the five deadliest hurricanes in the history of the United States, which made landfall on the 28th of August 2005 in New Orleans. The  Haiti earthquake was a magnitude 7.0 earthquake, which struck Haiti on January 12th 2010, with an epicenter being very close to the capital Port Au Prince. This essay would refer and evaluate the success of adjustment and response strategies to the 2010 Haitian earthquake and the 2005 Hurricane Katrina.
There are many things that communities and the government can do prior to a hazard as an attempt to reduce the loss and the impact of the hazard. For instance, building design is a vital adjustment strategy that countries can adopt before earthquakes, because a reason for high death tolls are due to buildings collapsing. Countries that are frequently hit by earthquakes have building regulations and ensure that their buildings are built from costly materials. In the case of the Haitian earthquake, this adjustment certainly cannot be applied, as bad housing was the main reason for the death toll climbing to 220,000. The area with the most damage was the capital, Port-au-Prince, which was already over-polluted prior to the earthquake, as thousands of people moved in to the capital after four powerful earthquakes hit a nearby town in 2008. Due to the rapid intake of people, houses were built hurriedly and incorrectly. They were built from limited amount of money and without enough steel as a support to the buildings.  Therefore, the consequences were catastrophic, as people were crushed and trapped by the debris of their homes. After the earthquake, and even till date, people are still living in refugee camps that were assigned to them after earthquakes, and the post-earthquake adjustment strategies aren’t any different. The recent powerful Hurricane Matthew that hit Haiti, resulted in a high death toll, as people still occupied the streets with nothing but a tent protecting them. Regarding Hurricane Katrina, due to the fact that 80% of New Orleans is below sea level, 350 miles of the city were occupied by Levees which were specifically built to withstand a category 3 storm.  However, after the hurricane, it was found that there were more than 50 failures of the levees. Furthermore, the economic disparity in New Orleans resulted in the poorer/less wealthy population to be more vulnerable to the hurricane, as they occupied the low lying areas of New Orleans which was prone to severe flooding. Clearly, their houses were built cheaply, from materials that could not withstand strong hurricanes such as the category 5 of Katrina. The adjustment strategies that were implied Hurricane Katrina look more promising than the Haitian earthquake as an improvement in the Leve system resulted in 560 km of new Levees being built, water from the Mississippi River was diverted in order to re build the wet lands and a network of back-up warehouses were built which was built to feed and shelter up to 350,00 residents. After the hurricane, the Congress issued a statement to the Corps of Engineers to raise the height of the levees around New Orleans to protect against a 100-year storm. Furthermore, it is important that warning systems are implanted as it is necessary that people are warned about such disasters, and this was applied in 2014, where U.S. Army Corps of Engineers inaugurated its $14.5 billion storm protection system for New Orleans, as local officials termed this as the best protection the city has ever had. To sum it up, the pre- disaster adjustment strategies could not be applied to either of the disasters, however, the adjustment made after Katrina were more effective compared to the Haiti Earthquake.

Response strategies can take the form of short-term responses and long-term responses. Short term responses are responses within days-weeks after a disaster has taken place. They mainly include search and rescue teams, which help and find the injured/deceased. In the case of the Haitian earthquake, search and rescue teams were the instant response. Immediate donations to Haiti such as $330 million by the EU and 115,000 tents were donated. The first Red Cross teams arrived at the site 36 hours after the earthquake and other large organizations arrived during the following days. However, there were other logistical challenges, as the airport and the harbors in the hub of Haiti, Port-au-Prince, was severally affected, hence being unable to operate. Therefore, there was great difficulty in terms of reaching Haiti by international NGO’s. Additionally, short term responses also include providing the victims with water and food, and in the case of Haiti, many countries such as Singapore and the United States sent food and water supplies to the victims. This is very important as the government was unable to meet the needs of the victims and therefore needed help from neighboring countries. However, despite the fact that such massive efforts were put into this disaster, it clearly wasn’t enough and effective. This was due to the fact that there was an unequal distribution of aid between, for e.g. the “safe” and the “unsafe areas” of Port-au-Prince. The planning and management was poor and unorganized, as there was no accountability for many of the groups that arrived to offer help. Also, language barrier was a problem as relief groups lacked language interpreters.  Long term responses are the responses that still go on for months to years after a disaster. In Haiti, there was support for people who have lost their jobs, (which equals to 70% of the population), through their “cash/food-for-work” projects. Moreover, The Dominican Republic (neighboring country of Haiti) offered their support by accepting some refugees. Additionally, the EU donated $300 million, and the World bank postponed Haiti’s debt repayments for about 5 years. However, the number of people in relief/refugee camps since the earthquake equaled to 1.6 million, and there were hardly any transitional housing that were being built.  Most of the camps had no electricity or running water, and some of them were beginning to fall apart. Furthermore, between 22 multinational charities, $1.1 billion had been collected for Haiti for relief efforts, but misappropriate handling led to only 2% of these funds being distributed to the affected people. This shows that the long term responses were not completely effective as the majority of the population still live in make shift camps and do not have access to clean water and proper sanitation. In the case of Hurricane Katrina, the state of Louisiana declared a state of emergency three days before the hurricane made landfall. On the August 28th, the day before the hurricane hit the city, the mayor of New Orleans declared a mandatory evacuation of the city, as the Superdome was opened as a site for about 25,000 residents to take shelter from the storm. Once the hurricane made landfall, a direct response strategy was to mobilize 1,000 Homeland Security workers to provide assistance to the city. FEMA seemed almost unwilling to accept help from non-government organizations.  For example, the American Red Cross was not allowed into New Orleans following the disaster and was unable to supplement the government’s response. By August 30th, the Superdome was packed past capacity, with at least 20,000 people residing in the building.  The situation in the Superdome eventually became so bad that it had to be evacuated the next day. As the situation unfolded, it became clear that the government’s response was inadequate and inefficient, as it took president Bush himself a week to fly over the flooded area. Long term responses following the hurricane were much more coordinated, successful and effective than the Haitian earthquake. For instance, the Congress providing $ 16.7 Billion to rebuild the damaged infrastructure and the FEMA agreeing to lease 10,000 houses to displaced families, is a proof of better rehabilitation, compared to the ineffective response strategies in Haiti. Additionally, the water and gas sector have tremendously been improved as the oil gas and energy facilities which were damaged have now been replaced. Similarly, the pumps on the drawing board have been replaced to up to 3 times faster than the faster. Therefore, it can be seen that the long-term response strategies were far more effective post Katrina compared to the Haitian earthquake primarily because the United States is economically better placed than Haiti.

In conclusion, there is a clear difference between the adjustment strategies that have been applied before and after Hurricane Katrina and the  Haitian earthquake, due to the fact that both countries vary in wealth, technology advancements and political situation.