At the end of October this year, over 220 people died in flash floods in Valencia, Spain, with a year’s worth of rain falling in just eight hours in some parts of the region. During the month of April, nearly 180 people died during floods in Brazil, and over 200 people died in floods in Kenya. Heatwaves in Myanmar in the same month took the lives of 1,500 people, and Cyclone Remal claimed the lives of at least 65 people when it hit parts of Bangladesh and India in May of this year.
These events are just a handful of so-called ‘natural disasters’ that have occurred this year. Yet, it could be argued that there is nothing ‘natural’ about many of these events due to the human activities that have contributed to the climate crisis. Carbon Brief’s database of over 600 attribution studies, which test to what extent climate change affects extreme weather events, found that of the 735 events recorded, 74% were more likely to happen or more severe due to the climate crisis. By calling these events ‘natural’, the Global North, which is responsible for 92% of global emissions, according to the Lancet, attempts to absolve itself from its role in them. Moreover, using the term ‘natural’ tiptoes around the issue that these events disproportionately affect certain countries and marginalised groups of people. The word ‘disaster’ also ignores these inextricably linked social inequalities by making it seem futile to help those most affected by extreme climatic events to prevent the possibility of tragic outcomes.
Countries in the Global South are hit hardest by these events, with 89% of flood-exposed people living in low- and middle-income countries. The Global Climate Risk Index 2021 found that the ten most affected countries by extreme weather events are all located in the Global South. Being in risky geographic zones alone does not explain the extent of these findings. The lower economic status of many of these countries due to the Global North’s historical and ongoing colonialist pursuits leaves these countries in vulnerable positions as, for example, they may not be able to construct safety infrastructure. This leads to a vicious cycle whereby countries that cannot build protective measures will be further economically disadvantaged in the aftermath of extreme weather. Blaming nature for extreme weather events that will hit these countries is a clear example of the Global North scapegoating its responsibility for causing the climate crisis and the resulting increase in the intensity and frequency of adverse weather.
These social inequalities can also be found within countries, with communities of colour often most negatively affected by extreme weather. For example, the four most flood-damaged areas during Hurricane Katrina in the US had a Black population of at least 75%. The effect of this racial divide can still be felt today with the increased racial wealth gap post-hurricane. A joint report by the NAACP’s Environmental and Climate Justice Program and Columbia University found that Black households lost on average $50,000 after the hurricane, while white households gained $75,000 on average from insurance and relief claims. These communities often face violence when they try to speak out against such inequality. For example, an investigation by Global Witness has found that at least 2,100 land and environment defenders have been killed in the last decade, with the majority being Indigenous people and/or people from the Global South.
Other marginalised groups are also unfairly impacted due to their economic position, both during and in the aftermath of extreme weather events. Women are 14 times more likely to die during these kinds of events. This is due to a myriad of reasons rooted in gender inequality; for example, women often work at home in buildings not prepared to protect them against extreme weather. Their treatment post-event is also unequal, with increased rates of gender-based violence and human trafficking linked to extreme weather events.
The LGBTQIA2S+ community is inordinately affected by extreme weather events as well. Young queer people are 120% more likely to be homeless, which increases their vulnerability to injury and death during harsh weather. Queer people are often excluded from humanitarian assistance in the aftermath of such events. For example, the Aranvanis, a group of people in India who do not adhere to the gender binary, were excluded from temporary shelters and official death tolls after the 2004 tsunami. Another example can be seen in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina when Arpollo Vicks, a transgender woman, was jailed for six days after showering in the women’s toilets of a relief shelter, even though she had permission from a volunteer. Families were defined along heterosexual lines after the hurricane, and so same-sex couples were often separated between different cities. This also happened in Japan in the aftermath of the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami.
Using the term ‘natural disaster’ ignores the fact that extreme weather events are an anthropogenically-induced climate crisis and social justice issue. It disregards the fact that these events are not natural and are instead the result of the Global North’s overconsumption and fossil fuel exploitation. It also turns a blind eye to the unequal impact these events have on different people. Those in the Global South and marginalised communities are more vulnerable to adverse weather due to their economic position and are also treated unfairly in the aftermath of such events. It’s high time we ditch the term ‘natural disasters’, and call these events what they are: extreme weather events exacerbated by the Global North that discriminate against marginalised people.