How can Degg’s model be used to explain why hazards do not always become disasters?
Degg’s model argues that a natural hazard only becomes a disaster when it interacts with human vulnerability.
Key idea:
• Hazard (earthquake, volcano)
• Human factors (population density, preparedness, governance)
Analytical judgement:
The model shifts focus away from the physical event and towards human vulnerability, explaining why similar-magnitude hazards have very different impacts.
Exam use:
Use to challenge statements that disasters are purely natural.
What are the limitations of Degg’s model in tectonic hazard analysis?
Degg’s model oversimplifies the relationship between hazards and impacts.
Criticism:
• Does not show how vulnerability changes over time
• Ignores political decisions and global inequalities
Exam judgement:
Useful as an introduction, but needs supporting models (e.g. PAR) for higher-level analysis.
How does the PAR model explain why disasters are more severe in LICs?
The PAR model shows disasters result from root causes, dynamic pressures, and unsafe conditions.
Structure:
• Root causes → poverty, lack of power
• Dynamic pressures → urbanisation, weak institutions
• Unsafe conditions → informal housing, poor infrastructure
Analytical judgement:
The model explains why vulnerability is socially constructed, not accidental.
Exam use:
Excellent for essays on inequality and development.
How can the PAR model be critiqued?
The PAR model may underplay the role of extreme physical magnitude.
Limitation:
• Very high-magnitude events can overwhelm even HICs
Balanced judgement:
Best used to explain patterns of vulnerability, not to dismiss physical geography entirely.
How can Park’s model be used to compare responses in HICs and LICs?
Park’s model shows how quality of life falls after a hazard and then recovers.
Key comparison:
• HICs: steep recovery, higher pre-disaster quality of life
• LICs: slower recovery, sometimes long-term decline
Exam judgement:
Shows how development level influences recovery speed and effectiveness.
Why are plate boundaries key to understanding tectonic hazards?
Most earthquakes and volcanoes occur at plate boundaries due to plate movement and friction.
Analytical judgement:
Plate tectonics provides a unifying explanation for global hazard distribution.
Exam use:
Use early in answers to demonstrate core physical understanding.
What hazards occur at constructive boundaries and why?
Plates move apart, allowing magma to rise and solidify.
Hazards:
• Shield volcanoes
• Shallow, low-magnitude earthquakes
Exam judgement:
Hazards are frequent but usually low risk, making disasters less likely.
Why do destructive boundaries produce the most hazardous tectonic events?
Dense oceanic plate subducts beneath continental plate, creating pressure and melting.
Hazards:
• Explosive stratovolcanoes
• High-magnitude earthquakes
• Tsunamis
Exam judgement:
Combination of high energy release and nearby populations increases disaster risk.
Why do collision boundaries have earthquakes but no volcanoes?
Neither plate subducts; crust thickens and buckles instead of melting.
Hazards:
• Powerful earthquakes
• Mountain building
Exam use:
Shows that volcanoes are not present at all convergent boundaries.
Why are earthquakes common but volcanoes absent at conservative boundaries?
Plates slide past each other without magma generation.
Hazards:
• Shallow, high-damage earthquakes
Exam judgement:
Hazard risk is driven by friction and sudden release, not magma.
Why are shallow-focus earthquakes more damaging?
Seismic waves travel a shorter distance to the surface.
Analytical judgement:
Depth can matter more than magnitude when explaining damage.
How does magma composition affect eruption style?
• Basaltic magma → runny → effusive eruptions
• Andesitic/rhyolitic magma → viscous → explosive eruptions
Exam judgement:
Explosivity is driven by gas trapping, not just magma volume.
Why are earthquakes common but volcanoes absent at conservative boundaries?
Plates slide past each other without magma generation.
Hazards:
• Shallow, high-damage earthquakes
Exam judgement:
Hazard risk is driven by friction and sudden release, not magma.
Why are secondary impacts often more damaging than primary impacts?
Secondary hazards (lahars, tsunamis, landslides) extend impact over time.
Exam use:
Good for evaluation paragraphs comparing immediate vs long-term impacts.
Why is predicting earthquakes more difficult than predicting volcanoes?
Earthquakes lack reliable precursors.
Volcano advantages:
• Gas emissions
• Ground deformation
• Seismic swarms
Exam judgement:
Management often focuses on preparedness rather than prediction.
How can tectonic hazard management strategies be categorised?
• Mitigation: building design, land-use planning
• Adaptation: education, drills
Exam use:
Helps structure “assess the effectiveness” questions.
How should case studies be used to reach top-band answers?
Case studies should test theory, not replace it.
Example approach:
• Apply PAR model to explain impacts
• Use Park’s model to compare recovery
Exam judgement:
Theory + evidence = analysis.
How can you compare two tectonic events effectively?
Compare:
• Development level
• Governance
• Preparedness
• Speed of recovery
Exam use:
Ideal for 20-mark evaluative questions.
How can tectonic hazards be linked to development and globalisation?
• LICs more vulnerable due to poverty
• HICs outsource risk via global supply chains
Judgement:
Hazards expose global inequalities.
How can multiple models be combined in one answer?
• Degg’s model: hazard vs disaster
• PAR: why vulnerability exists
• Park’s: recovery differences
Exam conclusion:
Using multiple models shows evaluative depth.
