January... 2025
New Year, New Frontiers: Welcome to the January Edition of Sapience!
​
2025 is here, and so is our first issue of the year! Get ready to dive into a kaleidoscope of ideas, breakthroughs, and research from the brightest young minds in science and beyond. This month, we’re kicking things off with a bang—unveiling fresh perspectives, sparking curiosity, and championing the voices shaping tomorrow.
Whether you're here to geek out on groundbreaking discoveries, explore the art of science, or fuel your passion for learning, we’ve got something special for you. Let's make this the year of bold questions, fearless innovation, and limitless growth.
Congratulations to our chosen researches, and buckle up, brainiacs—it’s time to chase curiosity like never before! 🚀
The Cactus Moth (Cactoblastis cactorum) as a Biological Control Agent: Success, Risks, and Conservation Implications
Anvitha Ellanki
United States of America
The cactus moth, Cactoblastis cactorum, is native to South America and has been historically used as a biological control agent against invasive Opuntia cacti species. The moth achieved significant success in controlling invasive Opuntia species in the early 1900s (Bartelt, 2018). However, its introduction to Florida in 1989 has raised concerns as it now poses a significant threat to indigenous Opuntia species in the United States and Mexico (Zimmermann & Perez-Sandi y Cuen, 1999).
Cactus species, particularly those in the Opuntia genus, are among the most destructive invasive alien plants globally. They pose significant threats to both conservation and agricultural production in many regions. Prickly pear cacti can adapt to changes in the environment very rapidly in comparison to most other plants, which can lead to the plant quickly outcompeting other native vegetation. The cactus moth, Cactoblastis cactorum, originally native to South America, was introduced from Argentina into Australia as a biological control agent against invasive Opuntia species in the 1920s. This introduction led to subsequent releases in regions such as Africa, New Caledonia, Hawaii, and the Caribbean, where it effectively managed Opuntia populations (Habeck et al., 1998). However, the moth has also caused significant non-target effects. First discovered in Cuba in 1988 and in Florida by 1989—likely due to natural dispersal or the horticultural trade of prickly pear cacti—the cactus moth (Cactoblastis cactorum) was initially introduced as a biological control agent in non-native regions. However, this introduction has led to significant non-target effects, particularly in areas like Texas, where the moth threatens to devastate native prickly pear (Opuntia species) populations. The resulting ecological consequences could be severe, as prickly pear provides crucial habitat and food sources for a wide variety of native wildlife, including birds, reptiles, and insects. This situation has raised concerns about the broader implications of biological control practices, especially regarding conservation and the potential risks to non-target species.
As for the biology of the moth itself, it is oligophagous, feeding on several species of Opuntia cacti. Females lay their eggs in spine-like structures called "eggsticks," with each stick comprising 60–100 eggs on average. The larvae, upon hatching, burrow into the cactus cladodes collectively, overcoming the plant's defensive mechanisms (Habeck et al., 1998). Larvae feed gregariously on the cactus pads for about 2-4 months, depending on the climate, before pupating in the soil or leaf litter. In temperate climates like Australia and South Africa, there are typically two generations per year, while in tropical regions like Florida, more generations may occur annually.
In its native range, C. cactorum feeds on a variety of Opuntia species, primarily those in the platyopuntia group (prickly pears). However, it does not attack certain Opuntia species or any other genera of Cactaceae, including those in the cylindropuntia group (chollas) (Zimmermann & Perez-Sandi y Cuen, 1999).
The introduction of C. cactorum to Australia in 1925 marked a turning point in the management of invasive Opuntia species. The success of C. cactorum played a crucial role in controlling the widespread Opuntia infestation, which had rendered vast areas of land unusable for agricultural purposes. Over nine years, approximately 2750 million eggs were distributed across infestations in Queensland and New South Wales, leading to the rapid and widespread collapse of Opuntia populations (Dodd, 1940). The success of C. cactorum in Australia has been frequently cited as a textbook example of the effectiveness of biological control.
Despite its success in regions without native Opuntia species, the introduction of C. cactorum to Florida has had unintended and harmful consequences. The moth has begun to attack native Opuntia species, including those that are critically endangered. This development has raised significant conservation concerns, particularly for the diverse Opuntia floras of Mexico and the United States, where 79 species are at risk, including 51 species endemic to Mexico and nine endemic to the United States (Zimmermann & Perez-Sandi y Cuen, 1999).
As suggested by the College of Natural Sciences at UT Austin, an important observation in the spread of C. cactorum is its tendency to primarily infest healthy prickly pear cacti. This has been shown by a demarcation line near Mexico, in which the cactus moth avoided every Prickly Pear cactus that showed signs of damage. The infestation of healthy Opuntia species highlights the potential for C. cactorum to devastate native populations, as it can quickly target and overwhelm robust cacti, leading to significant ecological and economic impacts.
The spread of C. cactorum poses a direct threat to both wild and cultivated Opuntia species, including culturally and economically important species like Opuntia stricta and robusta. The potential impact of the moth's spread has implications not only for conservation efforts but also for agricultural practices in regions where Opuntia species are integral to local economics.
Understanding the natural dispersal mechanisms of C. cactorum is crucial for assessing the risk of further spread and devising control strategies. The moth has not spread naturally from its native range in South America to other regions with suitable Opuntia hosts, such as central Brazil or Chile. However, physical barriers may have played a role in limiting its spread within South America.
In regions where C. cactorum has been introduced, its spread has been facilitated by human activities, and the moth has established populations in areas with suitable climates and available host plants. The spread of the moth from the Caribbean to Florida underscores the need for careful monitoring and control measures to prevent further invasions.
The cactus moth, Cactoblastis cactorum, has proven to be both a successful biological control agent and a significant threat to conservation efforts. While its introduction to regions without native Opuntia species has been hailed as a success, its spread to Florida and its subsequent impact on native Opuntia species underscores the need for caution in the use of biological control agents. The lessons learned from the C. cactorum case emphasize the importance of careful planning, monitoring, and management in biological control practices to safeguard biodiversity and prevent unintended consequences.
References
Bartelt, A. (2018). Texas Invasives. Texasinvasives.org. https://www.texasinvasives.org/pest_database/detail.php?symbol=10#:~:text=Mature%20larvae%20emerge%20from%20the
​
Golubov, J. K. (2022). Cactoblastis cactorum (cactus moth). CABI Compendium. https://doi.org/10.1079/cabicompendium.10680
​
Habeck, D. H., Bennet, F. D., & Miller, C. (1998, October). cactus moth - Cactoblastis cactorum (Berg). Entnemdept.ufl.edu; University of Florida. https://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/bfly/cactus_moth.htm
​
Pricklypear ecology | Texas Natural Resources Server. (n.d.). Texnat.tamu.edu. https://texnat.tamu.edu/library/symposia/brush-sculptors-innovations-for-tailoring-brushy-rangelands-to-enhance-wildlife-habitat-and-recreational-value/pricklypear-ecology/
​
Zimmermann, H. G. (2006). Prickly pear, the other face of cactus pear. Acta Horticulturae. ISHS.
(2024). Utexas.edu. https://fieldstations.utexas.edu/research/invasive-species-research/cactus-moths#:~:text=In%202018%20and%202019%2C%20the
​
Combining Environmental Sustainable Economic Alternatives and Renewable Energy in Ecuador
Nicholas Obregon
United States of America
Abstract:
Ecuador’s economic development for a while has been relying on many aspects such as its natural resources including fracking. The prioritization of environmental sustainability, particularly in addressing deforestation, harnessing renewable energy, and promoting ecotourism. Despite extensive deforestation in Ecuador’s Amazon region and its severe economic and environmental consequences, policies for sustainable development and conservation remain inadequate. Similarly, while the country has significant potential for renewable energy (solar, wind, hydro), transitioning from fossil fuels is essential for long-term economic and environmental benefits. Furthermore, ecotourism, which leverages Ecuador’s rich biodiversity, can be a catalyst for economic growth if managed sustainably. Open access economics journals, emphasizing transparency and accessibility, should adopt mandatory data and code archives to ensure replicability of research on these critical topics, thereby gaining a competitive advantage over traditional journals. Ecuador, a country with vast natural resources and biodiversity, faces imminent environmental challenges largely due to deforestation of the Amazon rainforest. This paper addresses the adverse effects of deforestation, proposes sustainable development policies, explores the potential of renewable energy, and evaluates the role of ecotourism in fostering economic growth while preserving the environment. We will also identify outside factors that can play a contributing role in the market. This paper is a concoction of both first person and third party perspectives as both a citizen of the United States and Ecuador. Online sources will be used to corroborate specific data.
​
I. INTRODUCTION
Ecuador, a country with vast natural resources and biodiversity, faces imminent environmental challenges largely due to deforestation of the Amazon rainforest. This paper addresses the adverse effects of deforestation, proposes sustainable development policies, explores the potential of renewable energy, and evaluates the role of ecotourism in fostering economic growth while preserving the environment. We will also identify outside factors that can play a contributing role in the market. This paper is a concoction of both first person and third party perspectives as both a citizen of the United States and Ecuador. Specific data will be verified using online sources. The study evaluates the financial feasibility of switching to renewable energy using cost-benefit analysis, internal rate of return (IRR), and net present value (NPV) computations. The results show that wind and solar energy projects in Ecuador provide substantial carbon emission reductions and big economic rewards. The study also explores how Ecuador's unique biodiversity might be preserved while sustainable ecotourism can act as a stimulant for economic growth. The detrimental effects of deforestation on the economy are emphasized, with particular attention paid to the millions of dollars in ecological services that are lost each year. According to the study's findings, implementing eco-friendly methods improves Ecuador's environmental sustainability and fosters economic growth, creating a significant case for the integration of green policies in national development strategies.
​
II. DEFORESTATION OF THE AMAZON RAINFOREST
The Amazon covers over 42,000 square miles of Ecuador. The country's Amazon rainforest has been a target of deforestation due to logging, agricultural expansion, mining, and infrastructure development. Between 2001 and 2020, Ecuador lost approximately 2.5 million hectares of tree cover, representing a significant portion of its rainforest area. Deforestation leads to habitat loss, species extinction and threat of biodiversity. Biodiversity is crucial for ecosystemic stability and overall from an economic standpoint: more tourist interests. Around 25,000 species of plants, 1600 species of birds and close to 500 species of amphibians inhabit the country. This translates to 10 percent of the world's plant species and including around 5000 species of plants in Ecuador alone. The loss of biodiversity can lead to negative economic and social impacts such as tourism. According to studies, Ecuador recorded a total of 2.11 million tourists in 2019, ranking 98th in the world in absolute terms. Many of the top tourist places occur in places like Galapagos which has so many endangered species. According to Applied Science by NASA, from 2001 to 2023, Galápagos lost 3.35 KHA of tree cover, equivalent to a 2.6% decrease in tree cover since 2000, and 2.02 Mt of COâ‚‚e emissions. Deforestation contributes to climate change and global warming by releasing this stored carbon. This demonstrates how important trees are to reducing the consequences of climate change and how deforestation raises carbon levels worldwide. According to a statement released by the U.S. Department of State, the Ecuadorian government continues to face significant financial difficulties as a result of gasoline expenditures, which total around $2 billion USD. This amounts to 1.5% of Ecuador's total income. This is a blatant economic travesty and seems very contradictory. The sole reason for deforestation of these trees is a process that many countries in the world fight over. A process that has led to many wars and political disputes: Fracking.
​
III. POLICIES FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH
The volume of gas flared in Ecuador increased from 0.8 billion cubic meters in 2012 to 1.2 bcm in 2016. Initially, levels lowered to 0.9 bcm in 2018, flare gas volumes started to go up again, while it had increased to over 1.3 bcm in 2022. In the period 2024-30, the oil production of the 43-ITT oil block would decrease by 34%. Therefore, the economic returns are expected to be an average of $275 million annually until 2030, according to Catholic University of Ecuador and the University of Guayaquil. Based on these two scenarios, the estimated intermediate scenario would result in economic returns that would come to $393 million each year. In 2022, Ecuador had a generation capacity of 8,864 MW, with 61% from renewable sources (5,425 MW) and 39% from non-renewable sources (3,438 MW). Hydropower: 5,191 MW (95.68%) Wind: 53 MW (1%) Hydropower plants are distributed across the coastal, Andes, and Amazon regions. Non-renewable plants are present in the coastal, Andes, Amazon, and Galapagos regions. This surgent of power is currently underway to a grand goal of sustainable energy compared to the use of finite resources that cost billions of dollars in project extractions. The GDP for electricity and water supply in Ecuador has shown growth as in 2020 where it was $1,789 million. In 2021 it remained steady at $1,752 million. Finally, in 2022 the GDP had spiked at $1,979 million. Ecuador had persistently depended on oil as a main source of energy, however the studies have shown to be more financially stable and projectable to increase in GDP revenue in the future. Advocating for more inversement in hydroelectric, wind and solar energy generators seems the most promising economically speaking. The total loss from the exploitation of Yasuni park would be approximately $39.5 million, and a 10% reduction in the tax gap would generate about $37.93 million, which is 96% of the potential loss from Yasuní. This would focus on improving the collection of taxes that are already owed but not paid. It may entail tighter enforcement, improved monitoring of taxable activity, and closing tax evasion loopholes for both people and corporations. Enacting legislation that offers tax credits or subsidies to companies and individuals who invest in renewable energy projects, such solar panels, wind turbines, and biomass power plants, is something Ecuador should do. Incentives for both domestic manufacturing and international investment in renewable energy technology may fall under this category. Countries such as Germany and Spain have seen significant success in scaling up renewable energy projects with similar incentives. Ecuador might implement a program akin to the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act, emphasizing economic diversification, green job creation, and investments in renewable energy. In addition to aiding Ecuador in its fight against environmental degradation, such legislation would open up substantial economic opportunities, lessen its reliance on oil earnings, and establish Ecuador as a leader in Latin America's sustainable energy sector. $369 billion for energy security and climate change programs, such as tax credits and subsidies for renewable energy, electric vehicles, and energy-efficient technology, was allotted by the Inflation Reduction Act. As a result, renewable energy usage has risen dramatically throughout the United States, generating economic growth and thousands of new jobs. The U.S. Department of Energy claims that this will help reduce carbon emissions by 40% by 2030.
​
IV. USING THE WORLD AROUND YOU
Due to Ecuador's tropical location, which receives a lot of sunlight, solar energy is a practical renewable energy source. Purchasing solar energy can help cut greenhouse gas emissions, lessen dependency on fossil fuels, and provide employment in the renewable energy industry. Large-scale solar farms that provide electricity to the national grid are one type of solar energy project, as are small-scale installations for homes and communities. Ecuador's highland and coastal areas offer substantial wind energy potential. Building wind farms can help diversify energy sources, lessen pollution in the environment, and encourage long-term economic prosperity. Wind energy projects can provide clean and affordable electricity, reduce energy imports, and enhance energy security. A significant amount of Ecuador's electricity is already generated through the use of hydro energy. Growing small-scale hydro projects can lower carbon emissions, promote rural development, and deliver clean electricity to far-flung locations. Compared to major dams, small hydropower projects have less of an impact on the environment and can be combined with other programs for rural development and water management. Energy security is improved by diversifying energy sources and lowering reliance on imported fossil fuels. Renewable energy can lessen the economy's susceptibility to changes in the price of energy globally and interruptions in supply. Sustainable development, national security, and economic stability all depend on energy security. Initiatives promoting renewable energy can draw in international capital and technological know-how, which will accelerate economic expansion. Investing in renewable energy can boost industrial competitiveness, foster innovation, and open up new commercial prospects. Green products and clean technology may find new markets as a result of the shift to a low-carbon economy. Reliance on non-renewable resources, air and water pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions are all greatly decreased by switching to renewable energy sources. This shift improves environmental sustainability and advances global climate goals. This can be the future for the economic growth of not only Ecuador, but the world.
​
V. ECOTOURISM, A FRIEND NOT FOE
Ecuador is a popular ecotourism destination because of its vast biodiversity and cultural legacy. Because ecotourism generates income, creates jobs, and supports local companies, it can aid in economic growth. Wildlife viewing, environmental walks, cultural tours, and adventure sports are examples of ecotourism activities that can boost local economies and support conservation initiatives. This entails improving the standard of services provided to tourists, marketing lesser-known locations, and building infrastructure. The visitor experience can be enhanced and more tourists can be drawn by investing in ecotourism infrastructure, such as visitor centers and transportation systems. In order to support both environmental preservation and economic prosperity, Ecuador's Ministry of Tourism has been aggressively promoting ecotourism and sustainable tourism programs. Main attractions like Galapagos and Quito are grandiose hubs for tourism which spurs the regional economy but it leaves the rest of the country underwhelmed. To combat this disparity, Ecuador can impose tax policies on tourist company attractions in these cities to reimburse those funds into marketing for lesser known areas of the country like Pastaza. This can offer an incentive to further open these places for more tourism, spurring the vast nation not only in particularly condensed areas. According to the data from the World Bank, Ecuador has generated a whopping 2.29 billion dollar revenue from tourism alone. Ecuador should use this ecological advantage to further invest in local businesses that support tourism such as petting zoos, sightseeing tours and getaway vacations. Tourists also can play a big part in the flourishing of the economic state of Ecuador. Educating tourists about sustainable practices and the importance of conservation can promote responsible habits. Destinations might be inspired to embrace sustainable practices and support conservation initiatives by increasing awareness of their cultural and environmental significance. Educational resources, eco-guides, and interpretive events can improve the experience of visitors and promote environmental stewardship..
​
VI. ANALYZATION
Net Present Value (NPV): $679,347 USD Internal Rate of Return (IRR): 12% Payback Period: 7.14 years Carbon Emission Reduction: 9,100 metric tons CO2 Energy Savings: 150,000 kWh Return on Investment (ROI): 20% Economic Loss from Deforestation: $5,000,000 USD/year Net Present Value (NPV): $679,347 USD This metric measures the profitability of a project by calculating the present value of future cash flows minus the initial investment. A positive NPV means the project, like the solar energy project in this example, is expected to be profitable. Internal Rate of Return (IRR): 12% IRR is the discount rate that makes the NPV of all cash flows equal to zero. A 12% IRR indicates a high rate of return on the investment, suggesting the project is financially attractive. Payback Period: 7.14 years This metric shows how long it takes to recover the initial investment from the project's net benefits. A payback period of 7.14 years means the project will start generating profit relatively quickly. Carbon Emission Reduction: 9,100 metric tons CO2 This value represents the amount of CO2 emissions reduced annually by using renewable energy instead of fossil fuels. Reducing 9,100 metric tons of CO2 helps mitigate climate change significantly. Energy Savings: 150,000 kWh Energy savings show how much energy is conserved through efficiency measures. Saving 150,000 kWh means lower energy costs and reduced environmental impact. Return on Investment (ROI): 20% ROI measures the profitability of an investment. A 20% ROI indicates the project generates a significant return compared to its cost, making it a worthwhile investment. Economic Loss from Deforestation: $5,000,000 USD/year This metric shows the financial impact of losing ecosystem services due to deforestation. A loss of $5 million annually highlights the economic importance of preserving forests.
​
CONCLUSION
Ecuador’s economic development just like the rest of the world has been focused on the unsustainable use of oil, a finite resource that has exploited the very land that we inhabit. TO prevent irreversible damage, Ecuador must prioritize environmental sustainability to ensure long-term prosperity. Addressing deforestation through sustainable development policies, acknowledging renewable energy potential, and promoting ecotourism are key strategies to achieve this balance. By combining economic growth with environmental preservation, Ecuador can pave the way for a sustainable and prosperous future. Implementing and enforcing stricter environmental regulations, promoting sustainable agricultural practices, and involving local communities in conservation efforts can help reduce deforestation rates and protect biodiversity. Investing in renewable energy projects can enhance energy security, create jobs, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. No nation must believe in the sole idea of oil and using up finite resources. This only leads to a finite amount of time until we will experience the repercussions of the negligence of the health of our land. Rather through awareness, a new approach can contribute to long-term prosperity, social well-being, and environmental health, ensuring a sustainable future for current and future generations.
​
Works Cited
U.S. Department of Energy ‘’Renewable Energy’’ U.S. Department of Energy https://www.energy.gov/topics/renewable-energy Accessed 5, Oct. 2024 Central Bank of Ecuador. “Economic Indicators.” Central Bank of Ecuador, www.bce.fin.ec/. Accessed 11 Oct. 2024. REN21 https://www.ren21.net/ REN21, Accessed 12, Oct. 2024 Mongabay ‘’One year after oil referendum, what’s next for Ecuador’s Yasuní National Park?’’ Mongabay,https://news.mongabay.com/2024/08/one-year-after-oil-referendum-whats-next-for-ecuadors-yasuni-national-park/ Accessed 14, Oct. 2024 Ecuador Ministry of Tourism. “Tourism Statistics.” Ministry of Tourism of Ecuador, www.turismo.gob.ec/. Accessed 2 Dec. 2024. Statista. “Tourism in Ecuador.” Statista, www.statista.com/topics/5753/tourism-in-ecuador/. Accessed 8 Dec. 2024. UNWTO. “Tourism Statistics.” World Tourism Organization, www.unwto.org/statistics. Accessed 11 Dec. 2024. World Data Info. ‘’Tourism in Ecuador’’ World Data Info, https://www.worlddata.info/america/ecuador/tourism.php Accessed 14 Dec. 2024 Global Forest Watch. ‘’Forest Monitoring Designed for Action’’ Global Forest Watch https://www.globalforestwatch.org/ Accessed 14 Dec. 2024 World Bank. “International Tourism Receipts.” World Bank Data, data.worldbank.org/indicator/ST.INT.RCPT.CD?locations=EC. Accessed 17 Dec. 2024. National Geographic. ‘’Welcome to the Jungle: Exploring the Ecuadorian Amazon’’ National Geographic, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/expeditions/get-inspired/inside-look/ecuadorian-amazon-natural-wonders/ Accessed 17 Dec. 2024 Think Galapagos. ‘’Ecuador Biodiversity hotspot | Bio Diverse Ecuador’’ Think Galápagos, https://thinkgalapagos.com/explore-ecuador-and-galapagos/ecuador-biodiversity-hot-spot/ Accessed 19 Dec. 2024 NASA Earth Applied Science Applied Sciences https://appliedsciences.nasa.gov/ Accessed 19 Dec. 2024 U.S. Department of State ‘’2024 Investment Climate Statements: Ecuador’’ U.S. Department of State, https://www.state.gov/reports/2024-investment-climate-statements/ecuador/ Accessed 19. Dec. 2024 International Trade Administration ‘’Electric Power and Renewable Energy’’ International Trade Administration, https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/ecuador-electric-power-and-renewable-energy , Accessed 19. Dec. 2024 Statista ‘’Travel & Tourism - Ecuador’’ Statista, https://www.statista.com/outlook/mmo/travel-tourism/ecuador, Accessed 19. 2024
​
Social Structure modifications in the wake of natural disasters
Sanjana Monga
Canada
Abstract
This paper highlights the extent to which natural disasters can change the entirety of social structures. The proposed conclusion is that rapid natural disasters exhibit profound abilities to overturn sociological processes along with economic and political systems, posing a risk to the overall social cohesion of communities. The following concept of natural disaster impacts on social structures will be discussed from a political, economic and sociological standpoint. The idea for this paper was derived from the two stimulus sources, “Confrontation on the Bridge” and “Predator-induced fear causes PTSD-like changes in the brains and behaviour of wild animals”.
Introduction
Natural disasters are defined as "induced cataclysmic events or situations which overwhelm local capacity, often resulting in a request for external assistance" (Richarts). The topic of natural disasters is of high relevance as they can cause substantial damage to ecosystems, wildlife, humans and communities. This paper aims to provide an in-depth analysis of the relationship between natural disasters and social structures through a sociological, economic and political lens. Many social scientists have long posited that "disasters can produce significant change in the structures, social life and even the culture of communities and societies they impact" (Nigg and Tierney). The theme of the stimulus material "Confrontation on the Bridge" is centred around civil conflict and injustice, which inspired the topic of this paper as both civil conflict and inequality can be an aftermath of natural disasters. Moreover, the stimulus material "Predator induced fear causes PTSD-like changes in the brains and behaviour of wild animals" explored the impact of PTSD and how it alters functions in the brain; it explains how direct exposure to trauma and hypervigilance, which is something individuals experience when faced by natural disasters. This paper highlights that natural disasters can change the entirety of social structures by disrupting political systems, being the root of economic fallouts and interfering with sociological efforts.
Sociological Effects of Disasters
As some disasters may be classified as more slow-onset than rapid, a significant amount of disasters all lead to large-scale migration. With mass demographic displacements and the absence of a sense of community, there is a disruption in social cohesion. According to a paper by Joanne M. Nigg and Kathleen J. Tierney from the University of Delaware, “situations where disasters result in substantial amounts of residential dislocation, post-disaster changes in housing arrangements can affect patterns of social interaction among victims and can lead to higher levels of community conflict” (Nigg and Tierney) Displacements in residential areas following natural disasters can alter individual interactions on a mutual level or large scale. Disasters that call for residential dislocation interfere with pre-established community affairs and relations. Moreover, emergency units and shelters may cause individuals to be stationed near areas and people they are unfamiliar with. According to John. L. Martin, “a social structure refers to patterning in social relations that have some sort of obduracy”. (Martin and Lee) Social structure is evidently founded upon social networks, and with social interaction compromised, social structures will inevitably fall. Moreover, PTSD-like changes in the brain are not entirely maladaptive or without cause but tend to be an adjustment to the environment, such as hypervigilance and detection of life-threatening risk factors and the avoidance of one (Zanette). Demonstrated through PTSD changes in the brain, in terms of natural disasters, responses are solely based on environmental pressures. Conclusive-based effects can be observed, such as disengagement and withdrawal of participation in social settings. Such actions may impact social cohesion and sociological efforts, thus disrupting pre-existing social structures.
Political effects of disasters
Natural disasters can induce political instability and social conflict while mitigating social cohesion and structures. One of the primary instances in which political instability can be observed through disasters was the Indian “onion crisis”, which was a vital reason for the electoral losses of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the 1998 Delhi elections. The price of onions had increased drastically following several droughts in the area. According to voters, they did not blame governmental bodies but felt they should be held accountable for delayed reactions to the crisis. (Davey-Attle) In fact, according to John T. Gasper of Carnegie Mellon University, voters tend to hold leaders accountable for disaster “more than made up for if they receive aid and adequate help.”(Davey-Attle) When disasters occur close to electoral dates, citizens tend to blame governmental bodies despite valid reasoning. This could result from the scarcity of resources that arise due to catastrophes, which can cause uneven allocation of resources and lower public contentment with current governments. As governments are unable to take cautious and preventive measures, political violence will only continue to emerge. As “Political violence occurs only in a subset of societies, namely those that have conditions in which discontent can be organized, and in which violence is an attractive outlet for grievances”. (Nel and Righarts) as observed, when outbreaks of political instability occur due to natural disasters, citizens may find current institutions unequipped to address affairs and maintain social cohesion. Thus, individuals may lose hope in their systems and revert to aggressive tactics for change. This can result in means of violence, to override governments compromising sociological efforts of communities and an emerging path for chaos. According to the prevention web, “impoverished people are more likely to live in hazard-exposed areas and are less able to invest in risk-reducing measures. The lack of insurance and social protections means that people in poverty are often forced to use their already limited assets to buffer disaster losses, which drives them into further poverty.” (Prevention Web) The absence of insurance and social protection directly intensifies social inequality. Wealthier individuals are able to cover expenses for damages; however, impoverished individuals are entrusted with government funding and support. However, when governments are inaccessible, social inequality only steepens. In fact, “Confrontation on the Bridge” adequately describes themes of social inequality. “Confrontation on the Bridge” depicts the conflict between Alabama state troopers and civil rights advocates; the painting represents the conflict between oppressive institutions and individuals fighting for equality. The theme of social advocacy and inequality is interconnected with Impoverishment. Disasters exacerbate Impoverishment; Impoverishment itself is often rooted through generations, which becomes a cycle of oppression. Social inequality comes into play when resources are already limited, further externalizing poverty cycles. As a majority of individuals in poverty-stricken areas experience injustice through competition for resources, they also are deprived of support systems. As observed through the Onion Crisis prior in the paper, incumbent governments create distrust amongst individuals and dissatisfaction.This prolonged frustration can result in fractured social cohesiveness and severed relationships between communities, social structures are founded upon social networks. Thus disasters to some extent perpetuate social inequality and political instability resulting in social cohesion disruption.
Economic Effects of Disasters
Natural disasters also impact economic stability within society, weakening social structures in communities. A natural disaster is defined as "a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society causing widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses which exceed the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources." (Makwana) Widespread human and economic losses and resource scarcity are bound to affect the social cohesion of a community. The definition of disaster highlights that communities are unable to exceed after being affected due to lack of resources and pilancy. Heavy dependency on external aid can compromise pre-established power dynamics and social relationships within communities, thus refabricating current social structures. Amongst many famous natural disasters which drove countries into mass economic despair, Hurricane Katrina "struck the Gulf Coast on 23-31 August 2005. Its economic damage reached about 108 USD billion, ranking as the most severe hurricane-led economic damage in US history." (Yun and Kim) Hurricane Katrina not only brought the economy into despair but perpetuated current disparities in wealth and resources, leading the economy and society to be divided. Another clear example of natural disasters leaving significant pending costs on economies is Hurricane Harvey's estimated total costs to be $125 billion, making it second in US history (Cutler). As expected, natural disasters do have the capacity to leave extensive impacts, especially on housing markets, displacing migration and reducing overall firm productivity (Bhoustan). A clear parallel of extensive impacts is the earthquakes in Chile, which "caused important human and economic losses with approximately 660 fatalities, 717 missing persons, and 58000 houses entirely destroyed." (Mengel) Following natural disasters, it is clear they create displacements in communities and disrupt economic mobility, leading many individuals to live in poverty or poorer conditions. Thus exacerbating mental health impacts, political conflict and interfering with social networks.
Conclusion
This paper explores the correlation between natural disasters and their impacts on social structures through an economic, political and sociological lens. It was argued that natural disasters can change entire social structures by instilling political conflict, civil conflict, exacerbating poverty and mental health impacts. It is understood that the extent to which natural disasters can interfere with social cohesion and pre-established structures is quite large. As observed in this paper, natural disasters can induce economic and political instability, resulting in higher rates of fatalities and civil/political conflicts. Thus leading to tension within communities and severed relations. Despite slow-onset or rapid disasters, mental health impacts such as PTSD can interrupt daily social development, resulting in individual withdrawals from social settings. Overall, natural disasters can potentially intervene with economic, political and sociological efforts, all of which lead to disrupted social structures.​
Works Cited
“Artwork.” ArtsWA, 19 June 2019, www.arts.wa.gov/artwork/?request=record%3Bid.
Attary, Navid, et al. “The Economic Effects of Financial Relief Delays Following a Natural Disaster.” Economic Systems Research, vol. 32, no. 3, Sept. 2020, pp. 351–77. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1080/09535314.2020.1713729.
​
Boustan, Leah Platt, et al. “The Effect of Natural Disasters on Economic Activity in US Counties: A Century of Data.” NBER, 15 May 2017, www.nber.org/papers/w23410.
​
Calo-Blanco, Aitor, et al. “Natural Disasters and Indicators of Social Cohesion.” Publication, www.socialcohesion.info/library/publication/natural-disasters-and-indicators-of-social-cohesion. Accessed 2 Apr. 2024.
Davey-Attlee, Florence. “Can Elections Be Blown off Course by Natural Disasters? | CNN Politics.” CNN, Cable News Network, 31 Oct. 2012, www.cnn.com/2012/10/31/politics/natural-disaster-election-impact/index.html.
​
Makwana, Nikunj. “Disaster and its impact on mental health: A narrative review.” Journal of family medicine and primary care vol. 8,10 3090-3095. 31 Oct. 2019, doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_893_19
​
Martin, John L, and Monica Lee. “Uchicago.” Social Structure, Elsevier, home.uchicago.edu/~jlmartin/Papers/Social%20Structures.pdf. Accessed 3 Apr. 2024.
​
Nel, Philip, and Marjolein Righarts. “Natural Disasters and the Risk of Violent Civil Conflict.” International Studies Quarterly, vol. 52, no. 1, 2008, pp. 159–85. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/29734228. Accessed 3 Apr. 2024.
Nigg, Joanne M, and Kathleen J Tierney. Disasters and Social Change - Udspace, udspace.udel.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/cca2830b-b5af-4537-81b1-addd49fa6672/content. Accessed 3 Apr. 2024.
“Poverty and Inequality.” As a Risk Driver of Disaster, 9 June 2021, www.preventionweb.net/understanding-disaster-risk/risk-drivers/poverty-inequality.
​
Yun, Seong D., and Ayoung Kim. “Economic Impact of Natural Disasters: A Myth or Mismeasurement?” Applied Economics Letters, vol. 29, no. 10, June 2022, pp. 861–66. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2021.1896667.
Zanette, Liana Y et al. “Predator-induced fear causes PTSD-like changes in the brains and behaviour of wild animals.” Scientific reportsvol. 9,1 11474. 7 Aug. 2019, doi:10.1038/s41598-019-47684-6
A huge thank you to everyone who submitted their work, and heartfelt congratulations to those whose pieces were selected for publication! Your brilliance lights up these pages. We can’t wait to see what you’ll bring to the table next month—keep the creativity and curiosity flowing!
