Once upon a time and for many years, probably commencing in times and
places of colonial governments, there was "disaster relief", to which,
because disaster relief didn't seem to be changing things in the longer
term, came to be added "disaster prevention" - but this was a tad too
presumtuous. So then there was "mitigation" which was more realistic and,
being in place of prevention, meant measures taken before to limit disaster
impacts. This was when things were simple.
In all of this, I believe there is a difference to be respected between
participants - ie: potential and actual victims, and practicioners, on the
ground - and academics. I feel confident in suggesting this having been,
from time to time, all three ! This distinction I think can take account of
Anshu Sharma's important point re language. What has always concerned me
most of all is another category - the policy makers who, if we fail to
reach them, can either destroy or remake the world.
Can we return to the simple - I doubt there is a need to coin more
phraseology, don't we have enough ? "Better safe than sorry" is good in
English and has been well tested (what is it like for others ? "mieux sauf
que regretter" ??? etc). English also has "a stitch in time saves nine" but
that's getting specialist, and "an ounce of prevention is better than a
pound of cure" has outdated terminology and is too long.
Sorting the verbiage is long overdue; Ilan has again struck an important
cord - may the comments flow.
James
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.574 / Virus Database: 364 - Release Date: 29/01/04
|