Picking up on the theme of taking DRR seriously that Danny offered, we
have a situation that now and in the past actually rewards, in the name
of economic development (and private gain), the construction of risk.
The problem is systemic and deeply embedded I think holding a
politician responsible for something occurring during his/her
administration is purely symbolic. The degree of specific control that
a president or prime minister has over day to day operations of, say,
building code enforcement, is minimal. That said, a political leader
can and should change things at the policy level that lead to better
operations at the ground level, but given the entrenched nature of day
to day practice, it won't be particularly swift, particularly if there
are economic or political interests that are affected. And as Suzanne
has said, forcing the resignation of a prime minister merely gives the
impression of having done something.
Anthony Oliver-Smith
Professor Emeritus
Department of Anthropology
University of Florida
1739 NW 11th Road
Gainesville, FL 32605
tel.352-377-8359;Fax 352-392-6929
www.anthonyoliver-smith.net
|