Recovering from a disaster is never easy, and it is especially challenging for a whole country to stabilise its economy and have soon positive effects. As noticed by Wouter Botzen, Deschenes and Sanders (2019, p. 179), “effects of natural disasters significantly reduce economic growth, especially in low-income countries.” Therefore, it is vital for the government of South Africa to address the issues caused by the earthquake and reconstruct the region, focusing on several public interventions to stimulate the region’s growth in the shortest time possible.
Before offering some strategies, it is essential to describe the current state of the region. As known, although the area is densely populated, there were no victims, which is why it is possible to suggest that there is no shortage of human capital. Further, this is a region with a high concentration of manufacturing firms. Since a good part of the industrial infrastructure is ruined, it is evident that, without proper production rates, it will be challenging for this area to become stabilised. From the report, it is also known that schools and universities are severely damaged. Consequently, the scope of work is extended, but it is still possible for the government of South Africa to gather their efforts and promote the quick recovery and development of this region. Some recommended steps are mentioned in the following paragraphs.
First of all, people are the most valuable resource of the region because they are interested in and capable of restoring it. Consequently, it is recommended that the government address the citizens’ well-being, including their moral state and levels of encouragement and commitment. If the community is persuaded in the following reconstruction of schools, universities, hospitals and industrial infrastructure, they will be more relaxed and can help stabilise the region’s economy. Otherwise, they may slow down the recovery and development of the region due to an unaddressed stressful state. For example, the ‘adaptive behaviour’ of some persons may even result in additional economic loss: many people may refuse to continue their work because of the fear of another earthquake.
Further, it is vital to set up industrial infrastructure, and this is one of the most costly but significant areas for the government to address. It should be possible to manage water supply, fix roads and bridges, have stabilised electricity and transportation systems and remove hazardous waste like sharp metal objects or glass. What is more, with recovered infrastructure, it also becomes possible to continue the work of the most valuable manufacturing firms. Investments in their recovery should bring profit later, but if at least some of the region’s firms, plants and fabrics do not continue their work, it will be impossible to foster economic development.
Other policies also refer to the citizens and their well-being. According to Wouter Botzen, Deschenes and Sanders (2019), the low-income part of the society is affected the most, and if they have their homes destroyed, the mortality rate can increase significantly in the nearest future. Thus, a major part of the government’s budget should be spent on the recovery of low-income people. They need to receive shelter, have food and healthcare security, and take an active part in rebuilding the region. The final step to consider is that such a disaster is a chance for the community to ‘build better’ – new infrastructure needs to be safer, and higher standards will reduce the risk of the buildings being destroyed when another earthquake happens. These steps and policies are likely to have both short- and long-term positive effects on the economic development of the region. If great amounts of government money are invested in the damaged area now, it will bring good profit and cover the expenses over the next thirty years.
Reference List
Wouter Botzen, W. J., Deschenes, O. and Sanders, M. (2019) ‘The economic impacts of natural disasters: a review of models and empirical studies’, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 13(2), pp. 167-188.