In general, in his article entitled “The consequences of excessive unrequested donations: the case of Hurricane Andrew”, Neal tries to demonstrate how a great number of unneeded donations to regions where a disaster has just happened decelerate the process of delivering the resources that those areas really need. Particularly, he takes Hurricane Andrew that had a devastating effect on Florida in 1992 as an example. He also provides a discussion about how to allocate resources in case of natural disasters more efficiently.
In the introduction, the author provides an overview of the points he is going to cover. Thus, first of all, he describes various donating processes that happened earlier after other disasters. Second, he particularly describes Hurricane Andrew and its consequences. The next point he discusses is about the problems that unnecessary donations in the form of clothes and similar things caused (Neal, 1994). Lastly, he focuses on the provision of unneeded supplies in the form of food.
In the first section where Neal describes the process of donation, he provides examples of other natural disasters that have happened in the USA since the 1950s. He emphasizes that in all of them, people committed the same mistakes. Thus, he traces the pattern of delivering unrequested donations since 1952 after a hurricane in Arkansas. As a result, more than half of the provided goods were not used by the victims and had to be destroyed. Additionally, the author mentions two main problems that unneeded in-kind donations usually create. The first problem is that officials spend much time sorting, distributing, and destroying these unnecessary donations. The second problem is that these donations cause logistical issues, which create an impediment in delivering needed items.
In the second section, Neal describes methods that were used in obtaining the data regarding the excessive donations after Hurricane Andrew. In the next section, he focuses on Hurricane Andrew and the problem with unnecessary in-kind donations following it. First of all, he discusses the severity of the storm. Thus, Hurricane Andrew was identified as a Category four storm with winds blowing more than 150 miles per hour. As a result, almost 200,000 houses were damaged, 40 people died, hundreds were injured, and approximately 250,000 people became homeless. It was estimated that the overall expenses of the hurricane would be more than $15 billion (Neal, 1994).
Further on, Neal discusses the problem of excessive donations provided after the hurricane. Reportedly, the response in the form of donations was quick, which is good, but the kinds of items donated and their quantity created many problems. In terms of clothes, too much time was spent on their inspecting, cleaning, and sorting. Additionally, these procedures required other resources such as electricity and water. Moreover, most of the clothes were not even used and had to be destroyed. Regarding the excessive food donations, the author highlights the problems that they caused. Namely, after the issues with perishable food in previous disasters, people realized that the best option was to send canned food. As a result, there were truckloads of canned food that were not needed.
In the final section, Neal analyzes the consequences that excessive donations bring. The most important problem is transportation, as the delivery of unrequested goods hinders that of the essential resources (Neal, 1994). Another major problem is storage, as all these unneeded goods must be kept somewhere. Finally, it takes extra time to process these donations.
Thus, this article is important because it provides evidence concerning the fact that the abundance of unneeded donations after disasters causes many problems. This information can be used to change the way of making donations in case of disasters, particularly, making them more efficient.
- Question 1: What donations apart from money in your opinion are the most appropriate after a disaster?
- Question 2: Does the type of needed resources depend on the kind of disaster? How?
Reference
Neal, D. M. (1994). The consequences of excessive unrequested donations: The case of Hurricane Andrew. Disaster Management, 6(1), 23-28.