The Consumer Economics of Disaster Preparedness and the Potential Imact

     In class so far we've talked quite a bit about a country's responsibility as well as ability to prepare for disasters but what about the individual? "Eighty percent of the population would not survive the first 100 days of the apocalypse" says Bob Gaskin, a former marine and the founder of Black Dog Survival School. Many people in the Unites States have some form of crisis situation preparedness in their homes, be it a generator or extra batteries for electrical outages, a sump pump for flooding, or even a storm shelter for tornadoes. But this preparedness has become a booming industry in recent years, not just for the basics but for total self reliance in case of the apocalypse.Some companies selling freeze-dried food, such as Shelf Reliance have seen a 708% increase in sales over just three years. You can buy everything from water filtration systems to radiation suits, even underground bunkers that are resistant to EMPs (electromagnetic pulses).

     What does this mean for our class? Disaster preparedness is critical in the outcome of a disaster. According to the formula for risk, a government that is less vulnerable and has better manageability will have a lower risk than its counterparts. This same principle applies to the individual. While many "preppers" are preparing for events with a very low probability, these are events of high impact. These events considered by "preppers" vary greatly from tornadoes, to hurricanes, to nuclear attacks, EMPs sent from North Korea, economic collapse, the wide spread outbreak of infectious diseases, and the apocalypse. Some have even prepped for Obama's second term.

    The individual disaster preparedness industry is estimated to be about a $500 million industry and it is quickly growing. There have even been TV shows and movies made.

Here's the National Geographic trailer for their show Doomsday Preppers

The trailer is a little extreme but it makes a statement and really gives a look into the loves of these "preppers" as well as the industry surrounding them.

While some might argue that these "preppers" are loons and are paranoid about disaster, there is no denying that they will be ready if these low probability high impact events were to occur. Should this same line of thinking be applied globally? Perhaps not quite to such extremes but a crisis only becomes a disaster when there is a human element, so maybe it would be a good idea. While this post is more about individual preparedness in the first world and extreme scenarios, links can be drawn to individual preparedness in the developing world. No, most individuals in the developing world are not going to be able to buy a underground bunker but imagine if the paranoia that engulfs "preppers" in the first world were to spread, even a little. Perhaps disaster relief and preparedness around the around the world would shift to being more cautious and prepared for the disasters that have a higher likelihood. Just as the public opinion became a source of pressure over the ozone problem, it could do so with disaster preparedness.

     If the world as a whole were to invest more in preparedness, on the individual as well as the state and institutional levels, the economic damage lies lost to disasters could be lessened along with the costs of responding to these disasters.

Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/07/us/07survivalist.html?_r=1&
http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/08/family-disaster-preparedness/
http://www.prepperwebsite.com/
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/11/preppers-survivalist-doomsday-obama