Something I found to be extremely interesting during the interview with Brendan Meade and Susan Murphy was their mention of short term behavior vs. long term consequence and the similarity of that concept in both fields. Meade mentions that currently seismologists are looking at data that is measured during an earthquake which surprisingly accounts for less 1% of time which is evident of short term behavior. While instead they should be focusing on measuring how they expect that plates to move to account for possible future earthquakes which describes long term consequence especially since he mentions that buildings are only survivable for a single earthquake leaving the resources susceptible to these earthquakes. Murphy mentions the similarity when looking at healthcare for short term disease control detection vs the ability to predict the effect or expressions of diseases in the long term.
top of page
bottom of page
Julie, I also found this question of short term behaviour vs. long term consequence in the context of earthquakes particularly fascinating! I was listening to a podcast recently about earthquake prediction in Iceland, and how earthquake risk has come to be integrally woven into the social fabric of living there. On many levels that might square with Meade's point that it is easier to figure out how to recover from an earthquake then to mitigate their damage. It seems, this concept of rebuilding manifests itself in psychological resilience as much as it does in physical structures.