Map Exercise: The maps above are three ways of looking at New Orleans. What happens when you superimpose maps of race/ethnicity, elevation, and flooding? What other information would you want in order to draw some conclusions about the “social ecology” of New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina casualties?
-
Brandon Davis
Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
eddietastic, 
natashap, 
yitailiu, and 20 others are discussing.
jonl 5:40 pm on March 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
After superimposing the maps, we can see that most of the black communities are in the lowest part of NO, particularly occupying the area that shows point A to B and the 9th Ward. I would probably like to know population density and the strength of the levies and drainage (which ones broke and why). It may be interesting to know the poverty and unemployment rates of areas as well. I noticed that Kenner and Metairie are also low in elevation yet there was lighter flooding.
msmith92 10:53 am on March 24, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I too noticed that the black neighbourhoods were generally in the lowest lying areas and were also the most effected by flooding. I would like to know more about how the city came to be organized in this fashion. For example, were blacks occupying the lower-lying areas because they had less say in the decision-making processes of the city? Additionally, I would like to know more about how the government responded to this natural disaster and whether there was preferential effort put into recovering certain areas. I also agree with the above comment that it would be interesting to see the economic statistics of each general area to see whether that correlates with the flooded areas as well.
jenniefrench 3:16 pm on March 24, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
When you superimpose the maps you can see that ‘richer,’ usually white populations live at higher elevations, where african american communities and poor groups live at lower elevations. Obviously those living at lower elevations were far more dramatically influenced by the hurricane. Other factors that should be considered are evacuation protocols, the homeless situation and if they were considered in the evacuation, the amount of trust the local population has for officials or politicians, as well as access to cars, transport, even funds to be able to leave the city. The construction of the city left many vulnerable, and the hurricane itself cause so much damage – but I feel that the after math of Katrina left so many people angry because the government, local and federal, did not give the people living there, especially the poor and homeless, the respect they deserved. Environmental Justice was certainly infringed upon.
emilym 12:15 pm on March 26, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
After superimposing the maps, the first thing I noticed was that the lower elevation areas were predominantly African-American and that the areas where white people live are generally at a higher elevation and were not as badly flooded during Katrina. I would like to know if income correlates with elevation as well and why/how the African-American community ended up settling in those low elevation areas.
sharonshi 4:24 pm on March 26, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The maps given exhibit the locations where the African-American and Hispanics lived, which are primarily in the region of the heavy flooding. The heavy flooding was a result of low elevation. The lighter flooding regions were dominated by the white population. This shows, that the deaths that resulted from the disaster were predominately of the African-American and Hispanic population. Some other information that would help draw conclusions about “social ecology” would be the wealth of each race/ethnic group. This will help provide evidence that the deaths that resulted from the “natural” disaster was not all that “natural”.
lcoulthard 7:14 pm on March 27, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
We can see that not only were the heaviest flooded areas ones that were populated mostly by non-whites, and these areas were also the ones that stayed flooded for the longest after the incident. On top of that, these areas were also the ones that had many levees break. I would be curious to know the quality of the levees that were built in the non-white areas as compared to the white ones, and also curious to know where the search and rescue was primarily dispatched to in the start… I would further like to know why private companies like Halliburton were being offered contracts to rebuild areas instead of maybe the US Department of Housing and Urban Development!
Danni 9:58 pm on March 27, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
New Orleans was separated into different communities according to the social status. Traditional Caucasian well educated and rich population lived in the higher elevations, but the African-Americans with some poor populations lived in the lower elevations. The organization of the city development reinforced the severity of the impacts from Hurricane Katrina to the poor populations. Moreover, Hurricane Katrina might be considered the flash point of the conflicts between different communities, which associated with the social ecology concept that the natural tragedies, like Hurricane Katrina, is not random. Instead, the major social impacts of these natural tragedies are imbalance of communities in residents’ social, economical, educational status in the same city.
katehaxt 1:48 pm on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
As mentioned by everyone, we see that African-Americans were living at lower elevations and suffered worse with flooding than the higher dwelling whites. We can easily guess that the lower elevation communities were also denser, poorer and suffered more casualties than the higher elevation neighborhoods but we’d need this data and info about the rescue efforts to really understand the social ecology of NO when Katrina struck.
paige 4:24 pm on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
It’s quite clear that the lower elevations were inhabited by mainly African American communities when the disaster hit. In order to draw conclusions about the social ecology we would have to know the status of business operations in the area, the general income of each neighborhoods inhabitants, events and general trends of interaction in each neighborhood and how those interact with the impacts of Katrina.
tsung 2:22 am on March 29, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
After superimposing the maps, it is evident that the heavily flooded areas were the areas where the African American’s lived. The white neighborhood experienced light flooding while those below elevation were affected most. Those living below sea level are evidently the blacks and Hispanic and in addition, the map depicts a clear segregation between the rich and the poor neighborhoods. Other information such as investments made into strengthening the levees’ in different areas prior to Katrina would be useful to understand the social ecology of New Orleans. Moreover, I would like to know why the US government would reject a budget to strengthen defenses for the city. Knowing that those in the 9th ward area would be overwhelmed if a storm occurred, why did the government reject any investments in protecting its citizens?
brenden 8:15 pm on March 29, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
As many others have mentioned, the inhabitants of the lowest lying (and most heavily flooded) areas were predominantly inhabited by african americans. Additionally, if you examine the areas at higher elevation which experienced less flooding, they are predominantly occupied by caucasians. To draw additional conclusions about the social ecology of the New Orleans and the Hurricane Katrina casualties, I would want to examine information pertaining to, population density, home values and income levels, in the areas profiled. I believe that the trends would show that homes in the lower elevations would have higher population density, be worth less, and have lower household incomes. Alternatively, I believe that homes at higher elevations would have less population density, be worth more and have greater household income. The social ecological conclusion that could be drawn from these findings would be that in this city, wealthy caucasians primarily inhabited areas that were at higher elevations and lower risk of flooding.
Joyce Lin 10:43 pm on March 29, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
What we see from the map is that nothing is located by random or by chance. This is a visual representation of the concept of social ecology. However, to draw better conclusions I would also be interested in looking at the land values, income, access to transportation/main roads and age distribution of the populations.
midara 11:00 pm on March 29, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
If we are overlapping the maps we may find that the black communities are located in the lowest lying regions in New Orleans. It is because their communities are located in the lowest areas of the city, their damages due to floodings is undoubtedly the greatest among all. While we may conclude that the Black neighbourhoods are more isolated, ignored and rejected by the rest of the city, the result not only does represent racism and discrimination of the society but also the problems of the current social ecology. Social ecology emphasizes the interactions and relationship between human and society; because of the discrimination and racism that chases the Black communities to the lowest lying areas of the city, they have to suffer more from the loss and damages from the flood. Nevertheless, I suggest that more information on laws/policies of racism, transportation or evacuation methods available at time of disasters (i.e. are all people allowed to leave the area with same chance), population density, facilities such as hospitals or clinics, social class distribution etc. should be reviewed to draw bettwen conclusions on the “social ecology” of New Orleans.
jaydee 12:40 am on March 30, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Its clear from looking at both the maps that african american communities are mostly located in the lower elevated areas of the land. I think a very interesting map would be to have one showing income, as well as population density, and compare that to the map of elevation. This would be especially useful if we were to compare it to a map showing the amount of damage per area or the mortality rate.
erikaw 10:58 am on March 30, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The lowest levels of elevation (up to 9 feet below sea level), which were thus the areas of the heaviest flooding post-Katrina were almost perfectly correlated with the Black communities of New Orleans. This probably came about because of previous natural disasters, and through time the areas with higher elevation became higher in property value and thus for those with more money – namely white communities. Some other information I would want to draw conclusions on the “social ecology” of New Orleans would be population density, community involvement, and perhaps income.
bgibson 12:47 pm on March 30, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
There is a clear correlation between low elevation and heavy flooding. Furthermore, these low lying neighbourhoods are primarily African American communities. Conversely, areas of higher elevation saw less flooding and are predominantly White. I would like to see further information about income, locations of community centers (Hospitals, Rec Centres, Police Stations, etc.), population density and age demographics.
phoebe 5:14 pm on March 30, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
By superimposing the maps, there is clearly a relation between class, race, and elevation. White citizens of New Oreans lived in the higher elevation and thus generally faced little to moderate flooding. Black citizens lived in lower elevation and generally faced more severe flooding which would result in more property damage, loss of homes, cars and other luxuries/neccessities. These indiviudals were already disadvantaged as they had less money and means to recover from the hurricane and would have a more difficult time rebuilding back their homes and livelihoods.
alyumam 11:04 pm on March 31, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
By superimposing maps is evident that neighborhoods where white people lived, higher elevations existed and less flood happened (after Katrina) are contrasting with those of other ethnicity. This denotes a whole lot of other contrasts which might be cataloged within the ‘social ecology’ definition; in this section, privileges such as education, access to information like topographic maps, among other things might also have been an element that contributed to the catastrophic outcome in New Orleans.
Keaton Briscoe 3:44 pm on April 8, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
It is noticeable that the populations of the black citzens is predominantly in the lower laying areas of the city of New Orleans. It is clear why the damage was most severe in this area of the city. However, the higher elevated areas, which werent damaged as severly by the flood, were more white dominanted. I would be nice to know how the black citizens came to be habited in that lower laying area of the city.
nytsuen 11:04 pm on April 9, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
It is evident that non-white citizens lived in lowest elevated areas which were affected the most by Hurricane Katrina. It was also much harder for these citizens to recover from the disaster because they were poor and disadvantaged from the very beginning. I wonder if the lands/houses in the higher elevated areas were more expensive than the lower elevated lands and if so, by how much? Is this some sort of discrimination in the sense that the prices are so high that it is impossible for non-white people to purchase these safer homes?
yitailiu 4:35 am on April 11, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
By superimpose the maps provided, I can see a clear connection between race, elevation, and flooding. The areas that have lower elevation which are more susceptible to heavy flooding are populated mainly by African-Americans. This creates a similar situation of disproportionate casualties as the Chicago heat wave. In both events, the severity of the natural disasters are highly relevant to the social ecology.
natashap 5:03 pm on April 13, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
It’s interesting to observe that the lowest areas are mostly occupied by African-Americans. There’s not economic data on these maps, but it would be interesting to see if the stereotype that the poor live in the valley and the rich live up higher is true. Since the lower areas faced the worse flooding, this is definitely a case of social ecology contributing in this disaster. If the lower areas also had a lower income, this would likely mean that they may not have had the resources to leave while they could, which further contributed to the disaster.
eddietastic 12:46 pm on April 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
i feel like the city risked those who were poor to the natural disasters while those who had more money were able to get higher elevation . Effectively forcing people to put an economic price on their ability to live.