At times, it seems there is no end to the catastrophic dangers facing us as a species. Nuclear apocalypse. Climate change. Pandemics. Artificial intelligence. Supervolcanoes. The list is very long.
But if all hell were to break loose and an unprecedented global catastrophe occurred, where could one go? Where would it be safest to take cover, lie low, wait out the storm, and—hopefully—survive until brighter days return?
In a first-of-its-kind study published in the journal Global Challenges, scientists have identified the place that appears to be the safest in the world in the event of an unforeseen catastrophe.
“Australia is likely the most resilient place on Earth against global catastrophic risks,” explain the researchers in the paper, authored by Florian Ulrich Jehn of the University of Hagen in Germany.
But there is a caveat.
Even Australia is not entirely immune to global catastrophic risks, the researchers warn; it is simply the location least vulnerable to the full spectrum of potential threats looming over us.
In their study, Jehn and his colleagues analyzed scientific literature on galactic cosmic radiation, examining hundreds of studies and reports on the consequences of catastrophes such as asteroid impacts, volcanic eruptions, large-scale cyberattacks, disease threats, and more.
According to the researchers, global cosmic radiation is generally categorized into three main types. Abrupt Sunlight Reduction Scenarios (ASRS) are events that suddenly block sunlight due to volcanic eruptions, nuclear winters, or clouds formed by asteroid impacts.
Events that disrupt societal systems are termed Global Catastrophic Infrastructure Loss (GCIL) events; they lead to failures in power supply, transportation, and food production. Such events can be triggered by geomagnetic storms, cyberattacks, pandemics, and high-altitude electromagnetic pulses (HEMP).
The third type is Global Catastrophic Biological Risk (GCBR), referring to large-scale biological hazards—whether natural or man-made—that result in mass casualties and severe societal upheaval on a continental or global scale.
In addition to classifying risk categories, researchers have examined resilience—defined in this context as a society’s ability to maintain critical functions and human well-being in the face of major disruptions caused by such catastrophes, while accounting for specific geographic, institutional, and infrastructural factors.
Researchers argue that countries tend to be more resilient to global climate crises overall if they are democratic and wealthy; have lower levels of inequality; possess a large industrial base with significant state influence; are located in remote areas (such as large islands); exhibit high degrees of decentralization and diversity; and either have low dependence on trade or rely on geographically close trading partners.
Taking all these factors into account—and considering the three key categories of global climate-related shocks—Australia stands out in published research on the subject due to its geographic isolation, food production capabilities, fossil fuel reserves, industrial potential, and a range of other factors. “No single place on Earth is completely resilient to all global catastrophic risks, but Australia is the country most frequently cited as resilient to them,” the researchers explain. “However, even this country is vulnerable to certain dangers and relies on continuous international trade for fuel, medicines, and fertilizers.”
In the researchers’ analysis, Australia emerged as the only country explicitly identified as resilient to all three types of global climate catastrophes; yet, strengths in some contexts often become weaknesses in the face of other threats—a key theme in the research team’s review.
In Australia’s case, its status as a large island affords significant protection against certain risks but also increases its reliance on international trade systems for the import of specific critical goods.
Overall, despite the challenges it faces, scientists tend to regard Australia as the most resilient country on the planet in the context of global climate studies.
“While Australia faces obvious challenges related to the consequences of climate change, by our assessment, it performs well,” says Jen. “It is an island, so it can more easily isolate itself and close off from the outside world. Australia produces an incredible amount of food and has a large domestic industrial and mining sector. Furthermore, it is a wealthy nation with a reasonably stable democracy—all of which makes the country more resilient.”
Following Australia, other countries recognized as resilient to natural disasters include New Zealand, Japan, Switzerland, and Argentina; however, researchers also note that many of these nations remain vulnerable to specific hazards, even if other factors work in their favor.
“All the countries most frequently cited—with the exception of Switzerland—have extensive coastlines that could be struck by tsunamis triggered by near-Earth objects,” the study authors write. “All of them, except Switzerland, could be affected by an eruption from one of the many volcanoes in Southeast Asia or South America, similar to the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora. They all rely on trade. There is no place on Earth that is completely shielded from global cosmic radiation.”
Looking to the future, researchers suggest that identifying structurally resilient nations like Australia and New Zealand could make them suitable as hubs to support global resilience efforts.
For instance, they could host food stockpiles or seed banks, and their industrial capacity could enable them to keep functioning during a global catastrophe, making them ideal bases for coordinating an international response to whatever disaster might strike.
The most important thing is to be prepared, the researchers say. Sometimes, such events happen right on our doorstep.
About the Author
