We did the interviews with 18 elders in Estación Central, San Bernardo and general places because our goal was to know people from different vulnerable places. So we choose Estacion central as a urban environment and San Bernardo to represent a countryside place. In addition, we wanted to know people who lived in different places in Chile. For this reason we decided to go to general places and we found people from south of Chile, for example, Patagonia, Valparaiso and other areas too.
During the interviews, we realize that the elders from Chile are very calm and they are not afraid of earthquakes because it is normal for them. Despite our challenge is not only relationed with earthquakes but with others disasters too, we realize that here in Santiago, the most common disaster for the people that we interviewed is the earthquakes. In addition, a positive factor that we found was the willinging of the elders to be incorporated in design and execution of prevention programs to the effects of disasters.
Regarding the behavior of the elderly, their knowledge and experience regarding earthquakes is well known. It is an interesting fact that elderly people who had a good infrastructure in their homes claimed not to have great losses when the disaster, but a great difficulty in the housing.
In the end of the week we gathered all the answers from the interviews and observations we did. From those interviews we got very much valuable and interesting information especially about the elder’s experiences of natural disasters and their attitudes for disasters with taking note of the territory they were living in. On Wednesday we came up with our opportunities based on the answers and coding we had done.
Thursday was a day for presentations, feedback we got from teachers were good. All of it wasn’t positive as the most valuable feedback rarely is. But the positive feedback was about our protocol and the criterias for interviews, and also about the coding we did. So we got to know that we are going to the right direction. In addition we need to clearify our opportunities. Even if for us it seems to be clear that we based the opportunitites on the results of the research we didn’t succeed to make that clear at the presentation. But as is said before, the constractive feedback was very valuable for us.