## 4 The Impact of Socio-Economic Indicators on the Distribution and Consequences of Disasters  
Based on the results of Pearson's correlation analysis, there is a statistically significant relationship between various socio-economic indicators and the patterns, outcomes, and specific impacts of disasters, including the number of deaths, injuries, and total disasters. The analysis reveals a significant negative correlation between GDP per capita (USD) and the total number of disasters (\(p\) = 0.140, \(r\) = \(-\)0.333). This suggests that countries with a higher GDP per capita tend to experience fewer overall disasters and related impacts. This relationship could be attributed to wealthier nations' ability to allocate more resources towards disaster prevention, mitigation, and preparedness, potentially reducing both the frequency and severity of disasters [94,95]. However, the analysis did not find a statistically significant correlation between GDP per capita and the number of people affected, deaths, injuries, natural disasters, or man-made disasters. This indicates that economic wealth alone may not directly lead to better outcomes in terms of lives saved, reduced injuries, or fewer natural disasters. On the other hand, the quality of governance is also significantly negatively correlated with the total number of disasters (\(p\) = 0.080, \(r\) = \(-\)0.390). This suggests that higher governance quality is associated with fewer disasters overall. Effective governance likely enhances disaster management practices, including timely response and efficient resource allocation, thereby reducing the overall impact of disasters, including the number of deaths and injuries. Although the correlations with deaths (\(p\) = 0.941, \(r\) = \(-\)0.017) and injuries (\(p\) = 0.846, \(r\) = \(-\)0.045) are statistically significant, they are relatively weak. However, these findings still suggest that good governance may play a role in reducing the severity of disaster outcomes (Table 12). Furthermore, population density (people per km\({}^{2}\)) shows a highly significant positive correlation with the number of people affected by disasters (\(p\) = 0.000, \(r\) = 0.729), indicating that areas with higher population densities are more likely to see greater numbers of people impacted by such disasters. This finding is logical, as densely populated areas naturally have more people at risk when disasters strike. There is also a significant negative correlation with deaths (\(p\) = 0.120, \(r\) = \(-\)0.350), injuries (\(p\) = 0.229, \(r\) = \(-\)0.274), and total disasters (\(p\) = 0.401, \(r\) = \(-\)0.193). These results suggest that while more individuals may be affected in high-density areas, the number of deaths, injuries, and the frequency of natural disasters may be lower. This could be due to better infrastructure and emergency services that are more readily available in urbanized regions. However, correlations with specific types of natural and man-made disasters are not statistically significant, implying that population density alone does not fully explain the occurrence of these types of disasters (Table 12).Finally, the urbanization rate (%) is significantly negatively correlated with the total number of disasters (\(p=0.007\), \(r=-0.571\)). This indicates that higher urbanization rates are associated with fewer disasters overall. This may be because urban areas often benefit from superior infrastructure, more robust disaster response systems, and better access to resources, all of which can mitigate the frequency and impact of disasters, including those leading to deaths, injuries, and natural disasters [96; 97]. Additionally, the urbanization rate exhibits negative correlations with deaths (\(p=0.612\), \(r=-0.117\)), injuries (\(p=0.804\), \(r=-0.058\)), and natural disasters (\(p=0.766\), \(r=-0.069\)), although these are not statistically significant.