The safest places have been mapped (Image: Getty)
The UK’s safest and least safe areas to live in the event of a national crisis or catastrophe have been outlined on a map, which puts locations with military sites and among the most dangerous.
The map was designed after the UK Government issued its ‘Be Ready’ guidance for Brits, urging them to prepare an emergency kit comprising items such as non-perishable food, bottled water, and wind-up radios.
While the map shows the best and worst places to live for all kinds of catastrophes, the poor ratings for areas near military sites suggest these towns and cities could be especially vulnerable in the event of a major conflict.
Serhii Kashevko, a 30-year-old Ukrainian tech entrepreneur who carried out the analysis, found that Fermanagh and Omagh in southwest Northern Ireland are the safest area due to their remoteness, agricultural land, and lack of military bases.
England’s safest place, according to the data, is Thanet in Kent.
Speaking to the Independent, Kashevsko explained: “I looked at the effects of Russian attacks on Ukraine. One of the factors I used to assess areas was how populated they are … something I understood with how much more damage Russian attacks do in crowded areas of Ukraine.”
The UK’s most dangerous location is Gosport, the analysis found. It has 15 military or nuclear sites within a 19-mile radius.
The UK’s 10 Safest Areas to Live During Crises Mapped – and the 10 Most Dangerous
In an increasingly uncertain world, concerns about national security, international conflicts and potential disasters have become more prominent than ever. Across the United Kingdom, many people are beginning to consider an important question: where would be the safest place to live if the country faced a major national crisis? A new analysis has highlighted the ten safest and ten most dangerous areas in Britain, revealing significant differences in geographical location, population density and proximity to important military installations.
The findings come from a new online tool known as the “Doomsday” postcode checker, developed by Ukrainian technology entrepreneur Serhii Kashevko. The tool was designed to estimate how vulnerable different parts of the UK might be in the event of a national catastrophe, including a potential military conflict. Its findings have attracted considerable attention, particularly as the British Government has encouraged households to become better prepared for emergencies through its “Be Ready” campaign.
According to the analysis, Fermanagh and Omagh in Northern Ireland is the safest area in the UK, while Gosport in Hampshire is considered the most vulnerable. The results suggest that remote rural communities may have certain advantages during a major crisis, whereas densely populated urban centres and locations close to strategic military facilities could face greater risks.
The UK’s 10 Safest Areas During a National Crisis
The analysis identifies the following ten areas as the safest places to live in Britain during a hypothetical national emergency:
- Fermanagh and Omagh
- Derry City and Strabane
- Causeway Coast and Glens
- Newry, Mourne and Down
- Shetland Islands
- Mid Ulster
- Gwynedd
- Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon
- Orkney Islands
- Thanet
Northern Ireland dominates the list, with six of the ten safest areas located there. Fermanagh and Omagh takes first place because of its relatively low population density, extensive agricultural land and limited concentration of major military installations. These characteristics could offer certain advantages if a national emergency disrupted essential infrastructure or threatened heavily populated areas.
The Shetland Islands and Orkney Islands also perform well in the assessment. Their remote geographical positions and relatively small populations distinguish them from major urban centres. In a hypothetical crisis, geographical isolation could reduce exposure to certain risks associated with large cities and strategically important locations.
Gwynedd, in north-west Wales, is another notable example. Its mountainous landscape, particularly around Eryri National Park, provides natural geographical barriers. Rural communities in the region may also benefit from access to agricultural resources and lower population density.
Meanwhile, Thanet is identified as England’s safest area in the ranking. Located in Kent, the district benefits from its coastal geography and relative distance from several major inland industrial and military centres.
However, being ranked among the safest locations does not mean these areas would be completely protected from a national disaster. Their remoteness could also create difficulties if transport networks were interrupted or supplies of food, medicine and fuel became limited.
The UK’s 10 Most Dangerous Areas
At the opposite end of the ranking, the analysis identifies ten areas that could be particularly vulnerable during a major national crisis:
- Gosport
- Portsmouth
- Westminster
- Cheltenham
- Rushmoor, Aldershot and Farnborough
- City of London
- Southwark
- Plymouth
- Islington
- Hammersmith and Fulham
Gosport, located in Hampshire, ranks as the most vulnerable area in the country. According to the analysis, there are 15 military or nuclear-related sites within a 19-mile radius of the town. Its proximity to important naval facilities, including HM Naval Base Portsmouth, is a significant factor behind its position.
Portsmouth also appears near the top of the list because of its strategic importance to the Royal Navy. As one of Britain’s principal naval centres, the city contains important defence infrastructure that could make the surrounding region more exposed in a hypothetical military conflict.
Cheltenham is another location attracting attention. It is home to the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), one of Britain’s most important intelligence and communications organisations. Its strategic significance is a major consideration in the vulnerability assessment.
Rushmoor, which includes Aldershot and Farnborough, also receives a high-risk rating. Aldershot has a long-established association with the British Army and is widely recognised for its military presence.
Plymouth is similarly highlighted because it hosts HM Naval Base Devonport, one of the Royal Navy’s most important facilities and the largest naval base in Western Europe.
London features prominently in the list, with four boroughs or districts included: Westminster, the City of London, Southwark, Islington, and Hammersmith and Fulham. These locations contain important government institutions, financial organisations, transport networks and communications infrastructure.
Westminster is particularly significant because it is home to the Houses of Parliament, government departments and other central institutions. The City of London is internationally recognised as a major financial centre, while Southwark and other neighbouring districts form part of the capital’s extensive economic and transport network.
The concentration of people, businesses and essential services in these areas could make a widespread emergency especially challenging. Disruptions to electricity, communications, public transport and food distribution could affect large numbers of residents and workers.
Why Are Some Areas Safer Than Others?
Several factors help explain the differences between the locations included in the ranking.
The first is population density. Large cities generally contain more people, buildings and essential infrastructure within relatively small geographical areas. In a major emergency, this concentration could increase the number of people affected and make evacuation, emergency response and the distribution of essential supplies more complicated.
The second factor is proximity to military and strategic infrastructure. Naval bases, intelligence facilities, military headquarters and other important installations play essential roles in national defence. However, their strategic importance could also make nearby communities more exposed in certain conflict scenarios.
Geography is another important consideration. Mountains, islands and rural landscapes may offer natural advantages in some circumstances. Nevertheless, remote communities can also experience difficulties accessing hospitals, emergency services and essential supplies.
Finally, access to healthcare and emergency facilities matters considerably. A location that is geographically isolated might be less exposed to certain threats but could leave residents with fewer options if hospitals become overwhelmed or transport systems stop functioning.
The postcode checker combines several of these considerations to produce an overall assessment. However, its ratings should be understood as estimates rather than scientifically established predictions of what would happen during a real catastrophe.
How Can People Prepare for a National Emergency?
Regardless of where they live, British residents should understand that emergency preparedness is not exclusively about preparing for war. Severe weather, flooding, prolonged power cuts, cyberattacks and disruptions to supply chains can all create serious challenges for communities.
The UK Government’s “Be Ready” campaign encourages households to prepare basic emergency supplies. These include bottled water, non-perishable food, torches, batteries, wind-up radios and essential medicines.
Families should also consider preparing an emergency contact list, identifying alternative ways to communicate and understanding local evacuation arrangements. Keeping important documents accessible and knowing where to find reliable information during an emergency can also make a significant difference.
Community cooperation is equally important. Neighbours can support elderly residents, people with disabilities and vulnerable families who may need additional assistance during difficult circumstances.
A Warning, Not a Prediction
Although the new map provides an interesting perspective on national vulnerability, its findings should not be interpreted as a definitive forecast of Britain’s future. The analysis is based on selected indicators and hypothetical scenarios, and actual risks would depend on the nature, scale and location of any emergency.
Serhii Kashevko has explained that his approach was influenced partly by observing the effects of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, particularly how population density and strategic infrastructure can influence the consequences of military attacks.
His project therefore offers an opportunity to think more carefully about geographical vulnerability and emergency preparedness rather than identifying places that are guaranteed to remain safe.
Ultimately, no location in the United Kingdom can be considered completely immune to a national crisis. Rural communities may benefit from lower population density and geographical isolation, while cities often have better access to hospitals, emergency services and essential infrastructure.
The most important lesson is that preparedness matters everywhere. Rather than relying entirely on a postcode ranking, individuals, families and communities should focus on understanding potential risks, maintaining essential supplies and knowing how to respond when emergencies occur.
In an unpredictable world, being informed and prepared may prove far more valuable than simply living in an area labelled as one of Britain’s safest.