A dilemma of language: ‘‘Natural disasters’’ in academic literature

For decades sections of the academic community have been emphasizing that disasters are not natural. Nevertheless, politicians, the media, various international organizations—and, more surprisingly, many established researchers working in disaster studies—are still widely using the expression ‘‘natural disaster.’’ We systematically analyzed the usage of the expression ‘‘natural disaster’’ by disaster studies researchers in 589 articles in six key aca- demic journals representative of disaster studies research, and found that authors are using the expression in three principal ways: (1) delineating natural and human-induced hazards; (2) using the expression to leverage popularity; and (3) critiquing the expression ‘‘natural disaster.’’ We also identified vulnerability themes that illustrate the con- text of ‘‘natural disaster’’ usage. The implications of con- tinuing to use this expression, while explicitly researching human vulnerability, are wide-ranging, and we explore what this means for us and our peers. This study particu- larly aims to stimulate debate within the disaster studies research community and related fields as to whether the term ‘‘natural disaster’’ is really fit for purpose moving forward

“Critique is not a verb”:is peer review stifling the dialogue in disaster scholarship?

Purpose: In this position piece, we will reflect on some of our recent experiences with the peer review process in disaster studies and show how debate can so easily be stifled. We write it as a plea for healthy academic argumentative discussion and intellectual dialogue that would help all of us to refine our ideas, respect others’ ideas and learn from each other.Approach: We provide reflection on our own experiences. All the examples here are based on the anonymous (double-blinded) peer reviews that we have received in the past 2 years in response to papers submitted to disaster-related journals.Findings: We show that the grounds for rejection often have nothing to do with the rigour of the research but are instead based on someone’s philosophy, beliefs, values or opinions that differ from that of the authors, and which undermine the peer-review process.Originality: There is so much potential in amicable and productive disagreements, which mean that we can talk together – and through this, we can learn. Yet the debate in its purest academic sense is a rare beast in disaster scholarship – largely because opposing views do not get published. We call for is that ideological judgement and self-interest are put aside alongside our pride when peers’ work is reviewed – and that intellectual critique is used in a productive way that would enhance rather than stifle scholarship.</div

Hydropower development and environmental impact assessments in Vietnam: current practice and shortcomings

Hydropower projects play an important role concerning national energy security in Vietnam; however, the boom in hydropower development in the last ten years had caused many negative impacts on the environment, fisheries, and people’s livelihoods at upstream and downstream river basins, revealing certain weaknesses the management of systems, processes and projects. The main objectives of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) are to reduce environmental impact and to be a supporting tool for decision-making processes. However, this study finds that EIAs of small and medium scale hydropower projects in Vietnam did not assess thoroughly the important factors such as water balance changes, deforestation, aquatic production impacts, and cultural impacts on the indigenous population

In the Arena: Contesting Disaster Creation in Cities

Space is a feature of all disasters, and it is through decisions on how space is developed, used, and reproduced that disasters manifest themselves. Critical urban theory sees urban space—cities—as an arena of contestation expressed through the relationship between people, power, and the built environment. Cities allow for an unpacking of this process of contestation through the interpretation of various temporal, spatial, social, and physical elements that together create complex issues and ‘wicked problems’. In these urban spaces in all their complexity, disasters reveal both the worst injustices and inequalities present in a society. By drawing on three well‐known cases—Hurricane Katrina in 2010; the Haiti earthquake in 2010; and the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami in 2011—this paper not only explores the opportunities that critical urban theory presents for gaining a deeper understanding of disaster risk creation, but also it encourages disaster scholars to engage with it

Drivers of Applying Ecological Modernization to Construction Waste Minimization in New South Wales Construction Industry

The application of ecological modernization (EM) (to delink industry growth from environmental damage) to minimize construction waste has not been explored within the construction industry in general, and the New South Wales (NSW) construction industry in particular. This study seeks to identify the drivers of applying EM to construction waste minimisation (CWM) in the industry. Also, to determine the CWM measures that are critical for each of the drivers. A survey was adopted in this study to target stakeholders engaged in the delivery of construction projects in NSW from design to completion. The survey was selected to reach a large number of respondents within a manageable period. A pilot study was conducted to ensure the reliability of the research design before a full-scale data collection was launched. The data from 240 valid responses was analysed using factor analysis, relative importance index and descriptive statistics. The results revealed five important drivers for EM’s application to CWM. These are agents of change, government policies, supply chain dynamics, skill-building and technological innovations. The CWM measures that are critical for each of these drivers were also identified. The study provides insights into the application of EM to address the construction industry problem of waste generation as by-product of its growth. It also shows the ability to protect the environment while enabling continuous economic growth. Furthermore, it demonstrates the applicability of EM to minimize the construction waste of NSW construction industry

Disaster risk reduction as a professional competency. A review of related training and education provision for built environment practitioners in the UK and Australia

The UN’s Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 highlights the importance of engaging multiple stakeholders in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR). However, questions remain about whether the increasingly broad range of people who are required to make more informed decisions about risk reduction actually have the professional competencies to do so. DRR in the UK is a part of the resilience agenda, which implies a proactive approach to managing disasters and reducing the risks. In Australia, DRR is integrated within national disaster management policy, shifting responsibility away from government towards a proactive private sector, community and individual. When analysed closely it becomes apparent that despite the presence of legislation that encourages integrating such considerations into built environment processes, many built environment practitioners have not received the training required for dealing with DRR. In addition, proactively dealing with disaster risk in both countries is primarily implemented by emergency managers that typically have not been trained to deal with the required range of DRR approaches. These observations suggest that if DRR considerations are going to become better integrated into the (re)development of increasingly urbanised world, then there is a need to better integrate DRR principles into the core professional training (or at least continued professional development) of some of these key built environment practitioners. Therefore with the aim of assessing the extent to which DRR is (or can be) a core professional competency, this paper a) presents a critical review of the current core competency requirements for members of professional institutions, and b) provides an overview of the training of built environment practitioners in the UK and Australia

Language matters: Dangers of the “natural disaster” misnomer

Despite unmistakable human complicity in disasters, the idea that disasters are simply part of the natural state of affairs remains pervasive. This is reflected in the frequent use of the expression “natural disaster”. This paper examines International non-governmental organisations' (INGOs) and Intergovernmental organisations' (IGOs) literature that utilises the expression “natural disaster”. The authors look at how the expression is used, discuss the reasons why it is problematic and ultimately argue that by continuously blaming and putting the responsibility for failures of development on “nature”, we – as a society – fail to hold accountable those who create disaster risk. Section 2 gives an overview of the key terminology that emphasises that disasters are socially produced. Section 3 describes methodology, and is followed by Section 4, in which the results of the analysis are presented. Section 5 brings the discussion together by arguing that risk is created in many ways but ultimately it is the predatory socio-economic system that characterises the current status quo – a status quo that thrives on race, class and gender based discrimination – that both drives the creation of risk and puts down any attempts to overturn its dominance. In the conclusion the authors argue that the language currently being used, particularly the “natural disaster” expression, is not helping to address root causes of disasters. Arguably it is hurting the cause

What We Measure Matters:The Case of the Missing Development Data in Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction Monitoring

International audienceThe Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030's (SFDRR) framing moved away from disaster risk as a natural phenomenon to the examination of the inequality and injustice at the root of human vulnerability to hazards and disasters. Yet, its achievements have not seriously challenged the long-established capitalist systems of oppression that hinder the development leading to disaster risk creation. This article is an exploratory mapping exercise of and a collective reflection on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and SFDRR indicators-and their use in measuring progress towards disaster risk reduction (DRR). We highlight that despite the rhetoric of vulnerability, the measurement of progress towards DRR remains event/hazard-centric. We argue that the measurement of disaster risk could be greatly enhanced by the integration of development data in future iterations of global DRR frameworks for action

Proceedings of the ANDROID Doctoral School

The Doctoral School initiative which was set up by the ANDROID network is a core element of the overall project that aims to strengthen the link between research and teaching in the area of disaster resilience. The mixed teaching space that we have developed as part of this ongoing project has attempted to encourage and promote the work of doctoral students in this field. The ANDROID disaster resilience network doctoral school consists of two programmes: 1. Online Doctoral School (ODS) and 2. Residential Doctoral School (RDS) The interlinked programmes work together to deliver on a varied number of teaching and research driven objectives. The online doctoral school which was conducted in Spring 2013 provided an innovative platform to transfer and develop the knowledge base of doctoral candidates. This was achieved through the conduct of a series of domain expert presentations along with thematic sessions aimed at engaging the doctoral researchers in knowledge discovery through detailed discussion. The online doctoral school will be rolled out again in Spring 2014