Search results

This paper is a critique of Western modernity and the problems and promises of postmodernism in (re)liberating disaster studies. It criticizes metanarratives and grand theories of Western discourses to advance postmodern discourses in disaster studies.

This paper outlines a conceptual domain through which approaches of postmodernism can be employed to (re)liberate disaster studies.

Metanarratives and grand theories frame the scope and focus of disaster studies. But the increasing number and the aggravated impacts of disasters and environmental challenges in the late 20th and early 21st centuries are proofs that our current “frames” do not capture the complexities of disasters. Postmodernism, in its diversity and various meanings, offers critical and complementary perspectives and approaches to capture the previously neglected dimensions of disasters.

Postmodernism offers ways forward to (re)liberate disaster studies through ontological pluralism, epistemological diversity and hybridity of knowledge.

The agenda of postmodernism in disaster studies is proposed in terms of the focus of inquiry, ontological and epistemological positionalities, research paradigm, methodologies and societal goals.

At the global level, disaster risk finance (DRF) is playing an increasingly prominent role in the international agendas for climate change adaptation. However, before implementing such agendas, it is essential to understand the needs and limitations of DRF in the subnational context where they need to impact. This research aims to gain insights into the perspectives of community and governmental actors in Colombia regarding DRF. Its goal is to promote the specific design of collaborative educational and technical assistance processes that consider their interests in the subject and the cultural diversity of the territories.

To achieve this, semi-structured interviews were conducted, and the findings were organized to highlight key aspects that help to understand DRF perspectives in the Colombian context.

It was found that the most significant limitations of implementing DRF include a lack of knowledge on the topic, corruption that encourages a reactive approach and the absence of economic resources. Concerns have emerged regarding the possibility of climate risk insurance becoming a profit-driven enterprise and the potential development of dependency behaviors within community groups, leading to maladaptation and moral hazard. Similarly, the implementation of DRF through foreign funds has raised concerns about the loss of territorial sovereignty and autonomy.

This is one of the first studies that carry out this kind of research and contributes to the formulation of inclusive public policies for DRF in different contexts worldwide.

This viewpoint engages with Jem Bendell’s deep adaptation framework which was developed as a response to the threat of collapse. Proponents of deep adaptation argue that societal collapse is either likely, inevitable or already underway. The deep adaptation framework is employed as a tool to contemplate the necessary adaptation of tourism development and planning in a context of polycrisis leading to collapse.

This is a conceptual viewpoint article that is built on deductive analysis of recent events, reports and scientific findings. It employs the deep adaptation framework to analyse possible alternative tourism futures in the face of the threat of collapse.

Bendell’s framework included four aspects of response to the recognition of the threat of collapse: resilience, relinquishment, restoration and reconciliation. In this work, the deep adaptation framework is employed to analyse what a deep adaptation approach to tourism might offer for efforts in securing optimal social and ecological outcomes. Findings highlight damaging activities that we should relinquish, more resilient approaches that communities could encourage and restorative practices such as rewilding and pluriversal economies as protective measures. This work recommends a precautionary approach to transform tourism education, research and practice in order to secure better tourism futures.

This work is novel in engaging with the threat of future collapse and in using the deep adaptation framework to consider alternative tourism futures.

Scholars of disaster have discussed how place attachment affects the disaster landscape. The rupture of self from home, of familiar into strange and disconnected is explored through this lens. I propose in this paper that it is possible that what we are seeing is not a sudden disruption of place attachment, but an ongoing process of alienation.

In this paper I discuss the concepts of both place attachment and alienation. In particular I explore Marx’s concept of alienation. I then look at examples from disaster research and identify instances and concepts that can be better interpreted as an ongoing process of alienation.

I find that, when using Marx’s framework of alienation, we can take examples from disaster studies that might appear as a sudden disruption of place attachment and critically examine them as cases of alienation.

This exploration of disaster theory offers a new framework for bringing together urban theory, in particular critical urban theory, with disaster research.

This study aims to help develop “business principles for stakeholder capitalism” in two steps. First, the study defines internal logic of three theories of capitalism and two variants within each theory. Second, it examines approaches to integration into modern democratic capitalism. Treating the three theories as substitutes identifies relative strengths and weaknesses; complementarity and partial overlap approaches to integration study the institutional settings within which stakeholder capitalism operates. Empirical outcomes reflect competition between market and stakeholder businesses for participants, with institutional conditions determining the scope of collective action.

The approach aligns three typologies in a unique conceptual arrangement defining the three theories of capitalism: forms of capitalism, potential failures of each form and associated types of goods. The first method examines the internal logic of each theory of capitalism. The second draws on traditional narrative review of references documenting each theory of capitalism and variants together with modern Marxist anti-capitalism.

Three typologies align uniquely with the theories of capitalism, each having two variants. Both variants of stakeholder capitalism are compatible with compassionate capitalism, constitutional government or polycentric governance but not with self-interest capitalism, dictatorship or Marxism. A theory of modern democratic capitalism allocates roles for private, club and social goods with empirically variable mixes occurring across countries. Competition among different types of enterprises provides an empirical test for comparative advantages of stakeholder capitalism. Future research should consider approaches for testing the proposed conceptual scheme in practice concerning capacity to deal with grand challenges, wicked problems and black swan events.

Research approach is limited to logical examination of theories and literature documentation without direct empirical confirmation. The study does not address practical implications for managers and public officials or social implications concerning private incentives, stakeholder cooperation or collective action.

Originality lies in shifting terms of debate about stakeholder capitalism from advocacy of substitute theories to understanding of its relationship to market capitalism and collective action capitalism. Value lies in explaining desirability of theoretical integration of three types of capitalism into a comprehensive framework for modern democratic capitalism.

This paper argues that extractivist logic creates the environmental conditions that produce “natural” hazards and also the human conditions that produce vulnerability, which combined create disasters. Disaster Risk Creation is then built into the current global socio-economic system, as an integral component not accidental by-product.

As part of the movement to liberate disasters as discipline, practice and field of enquiry, this paper does not talk disasters per se, but rather its focus is on “extractivism” as a fundamental explanator for the anthropogenic disaster landscape that now confronts us.

Applying a gender lens to extractivism as it relates to disaster, further highlights that Disaster Risk Management rather than alleviating, creates the problems it seeks to solve, suggesting the need to liberate gender from Disaster Risk Management, and the need to liberate us all from the notion of managing disasters. Since to ‘manage’ disaster risk is to accept uncritically the structures and systems that create that risk, then if we truly want to address disasters, our focus needs to be on the extractive practices, not the disastrous outcomes.

The fundamental argument is that through privileging the notion of “disaster” we create it, bring it into existence, as something that exists in and of itself, apart from wider socio-economic structures and systems of extraction and exploitation, rather than recognising it for what it is, an outcome/end product of those wider structures and systems. Our focus on disaster is then misplaced, and perhaps what disaster studies needs to be liberated from, is itself.

The purpose of this study is to identify LGBTQ+ perceptions of and experiences with hazards, vulnerabilities and disasters in the San Francisco Bay Area in the USA and to co-develop applied projects to “queer” disaster knowledge production and risk reduction activities in the region.

This is a community science project in which we collaborate with community members to enhance both community and scientific knowledge with the goal of utilizing it to produce a positive change to pressing social issues and their underlying causes. We do this through a series of four focus group workshops to identify community priorities, hazards, vulnerabilities and local action. We follow this with further ethnographic research and projects to apply findings from phase one.

The authors have found that: LGBTQ+ people in the Bay Area have unique experiences with hazards, vulnerabilities and disasters; there are significant gaps in the representation of LGBTQ+ hazard exposure in local scientific models that we can address through alternative methodologies; and tabletop exercises, learning modules and podcasts help orient and train disaster response agencies and personnel on LGBTQ+ inclusive operations.

This initiative entails novel approaches to community science for disaster risk reduction and creative collaboration with community-based organizations to foster the development of LGBTQ+ inclusive disaster risk reduction and response.

This conversation highlights the need to rethink how we approach disaster risk reduction in different South Asian contexts.

This paper is based on the webinar held as part of Asia Week at the University of Copenhagen which was organised by Asian Dynamics Initiative and Copenhagen Centre for Disaster Research on the September 12, 2023.

The prominent themes emerging from this conversation represents hybridity, self-rule and self-recovery. Along with this we suggest a fundamental turn to ensuring hope, solidarity and empathy is part of a post-colonial future.

The conversation contributes to the ongoing discussions on moving away from colonial practices in disaster risk reduction and disaster studies broadly.