A Critical Overviewof Disaster Theory

David AlexanderUniversity College London

The Problem

Theorem: A better knowledge of naturalhazards will contribute almost nothingto resolving the disasters problem...

...unless context is taken fully into account.

Lesson to be learned:We will never even understandthe problem, let alone solve it,unless we start being realistic

about the world in which we live.

• colossal imbalances in power and wealth

• immense but eminently solvable problemsthat are not solved because there ispowerful opposition to attempts to do so

• huge differences in thedefinition of what is rational

• many key activities are notlegitimate by any standards.

What is the world actually like?

• community-level DRR: communities arenot homogeneous or harmonious units

• communities are notparticularly interested in DRR

• neither are governments

• disasters can be explained withreference to power structures

Terry Cannon's observations onDisaster Risk Reduction (DRR)

• people, governments & communities seldomact on the basis of evidence and research

• rationality can only be defined in context.

• corruption

• political decision-making

• shoddy building (often wilful)

• ignorance (sometimes wilful)

• seismicity.

What causes earthquake disasters?- in probable order of importance -

Without corruption, the impact ofthis earthquake would have been

about 10% of what it actually was.

• difficult to define

• virtually impossible to measure

• extremely pervasive, endogenous

• moral and ethical frameworks vary

• links with other ills (black economy).

Corruption

NB: Correlation does not prove causation, but....

www.bbc.co.uk/news

"Our research shows that the successof early warning is largely determined

by politics, not science."- Chatham House, London

• widening wealth gap since 1970

• failure to divert resources fromresponse to prevention and mitigation

• half of world trade goesthrough 78 tax havens

• one fifth of world trade is illicit(drugs, armaments, people, species)

• relationship of proxy wars to aid.

Reality check:

• consolidate power structures

• augment profits

• allow introduction of convenientlyrepressive measures

• permit gratuitous social engineering.

The economic and socialVALUE of disasters

• resources that debilitatelocal coping capacity

• munitions, military hardware, soldiertraining and some humanitarian stuff

• an instrument of political influence

• a means of liningcertain people's pockets.

What is aid?

• BIG concrete on poor people's land

• of direct benefit to the donor countries

• aid is in DEEP CRISIS.

What is aid?

Disaster Risk Reduction

On the nature of theory

"Theory isour roadmap"

Prof. Thomas E. DrabekUniversity of Denver

The road map to what?

• disaster risk reduction• adaptation to dynamic risks• crisis response planning• emergency management• recovery planning and management

Theory tells us what we can and cannot do.

In the DRR field, theory is unique- or at least rather distinctive:

it cannot wait 100 years to be tested.

Theory, if it is any good,• explains• connects• validates• qualifies• makes more

efficient.

Pioneers in DRR

Rev. DrSamuel Henry Prince

1885-1960Nuova Scotia,

Columbia University

ProfessorHarlan H. Barrows

1877-1960Michigan,

Chicago University

1920

1923

Gilbert Fowler White 1911-2006

"Boundedrationality"

Herbert Simon, 1916-2001homo economicus

In disasters and disaster risk,how important is gender?

Kobe 1995 earthquake deathsby gender and age

― males ― females

Long term

Short term

Emic components

Etic components

METAMORPHOSISOF CULTURE

Experiences of culture[mass-media and consumer culture]

Accumulated cultural traits and beliefs

Inherited cultural background

Ideological(non-scientific)interpretations

of disaster

Learned(scientific)

interpretationsof disaster

BENIGN (healthy)at the service of the people

MALIGN (corrupt)at the service of vested interests

interplay dialectic

Justification Development

[spiritual, cultural, political, economic]

IDEOLOGY CULTURE

Can we define disaster?

1998 2005

HUMANCONSEQUENCES

OF DISASTER

“ORTHODOX” MODEL

PHYSICALEVENT

HUMANVULNERABILITY

“RADICAL CRITIQUE” (K. HEWITT et al.)HUMAN

CONSEQUENCESOF DISASTER

HUMANVULNERABILITY

PHYSICALEVENT

LET'S CHANGE THE MODEL:-

HUMANCONSEQUENCES

OF DISASTER

HUMANVULNERABILITY

CULTURE HISTORYPHYSICALEVENTS

CONTEXT & CONSEQUENCES

known knowns- things we

know

Modified Rumsfeld Classification

unknown knowns -things we

don't realisewe know

known unknowns -things we

know we don't know

unknown unknowns -things we

don't know we don't know

Rese

arc

h a

ndapp

lica

tion

sInt

ens

ify

searc

hBroa

den

our cultureW

e ca

ndo noth

ing

DETERMINISMCause Effect

PROBABILITY(constrained uncertainty)

Cause Single, multiple or cascading effects

THE KNOWN

THE UNKNOWN

PURE UNCERTAINTYCausal relationship

unknown

Greyarea

Cascading effects

Collateral vulnerability

Secondarydisasters

Interaction between risks

Climatechange

Probability

Indeterminacy

"Fat-tailed" (skewed)distributionsof impacts

C

E

E

E

E

C

E/C

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E/C

(a)

(b)

C – causeE - effect

Disaster

Resilience

The "cradle"of resilience:

Canonbury TowerLondon N1.

Built in 1509to survive the

Universal Deluge:inhabited in 1625by Francis Bacon.

Francis BaconSylva Sylvarum, 1625

LAW

STATESMANSHIP

LITERATURE

SCIENTIFICMETHOD

MECHANICS

MANU-FACTURING

ECOLOGY

MANAGEMENT(ADAPTIVE)

CHILDPSYCHOLOGY

ANTHROPOLOGY

SOCIALRESEARCH

DISASTER RISKREDUCTION

SUSTAINABILITYSCIENCE CLIMATE CHANGE

ADAPTATION

c. 50 BC

AD 15291625

1859

19301950

1973

2000

2010

NATURALHISTORY

• an objective, a process or a strategy?

• a paradigm, diverse paradigms?

• 'bounce-back' or 'bounce-forward'?

• focuses on the community scale?

• can reconcile dynamic & static elements?

Resilience

Resilience Vulnerability

Riskamplification

factors

Riskmitigationfactors

Totalvulnerability

Risk perceptionfactors- +

positivenegative

DIALECTIC

Vulnerability

Total: life isgenerally precariousEconomic: people lackadequate occupationTechnological/technocratic: dueto the riskiness of technologyDelinquent: caused bycorruption, negligence, etc.Residual: caused bylack of modernisationNewly generated: caused bychanges in circumstances

RESILIENCE:as a material has brittle strength and ductility:so must society havean optimum combination of resistance tohazard impacts and ability to adapt to them.

RESILIENCE

Social

Tech

nica

l

Physical

Psych

ological

CLIMATE CHANGEADAPTATION

DISASTER RISKREDUCTION

OTHER HAZARDSAND RISKS

naturalsocial

technologicalintentionalcompoundcascading

SUSTAINABILITYSCIENCE

RISKSdaily: unemployment, poverty, disease, etc.major disaster: floods, storms, quakes, etc.emerging risks: pandemics, climate change

SUSTAINABILITYdisaster risk reduction

resource consumptionstewardship of the environment

economic activitieslifestyles and communities

SUSTAINABILITY

Conclusion: thewords of a dwarf perched on the

shoulders of giants

• advances in knowledgehave had a positive impact

• the whole problem is betterknown than ever before

• interdisciplinary research and problem-solving have made some progress

• but the balance is still weighted heavilyin favour of a worsening situation.

Correcting a one-sided picture:-

• realism helps

• transparency is necessary

• gross inequality is in no one's interest

• national policies are needed and can work

• cultivate a flexible attitude.

The positive messages

THE PILLARS OF MODERN LIFE

idealismprinciplebelieffaith

fanaticismultranationalismauthoritarianism

backlash

virtuecharityservicedefence of principles

unscrupulousnesscorruption

opportunismcensure

capital availabilitywealth diffusionfinancial security

financial repressiondebt burdenconsumerism

ingegnuitypragmatismtechnological progress

crass materialismgalloping consumption

pollution and wastetechnological hegemony

Ideocentrism

Morality

Luchrocentrism

Technocentrism

SPI

RIT

FLESH

PHILOSOPH

ICAL

MECHANISTIC

Positive Negative

...culturally conditioned.

Ideocentrism+ ideal: effective disaster mitigation- fanaticism: politicization of humanitarian relief

Morality+ virtue: untiring application of mitigation measures- corruption: failure to observe building codes

Luchrocentrism+ financial security: monetary reserves vs. disaster- financial repression: poverty --> vulnerability

Technocentrism+ ingenuity: new hazard monitoring systems- technological hegemony: unfair distribution of

mitigation benefits

Earthquake disasteras a negative windowof opportunity

But at the bottomthere was hope....

"Pandora's box"theory of disasters

Organisationalsystems:management

Socialsystems:behaviour

Naturalsystems:function

Technicalsystems:

malfunction

VulnerabilityHazard

Resilienc

e

Politicalsystems:decisions

david.alexander@ucl.ac.ukwww.slideshare.net/dealexanderemergency-planning.blogspot.com

Ishinomaki, Japan