Search results

The purpose of this paper is to connect the theoretical idea of warning systems as social processes with empirical data of people’s perceptions of and actions for warning for cyclones in Bangladesh.

A case study approach is used in two villages of Khulna district in southwest Bangladesh: Kalabogi and Kamarkhola. In total, 60 households in each village were surveyed with structured questionnaires regarding how they receive their cyclone warning information as well as their experiences of warnings for Cyclone Sidr in 2007 and Cyclone Aila in 2009.

People in the two villages had a high rate of receiving cyclone warnings and accepted them as being credible. They also experienced high impacts from the cyclones. Yet evacuation rates to cyclone shelters were low. They did not believe that significant cyclone damage would affect them and they also highlighted the difficulty of getting to cyclone shelters due to poor roads, leading them to prefer other evacuation options which were implemented if needed.

Theoretical constructs of warning systems, such as the First Mile and late warning, are rarely examined empirically according to people’s perceptions of warnings. The case study villages have not before been researched with respect to warning systems. The findings provide empirical evidence for long-established principles of warning systems as social processes, usually involving but not relying on technical components.

The purpose of this paper is to present a first exploration of governmental duty of care towards scientists involved in science diplomacy by focusing on disaster research.

The method is a conceptual exploration, using specific case studies and potential scenarios within theories and practices of science diplomacy and duty of care, to raise questions and to suggest policy recommendations for government. The focus on disaster research links the analysis to disaster diplomacy, namely, how and why disaster-related activities (in this case, science) do and do not influence peace and conflict.

From examining case studies of, and outputs and outcomes from, disaster-related science diplomacy, governments need to consider duty of care issues in advance and develop a science diplomacy strategy, rather than responding after the fact or developing policy ad hoc.

Policy recommendations are provided to try to ensure that governments avoid simply reacting after a crisis, instead being ready for a situation before it arises and drawing on others’ experience to improve their own actions.

Improved interaction between science and society is discussed in the context of diplomacy, especially for disaster-related activities.

Governmental duty of care has not before been applied to science diplomacy. The focus on disaster-related science further provides a comparatively new dimension for science diplomacy.

This paper explores Arctic post-disaster situations by focusing on settlement and shelter in Arctic humanitarian contexts.

Principles of post-disaster settlement and shelter are examined for the Arctic and then for the case study of Svalbard, Norway.

Established principles apply in the Arctic, but are not easy to implement. Limited practical experience exists, and some Arctic humanitarian situations require much more investigation to understand how to deal with the post-disaster settlement and shelter process.

Setting an agenda for aspects of the principles and practices of Arctic humanitarianism.

This short paper builds on and critiques work presenting potential non-disasters: disasters that did not seem to happen despite a major hazard. Previous work does not differentiate among different types of potential non-disasters. This short paper uses local information to propose three categories according to reasons for vulnerability being low or absent. These proposed categories are used to critique the construct of “potential non-disasters”.

This short paper uses a subjective approach to examples of potential non-disasters in 2022, focusing on local information that describes what happened. This information is applied and analysed for the three proposed categories using examples from Japan, Nepal, the Philippines and Vietnam. Such comparisons are useful for critiquing “potential non-disasters”, by understanding better local approaches and information available for reporting on situations that could be disasters.

Potential non-disasters remain relevant for exploring mechanisms, tools and actions for educating about vulnerability causes and vulnerability reduction to avert disasters. Limitations are evident by relying on media reports, even local ones with local authors. A suggestion is to implement a grant programme for collecting data immediately after a major hazard without an evident, major disaster. Additionally, an annual report and critique of each year's potential non-disasters, categorised and analysed, would help to evidence the presence and limits of the “potential non-disaster” construct.

This short paper contributes a much deeper theoretical dive into understanding potential non-disasters, both describing them and the drawbacks of the construct. To practitioners, the construct now offers more avenues for actions while illustrating their effectiveness in reducing vulnerabilities. Thus, this paper supports multiple, linked pathways towards more non-disasters.

The purpose of this paper is to better link the parallel processes yielding international agreements on climate change, disaster risk reduction, and sustainable development.

This paper explores how the Paris Agreement for climate change relates to disaster risk reduction and sustainable development, demonstrating too much separation amongst the topics. A resolution is provided through placing climate change within wider disaster risk reduction and sustainable development contexts.

No reason exists for climate change to be separated from wider disaster risk reduction and sustainable development processes.

Based on the research, a conceptual approach for policy and practice is provided. Due to entrenched territory, the research approach is unlikely to be implemented.

Using a scientific basis to propose an ending for the silos separating international processes for climate change, disaster risk reduction, and sustainable development.

The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss perceptions of petroleum-related corporate social responsibility (CSR) among local and regional authorities, local peoples (indigenous and non-indigenous) and representatives of petroleum companies working or living in the Nenets Autonomous Okrug (NAO) in the Russian Arctic. Although the CSR literature comprises a broad spectrum of approaches, an underrepresentation of perspectives from non-business stakeholders has been suggested. The paper seeks to redress this gap.

The data are obtained through 34 in-depth, semi-structured interviews conducted and qualitatively analysed to extrapolate perceptions, views and expectations of petroleum-related CSR in NAO. By exploring needs, wants and expectations, differences are identified between short-term expectations and long-term perspectives.

A central feature of the authors’ findings is the wide variation in the responses not only between community groups and sectors but also within them. The complexity identified is an argument in favour of local involvement to understand local contexts and suggests avoiding “one-size fits all” CSR approaches. Challenges and opportunities are identified for the petroleum companies in dealing with different stakeholders and diverging interests.

The importance of local context means that caution is advised when considering the transferability or generalisability of lessons, within NAO and elsewhere in and outside the Russian Arctic. Furthermore, fundamental motivations are not always transparent from interviews.

Although a rich literature exists on CSR, this is perhaps the first study providing a cross-sectoral analysis of people’s perceptions, including those of non-business stakeholders, in this region.

This short paper compiles some potential disasters that might not have happened in 2021 even though a major hazard occurred. No definitive statements are made of what did or did not transpire in each instance. Instead, the material offers a pedagogical and communications approach, especially to encourage deeper investigation and critique into what are and are not labelled as disasters and non-disasters—and the consequences of this labelling.

This short paper adopts a subjective approach to describing situations in 2021 in which a hazard was evident, but a disaster might not have resulted. Brief explanations are provided with some evidence and reasoning, to be used in teaching and science communication for deeper examination, verification and critique.

Examples exist in which hazards could have become disasters, but disasters might not have manifested, ostensibly due to disaster risk reduction. Reaching firm conclusions about so-called “non-disasters” is less straightforward.

Many reports rank the seemingly worst disasters while research often compares a disaster investigated with the apparently worst disasters previously experienced. This short paper instead provides possible ways of teaching and communicating potential non-disasters. It offers an approach for applying lessons to encourage action on disaster risk reduction, while recognising challenges with the labels “non-disaster”, “success” and “positive news”.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an introduction to and overview of this special issue titled “Municipalities addressing climate change: a case study of Norway”. It provides the rationale for the project leading to the special issue while summarizing the issue's contents and outcomes.

Seven research institutes in Norway were brought together for a five‐year project examining adaptation to extreme weather in Norway at the municipal level.

The project led to individual and collaborative research linked to policy advice for Norwegian municipalities. Barriers and opportunities to act locally regarding extreme weather were identified, giving ways forward through more science along with policy and action possibilities.

Only three main sectors were covered: drinking water supply, cultural heritage, and flood risk reduction. Extreme weather affects other sectors too, but no advice is given regarding those areas.

The project led to fact sheets, a web site, and engagement with practitioners at the municipal level in two ways. First, providing science‐based advice that can be used by those working for municipalities. Second, providing practical advice to scientists regarding what practitioners seek from research.

The work will contribute to improving how Norwegian municipalities consider and address extreme weather, in the context of climate change amongst other hazards, along with further social and environmental changes affecting municipalities.

This special issue represents an interdisciplinary, cross‐sectoral approach towards useable science. It is also relatively original in providing an interdisciplinary approach for the case study of Norway.