Search results

This paper explores ontological assumptions of disasters and introduces some concepts from Chinese disaster scholarship. The authors suggest an approach to explore and engage with different ontologies of disaster without direct comparison, that can further interdisciplinary and cross-cultural collaboration.

By reviewing the academic literature and focussing on two recent key translational texts by Chinese scholars, the authors show what can be revealed about ontology and the potential influence on thinking about human-environment interactions and disaster risk reduction (DRR) policy.

In Chinese disaster studies, the goal of a “harmonious human-environment relationship” is a foundational concept. There is a clear hierarchical and ontological distinction between humans and the natural ecological system viewed as an integrated whole, with underlying rules that can be discovered by scientific research to enable management of a harmonious relationship.

The authors suggest a practical way to begin with the following questions: What is the societal goal/aim? What is nature? What is society? How do these interact to create disasters? And what are the implications for DRR research and practice? The authors also demonstrate the importance of probing and understanding the underlying ontologies that are the foundation for theory, which in turn is the foundation for policy and action.

Identification of ontological differences in interdisciplinary and cross-cultural research collaborations and working across these boundaries is challenging and rarely questioned. Yet, as demonstrated here, considering ontological assumptions of the causes of disaster, within and across cultures and disciplines, is essential for collaboration and further research.

This paper aims to demonstrate the importance of conversation among disaster studies researchers who may be positioned at times and to varying degrees as both insiders and outsiders in relation to the contexts in which they work. Three key questions are explored: how we identify with and relate to people in our study areas, who we do research for and what this means for knowledge creation and research practice.

Prompted by the Power Prestige and Forgotten Values manifesto (2019), the authors conversed with one another by email and video call, asking questions that triggered reflection. The emerging themes informed the key questions and the structure of the paper. The authors write with three individual voices to highlight the element of dialogue and our different experiences.

Sharing in depth with other researchers from different cultural and disciplinary backgrounds created space to both listen and find a voice. Emerging themes were positionality, how knowledge is used and implications for research practice. Researchers are part of a living system with the potential to serve, exploit or damage. Knowledge is generated at multiple scales, and we can act as a bridge between people and policymakers, using networks.

The authors remain open and unbiased to “new” local/contextual knowledge, adopting the attitude of a learner. Knowledge creation should focus on pragmatic outcomes such as informing emergency planning.

A novel dialogical approach is used to demonstrate the value of conversation among researchers from different backgrounds that enables them to question and challenge each other in a supportive environment. This leads to deeper understanding of our role as cross-cultural researchers and reveals unifying questions and implications for research practice.