my thesis is a disaster

Disaster Relief Architecture - Thesis

Hi everyone,

I am a third year architecture student at the Politecnico di Milano. I have to start my thesis soon and would like to do it on disaster relief architecture. I was wondering if anyone had any advice regarding books, websites, magazines or articles which could be useful for me. I would greatly appreciate any help! I am interested in Architecture for Humanity's work as well as that of Shigeru Ban's - so the idea of working with local or readily available resources to quickly respond to natural or anthropological disasters. This doesn't necessarily mean construction in terms of design but can also look at preventative measures, engineering techniques etc.

Any and all help is really appreciated - thank you! Jasmine

key search terms: resilience, resilient

Also, keep in mind disasters don't just happen in tropic climates design for cold weather as well as hot weather.

Hi Peter thanks for your reply. Yes of course, I don't intend on limiting my research to only tropical climates, I didn't think that I had implied that...!

Good to hear that you are looking for a more universal solution all too often we get ideas for temporary disaster shelters that are mostly tent structures not something that could work in winter or over a long period of time.

also remember that the materials need to be recyclable or reusable in permanent buildings as it is a poor practice to take back emergency shelters like we in the US did for Sandy or have to dump tons of materials into landfills like we did for Katrina

Over and OUT

I definitely agree. I'd like to look at disaster relief architecture from two points of view: one would be designing for the prevention of potential disasters in terms of buildings actually collapsing during a disaster and the other side would look at how architecture responds - so using available materials, limited timing, working with the community.

I actually wanted to use Katrina as an example of the wrong type of management seeing as it wasn't handled very well. Thank you again for your help! It is very appreciated :) Jasmine

What about looking at places that set up field hospitals and the like? An example is Blu-Med . Maybe reach out and see what you can learn from them, or take a look at their blog?

There's a company up here called Weatherhaven that does portable buildings, mostly for the military, but also for disasters I believe.

One big obstacle is bureaucracy, not necessarily design.

Also there's the temporary housing and social issues related to Japanese Tsunami and Fukushima. I think I heard the suicide rate spiked dramatically among families displaced.

We do a lot of disaster recovery projects at my university.

shigeru Ban is a prof here currently and built his disaster response efforts as part of our regular curriculum (which is project based - ie, we build stuff).

Some recent plywood housing projects are here if interested. The way we do it is to involve locals in the process. When we dont the outcome is not good. That is the long and short of it.

As for the comments above, Peter makes a bit of an incorrect conclusion, at least based on our experience in the last 5 years or so of working on the ground. Universal solutions are exactly what you cannot have. It is the local solution that is most important. Building a system that is robust enough to work with local desires, and an attitude that starts from the local needs and wishes is essential. It is important to be willing to drop all of your ideas and start from scratch at times. MASS design group has defined this need very well in their work, and with exceptional results, and gave it a cool moniker in Lo-fab. The truth is that when you go to a disaster site the things you learn will inevitably blow away everything you think you know. It is almost a given.

If this is really a topic that interests you, do be aware that there are several phases in recovery from disaster. At first there is very little role for architects to play. It is possible to make temporary shelters of course, and many example exist, including the paper-tube partitions that ban used to create some privacy in the gymnasiums and other spaces in Tohoku. Temporary housing comes much later. Months if not years. This sound absurd, but its true. Even Japan, which stockpiled emergency shelters across the country in preparation for a disaster, took 6 months or more to set out enough spaces for the people who lost their homes. By that time, many moved away never to return.

The more permanent shelters and infrastructure, also a bit temporary to be honest, came some time later. The Home For All projects of Toyo Ito for example. These are important, but its not a simple thing, especially if you want the community to be involved. If you are looking for something to consider, the gap between the imminent needs of disaster, the mid-term needs after recovery starts, and the long-term needs of the displaced (many people stay in the temporary houses for 10 to 15 years), this is still a topic without a good answer. We need more good ideas.

What is not included in the list above is how to prepare for disaster before it happens. How do we build-in solutions to destruction? Is it physical or community/social? Daniel Aldrich is a very excellent resource for this topic and I definitely recommend reading anything by him. My opinion is its mostly social, and the physical design can be used to support society if its working well. When society is dysfunctional it is much much harder.

For other resources, check out MASS design group. They are not doing disaster but building community and many of the issues are similar. Also check out Architecture in Development and the newly minted Open Architecture Collaborative (OAC), and the publications of AFH, Design Like You give A Damn. Cameron Sinclair's own follow up work is also pretty interesting, the department of small works

I would also suggest that you look into the work of places like Communitere , which does not build but DOES help people to act on the ground, in Haiti, the Philippines, and now in Nepal. Building in a disaster zone is not easy and a partner is essential. People like this are a great help and they know how to deal with the shit that is common every day in a recovering area that make regular architecture a living hell to undertake.

there is a lot out there because it is a hot topic. In my own mind it is the framework that matters more than the design itself. Good examples of how to build are a dime a dozen, but ones that actually include community and understand the challenges on the ground, from rape at public toilets, to lack of clean water, to mental trauma, those ones are really hard to do without being there and being specific. It would be nice if you are able to include some of the issues in your own work as you dig into the subject.

Hi Will Galloway, Chris-chitect and Polebuilder! Thank you for your replies.

I decided to write my thesis on the primary stages of disaster relief architecture - so mainly looking at the immediate response (bodies involved, how processes varied depending on the gravity of the situation) and the first type of shelter set up. From there, I looked into temporary shelters, the later transitional shelters and finally the semi-permanent shelters. The whole disaster relief architectural process is so complex and detailed, as mentioned by Will Galloway, that I focused my research on the above-mentioned initial phases. I picked 6 key disasters that happened in the past 20 years and looked solutions applied in each one, setting them up against a set of criteria (time constraints, financial constraints, number of people killed, number of people affected, amongst others). From there , I was able to evaluate which disaster relief architectural process had more success and why - but this has only given me a slight insight into the whole entire process! I also looked at the preparation capacities in each case study, seeing how much they helped when responding to the consequences of the disasters and what could have been changed/improved. Then of course came the issue of evaluating more developed countries against third world countries (the Haiti earthquake vs the Japan tsunami, for example).

Thank you again for all of your suggestions and insight. Hopefully my future research and academic studies help in providing a more complete view and understanding of the disaster relief architectural process!

Hi there Jasmine,

This discussion was very interesting and eye opening. I am also about to start writing a dissertation and Iam very intrigued with the idea of destruction and architectures response to it. I would really appreciate if you could share some sources with me regarding the topic and some tips.

Thanks A lot.

Why go through all that trouble and just ask for her thesis so you can focus on your extracurricular activities.

Hello Jasmine.

I am currently working a similar idea for my thesis. That is, developing a universal solution for disaster rehabilitation and temporary shelters.

Could you please share you please share your thesis, it would be really helpful for me to gauge the entire concept.

[email protected]

my name is Beneetta. I am doing Architecture in India and will soon start my thesis on disaster management institute and climate monitoring center with emergency relief structures.Can anyone guide me how to approach this topic and suggest good books and websites to refer for the same.

Hi Benedetta,

Hi Benetta , I am Jahanvi also doing my thesis on disaster management institute. Can you please suggest me some case studies related to that. @ [email protected]

hi Jahanvi,

good to know that your topic is also same however i am searching for good case studies...will let you know if i get any.Also please reply to me if u get any at [email protected]

Two lazy students helping each other. What could go wrong.

There isn't such a thing as a lazy architecture student.

Hi Jasmine,

I am currently a architecture student in Nepal. I am currently working on a similar topic for post disaster rehabilitation for the earthquake victims in Nepal.

It will be a great help if you could please share your thesis or some case studies and some tips regarding this topic.

hello akiras,

it would be great if you share some information and thoughts on post disaster rehabilation.

Hi rishabhkshah, mananchopra, beneettamaryjose and akiras422,

Thank you all for reaching out. I had to do a lottt and I mean a lot of research, both online and offline, in order to compile the relevant information for my work. There is a lot of information now, especially compared to 5 years ago, when I prepared my undergraduate thesis.

As mentioned before, disaster relief architecture works in many complex phases - I chose to explore the early stages. I also did not have any other theses to refer to at the time.. There are many studies available online now given the quantity of natural disasters that have occured in recent years, as well as a surge in issues such as over population, the refugee crisis, and communities having to shift to low income housing.

The United Nations (UNHCR more specifically) recently revamped their emergency shelter handbook. To give you an idea, I had to work with UN related information from the 1980's to complete my work. A big part of writing your thesis has to do with researching, filtering through the quantity of information collected, and developing a topic you are personally interested in. That isn't really something for me, or anyone else, to decide

If it is of any help, I set up a small NGO in Indonesia about a year ago. We provide housing for communities affected by natural disasters or displaced individuals in low income housing. It's called The Shelter Project www.theshelterproject.net All the information is open source and therefore available online, so you are more than welcome to reference it in your research. Our non-profit is 100% community based and relies on the efforts of those affected to make it work.

Good luck to you all!

Hello ... My Daughter Has An Architecture Assignment That She Needs Help With Regarding Writing A No Less Than 300 Word Proposal Explaining How Her Disaster Relief Housing Design Will Meet The 7 Requirements List On Her Assignment Sheet ... And I've Been Of Absolutely No Use ... Is There Anyone Here Who Is Available And Willing To Help Us Out? ... Thanks!

This is not the place for highschool homework assignments & tips. The assignment as you describe it appears short and very simple. I can't imagine that it's impossible to find quality resources for a tiny 300 word abstract.

SEPUEDESIQUIERE

Well That Was Quite The Welcome Wagon ... Sorry To Have Disturbed You ... No It's Not "Impossible" ... Just Not My Forte!

Resurrecting a 6 month dormant (and 5y old) thread is not the best option either... but here's something relevant to disaster relief: http://buoyantfoundation.org/resources/papers /

The director of that organization is one of my old thesis committee advisors. Plenty of info there which should help clear the way to other sources.

Non Sequitur

Here we go with the "I can save the world with my thesis" mentality. Hilarious because its so naive.

yes yes... the ol' cure cancer with design thesis. But this was resurrected by a mother trying to do their kid's high-school homework.

If your comment is in reference to my original post, then you've misunderstood the entire premise. No, I don't think my thesis alone will save the world, but yes I do think that research of its nature will definitely help. The work I've done in the past couple of years is testament to that - I would never have been able to set up an organisation that helps identify and build emergency housing in disaster stricken or low income areas had it not been for the foundation that my thesis provided. It might be naive for someone to think they can save the world (on their own), but it's definitely a far better attitude than 'ha, what can one person do with a thesis'. Big things start with the right kind of mentality - gotta start the dream somewhere! I'd rather be part of a community that thinks they can save the world in any way possible really.

i am concerned about any information concerning this topic

i am an architecture student and my thesis is about developing a well operation center for emergency cases and crisis

is there any criteria for choosing a site for such topic

thanks in advanced

Yes, there most certainly are criteria for site selection.

Yes, the site needs to be able to fit plenty shipping containers.

Hi shireenalali, there are a lot of factors that would determine a suitable site for an operation center. I'm not exactly sure what your criteria is for the center (how big it is, what its functions are, how many people would visit in a day, accessibility, etc) so it's a little hard to answer your question with no related information.

my name is Aditi. I am in 4 year and will soon start my thesis on disaster management center. Can anyone guide me on how to approach this topic and suggest good books and websites to refer for the same.

Good resource.

Block this user

Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.

× Search in:
All of Archinect

Last Commented Threads

M.Arch I&II 2024 Application Status
Grad School Funding
Help! I’ve been accepted to Cal Poly and UCLA for undergrad and i’m stuck between the two!
M.Arch at Yale or UVa?
Thread Central

Last Created Threads

Result application KADK
M.Arch direction and help
UT Austin or Penn
What am I supposed to get out of design studio?

Discussed News

The Vessel to reopen with improved safety measures
Kanye West relists Tadao Ando-designed Malibu home for $14 million less
Frank Gehry talks to the LA Times about his ever-expanding vision for downtown Los Angeles
10 distinct examples of glass in architecture
New York releases city’s first study on environmental justice

Discussed Features

AI is Good For Architects (For Now)
A Bridge to Architectural Education: Exploring UCLA Architecture and Urban Design’s Summer Programs with Julia Koerner
Lautner's Concannon Residence, from Dust to Dust
A Conversation with Bjarke Ingels on AI, 3D Printing, and the Future of the Architectural Profession
Brillhart Architecture’s Eponymous House Pays Homage To Florida's Architectural Vernaculars with a Tropical Modern Flare

International edition
Australia edition
Europe edition

If you’re frustrated and stressed because of your dissertation, you’re not alone.

All-nighters and self-doubt: learn from our dissertation disasters

Recent graduates recall their dissertation slip-ups and share their advice on supervisors, footnotes and steering clear of the pub

I t’s likely to be the greatest academic challenge you’ll face as a student. Speak to a finalist working in the library at the moment and you’ll see from their gaunt and despairing facial expression that writing a thesis is not a fun thing to do.

These students take us through their hair-raising experiences - and share their tips for success.

I got the flu, and had to pull three all-nighters in a row

The dissertation was “a long, arduous process” for William Lloyd, a recent journalism graduate at Kingston University. “I caught the flu for the second time in my life, a week before it was due. That wasn’t ideal because I’d not really organised my time properly.

“True to form, I had left half of it to write with a few days left. I got a small extension due to the illness but had travel back to uni from home and do three all-nighters in a row at the library in order to get it done. Bloody hell, it took its toll.

“Whatever happens, my advice is not to panic. It was quite fun, in a way.”

My supervisor told me I was ‘not a scholar’

Cat Soave, a recent English literature graduate from the University of York, says: “I immediately encountered problems with my dissertation supervisor. They decided that I couldn’t write about the topic I had spent three years of education working up to. Their rationale was that I was “not a scholar” and would be unable to do adequate research for my topic.

“I was incredibly disappointed, and had to begin my research from scratch. In later meetings, I didn’t feel confident enough to be very vocal for fear of further criticism. I ended up completing my dissertation with next to no help or direction.”

What can we draw from Cat’s experience? It’s important to build a good relationship with your supervisor or try to find a different one if it clearly isn’t going to work.

Avoid unnecessary tinkering

Alys Key, a third-year English literature and language student at the University of Oxford, says: “The biggest problem I had with my dissertation was the final stages of drafting. The more I read it, the more it seemed to have problems, even if I’d been happier at an earlier stage.

“I think the key is to set yourself a cut-off point, at least a day or two before the deadline, and just limit yourself to proofreading. Everything seems bad when you’ve read it 100 times, so you have to have a bit of faith.”

I should have looked for more interesting research material

“Looking back, I should have researched more broadly,” says Emma Guest, an English literature and film studies graduate from Worcester University.

“I wrote my dissertation on two films by Guillermo del Toro. When I was looking for secondary reading to support my essay, I mainly focused on finding books on the topic. I think some people don’t realise that there are more interesting forms of secondary reading out there – such as archived papers, documentaries, and so on.”

Different tutors wanted different things - and some didn’t care

For Rupert McCallum, 21, a third-year biological sciences student at the University of Portsmouth, formatting his essay became an obstacle. “Different tutors within the department wanted different things - and some didn’t care,” he says.

“My advice would be to read up early on how to format your essay in case it becomes a pain closer to the deadline. Then double check, especially if the department is sending mixed messages. Although some of it may seem silly, sometimes it’s best just to jump through the hoops.”

I found it was easy to get sidetracked

Jessica Shales studied Anglo Saxon, Norse, and Celtic at the University of Cambridge – a specialist subject that can be difficult to research. “I found it was quite easy to become sidetracked, and to start reading lots in detail about stuff that wasn’t directly related to my question. If I were to start again, I think I would want to keep my overall aim more clearly in mind,” she says.

“I would also start writing it later than I did. I think I panicked a bit and wanted to get something down on paper, and so my argument wasn’t properly formed when I started writing. I think I was a bit scared by the fact that the dissertation was longer than anything I’d written before.

“I suppose my advice is to do whatever you’d try to do in a shorter essay, which is to pose a question, use relevant evidence to discuss it, and arrive at a conclusion accordingly.”

There’s nothing quite so soul-destroying as losing a page reference

Kate Wallis, 21, who studies arts and siences at University College London (UCL), learned the hard way to reference as she went along. “And I mean really reference, with page numbers. I cannot emphasise this enough.

“There’s nothing quite so soul-destroying as a stack of 20 books next to you that you have to go through to work out which elusive page your trifling statistic came from,” she says. “It’s advice that probably applies to all essay writing , but the dissertation is where it really comes to the fore.”

Top tip: don’t drink and dissertate

Don’t follow the example of William Buck, 21, who studied history at Cardiff University. “A desire to be in the pub let me down a bit. I was out at a night club about five times a week,” he says.

Keep up with the latest on Guardian Students: follow us on Twitter at @GdnStudents – and become a member to receive exclusive benefits and our weekly newsletter.

Guardian Students
Higher education
Advice for students

Comments (…)

Defending Your Dissertation: A Guide

A woman in front of a bookshelf speaking to a laptop

Written by Luke Wink-Moran | Photo by insta_photos

Dissertation defenses are daunting, and no wonder; it’s not a “dissertation discussion,” or a “dissertation dialogue.” The name alone implies that the dissertation you’ve spent the last x number of years working on is subject to attack. And if you don’t feel trepidation for semantic reasons, you might be nervous because you don’t know what to expect. Our imaginations are great at making The Unknown scarier than reality. The good news is that you’ll find in this newsletter article experts who can shed light on what dissertations defenses are really like, and what you can do to prepare for them.

The first thing you should know is that your defense has already begun. It started the minute you began working on your dissertation— maybe even in some of the classes you took beforehand that helped you formulate your ideas. This, according to Dr. Celeste Atkins, is why it’s so important to identify a good mentor early in graduate school.

“To me,” noted Dr. Atkins, who wrote her dissertation on how sociology faculty from traditionally marginalized backgrounds teach about privilege and inequality, “the most important part of the doctoral journey was finding an advisor who understood and supported what I wanted from my education and who was willing to challenge me and push me, while not delaying me. I would encourage future PhDs to really take the time to get to know the faculty before choosing an advisor and to make sure that the members of their committee work well together.”

Your advisor will be the one who helps you refine arguments and strengthen your work so that by the time it reaches your dissertation committee, it’s ready. Next comes the writing process, which many students have said was the hardest part of their PhD. I’ve included this section on the writing process because this is where you’ll create all the material you’ll present during your defense, so it’s important to navigate it successfully. The writing process is intellectually grueling, it eats time and energy, and it’s where many students find themselves paddling frantically to avoid languishing in the “All-But-Dissertation” doldrums. The writing process is also likely to encroach on other parts of your life. For instance, Dr. Cynthia Trejo wrote her dissertation on college preparation for Latin American students while caring for a twelve-year-old, two adult children, and her aging parents—in the middle of a pandemic. When I asked Dr. Trejo how she did this, she replied:

“I don’t take the privilege of education for granted. My son knew I got up at 4:00 a.m. every morning, even on weekends, even on holidays; and it’s a blessing that he’s seen that work ethic and that dedication and the end result.”

Importantly, Dr. Trejo also exercised regularly and joined several online writing groups at UArizona. She mobilized her support network— her partner, parents, and even friends from high school to help care for her son.

The challenges you face during the writing process can vary by discipline. Jessika Iwanski is an MD/PhD student who in 2022 defended her dissertation on genetic mutations in sarcomeric proteins that lead to severe, neonatal dilated cardiomyopathy. She described her writing experience as “an intricate process of balancing many things at once with a deadline (defense day) that seems to be creeping up faster and faster— finishing up experiments, drafting the dissertation, preparing your presentation, filling out all the necessary documents for your defense and also, for MD/PhD students, beginning to reintegrate into the clinical world (reviewing your clinical knowledge and skill sets)!”

But no matter what your unique challenges are, writing a dissertation can take a toll on your mental health. Almost every student I spoke with said they saw a therapist and found their sessions enormously helpful. They also looked to the people in their lives for support. Dr. Betsy Labiner, who wrote her dissertation on Interiority, Truth, and Violence in Early Modern Drama, recommended, “Keep your loved ones close! This is so hard – the dissertation lends itself to isolation, especially in the final stages. Plus, a huge number of your family and friends simply won’t understand what you’re going through. But they love you and want to help and are great for getting you out of your head and into a space where you can enjoy life even when you feel like your dissertation is a flaming heap of trash.”

While you might sometimes feel like your dissertation is a flaming heap of trash, remember: a) no it’s not, you brilliant scholar, and b) the best dissertations aren’t necessarily perfect dissertations. According to Dr. Trejo, “The best dissertation is a done dissertation.” So don’t get hung up on perfecting every detail of your work. Think of your dissertation as a long-form assignment that you need to finish in order to move onto the next stage of your career. Many students continue revising after graduation and submit their work for publication or other professional objectives.

When you do finish writing your dissertation, it’s time to schedule your defense and invite friends and family to the part of the exam that’s open to the public. When that moment comes, how do you prepare to present your work and field questions about it?

“I reread my dissertation in full in one sitting,” said Dr. Labiner. “During all my time writing it, I’d never read more than one complete chapter at a time! It was a huge confidence boost to read my work in full and realize that I had produced a compelling, engaging, original argument.”

There are many other ways to prepare: create presentation slides and practice presenting them to friends or alone; think of questions you might be asked and answer them; think about what you want to wear or where you might want to sit (if you’re presenting on Zoom) that might give you a confidence boost. Iwanksi practiced presenting with her mentor and reviewed current papers to anticipate what questions her committee might ask. If you want to really get in the zone, you can emulate Dr. Labiner and do a full dress rehearsal on Zoom the day before your defense.

But no matter what you do, you’ll still be nervous:

“I had a sense of the logistics, the timing, and so on, but I didn’t really have clear expectations outside of the structure. It was a sort of nebulous three hours in which I expected to be nauseatingly terrified,” recalled Dr. Labiner.

“I expected it to be terrifying, with lots of difficult questions and constructive criticism/comments given,” agreed Iwanski.

“I expected it to be very scary,” said Dr. Trejo.

“I expected it to be like I was on trial, and I’d have to defend myself and prove I deserved a PhD,” said Dr Atkins.

And, eventually, inexorably, it will be time to present.

“It was actually very enjoyable” said Iwanski. “It was more of a celebration of years of work put into this project—not only by me but by my mentor, colleagues, lab members and collaborators! I felt very supported by all my committee members and, rather than it being a rapid fire of questions, it was more of a scientific discussion amongst colleagues who are passionate about heart disease and muscle biology.”

“I was anxious right when I logged on to the Zoom call for it,” said Dr. Labiner, “but I was blown away by the number of family and friends that showed up to support me. I had invited a lot of people who I didn’t at all think would come, but every single person I invited was there! Having about 40 guests – many of them joining from different states and several from different countries! – made me feel so loved and celebrated that my nerves were steadied very quickly. It also helped me go into ‘teaching mode’ about my work, so it felt like getting to lead a seminar on my most favorite literature.”

“In reality, my dissertation defense was similar to presenting at an academic conference,” said Dr. Atkins. “I went over my research in a practiced and organized way, and I fielded questions from the audience.

“It was a celebration and an important benchmark for me,” said Dr. Trejo. “It was a pretty happy day. Like the punctuation at the end of your sentence: this sentence is done; this journey is done. You can start the next sentence.”

If you want to learn more about dissertations in your own discipline, don’t hesitate to reach out to graduates from your program and ask them about their experiences. If you’d like to avail yourself of some of the resources that helped students in this article while they wrote and defended their dissertations, check out these links:

The Graduate Writing Lab

https://thinktank.arizona.edu/writing-center/graduate-writing-lab

The Writing Skills Improvement Program

https://wsip.arizona.edu

Campus Health Counseling and Psych Services

https://caps.arizona.edu

https://www.scribbr.com/

What Is a Disaster?

Cite this chapter.

Ronald W. Perry 2

Part of the book series: Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research ((HSSR))

142k Accesses

84 Citations

2 Altmetric

Fieldwork is stimulating, challenging, and provides immediate rewards for the researcher. Although contemplating theoretical and paradigmatic issues in one’s office may be less exciting by comparison, it is important to deal with such tasks. Devising a definition of disasters or assessing consensus on a definition is not only a part of sound theory and methodology (Bunge, 1998) but also contributes to a clearer vision of the field of study, and on a very practical level, helps to sort out apparent anomalies in research findings and sets the stage for a progression from simple description toward the social scientific tasks of explanation, prediction, and control (Homans, 1967).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Dynes, R.R. (1998). Coming to terms with community disaster. In E.L. Quarantelli (Ed.), What is a disaster: Perspectives on the question (pp. 109–126). London: Routledge.

Google Scholar

Drabek, T.E. (1986). Human system responses to disaster: An inventory of sociological findings . New York: Springer-Verlag.

Killian, L.M. (1954). Some accomplishments and some needs in disaster study. Journal of Social Issues, 10 , 66–72.

Article Google Scholar

Stallings, R.A. (2005). Disaster, crisis, collective stress and mass deprivation. In R.W. Perry & E. L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster: New answers to old questions (pp. 237–274). Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Perry, R.W., & Mankin, L. (2004). Terrorism challenges for human resource management. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24 , 3–17.

Hempel, C.G. (1952). Fundamentals of concept formation in empirical science . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Martindale, D. (1979). Ideologies, paradigms and theories. In W. Snizek, E. Fuhrman, & M. Miller (Eds.), Contemporary issues in theory and research (pp. 7–24). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Kroll-Smith, S. & Gunter, V. (1998). Legislators, interpreters and disasters. In E.L. Quarantelli (Ed.), What is a disaster: Perspectives on the question (pp. 160–176). London: Routledge.

Barton, A.H. (2005). Disaster and collective stress. In R.W. Perry & E.L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster: New answers to old questions (pp. 125–152). Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Mileti, D. (1999). Disasters by design: A reassessment of natural hazards in the United States . Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.

Perry, R.W., Lindell, M., & Prater, C. (2005). Introduction to emergency management in the United States . Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Kuhn, T. (1970). Reflections on my critics. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 231–278). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Clausen, L. (1992). Das Konkrete und das abstrakte. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Kreps, G.A. (1998). Disaster as systemic event and social catalyst: A clarification of subject matter. In E.L. Quarantelli, (Ed.), What is a disaster: Perspectives on the question (pp. 31–55). New York and London: Routledge.

Horlick-Jones, T. (1995). Modern disasters as outrage and betrayal. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 13 (3), 305–316.

Warheit, G. (1972). Organizational differences and similarities in disasters and civil disturbances. In Proceedings of the Japan–United States Research Seminar: Organizational and community responses to disasters (pp. 130–141). Newark, DE: Disaster Research Center.

Dombrowsky, W.R. (1998). Again and again: Is a disaster what we call a disaster? In Quarantelli, E.L. (Ed.), What is a disaster: Perspectives on the question (pp. 19–30). London: Routledge.

Gillespie, D., & Perry, R.W. (1974). An integrated systems and emergent norm approach to mass emergencies. Mass Emergencies, 1 , 303–312.

Jigyasu, R. (2005b). Cultural heritage concerns in WCDR. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 23 (1), 141–160.

Boin, R.A., ‘t Hart, P., Stern, E., & Sundelius, B. (2005). The politics of crisis management: Public leadership under pressure . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Book Google Scholar

Bunge, M. (1998). Social science under debate . Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Ikle, F. (1951). The effects of war destruction upon the ecology of cities. Social Forces, 29 , 383–391.

Boin, R.A. (2005). From crisis to disaster: Towards an integrative perspective. In R.W. Perry & E.L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster? New answers to old questions (pp. 153–172). Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Quarantelli, E.L. (2000). Disaster research. In E. Borgatta, & R. Montgomery (Eds.), Encyclopedia of sociology . (pp 682–688). New York: Macmillan.

Burton, I., & Kates, R. (1964). The perception of natural hazards in resource management. Natural Resources Journal, 3 , 412–441.

Ritzer, G. (1979). Toward an integrated sociological paradigm. In W. Snizek, E. Fuhrman, & M. Miller (Eds.), Contemporary issues in theory and research (pp. 25–46). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Zetterberg, H. (1965). On theory and verification in sociology . Totowa, NJ: Bedminister Press.

Dombrowsky, W.R. (1981). Another step toward a social theory of disaster . Newark, DE: Disaster Research Center Preliminary Paper Number 70.

Bates, F.L., & Peacock, W.G. (1993). Living conditions, disasters and development . Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.

Gilbert, C. (1998). Studying disaster: Changes in the main conceptual tools. In E.L. Quarantelli (Ed.), What is a disaster: Perspectives on the question (pp. 11–18). London: Routledge.

Cisin, I.H., & Clark, W.B. (1962). The methodological challenge of disaster research. In G. Baker & D. Chapman (Eds.), Man and society in disaster (pp. 23–54). New York: Basic Books.

Smith, D. (2005). Through a glass darkly. In R.W. Perry & E.L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster: New answers to old questions (pp. 292–307). Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Lindell, M.K., & Perry, R.W. (2001). Community innovation in hazardous materials management: Profess in implementing SARA Title III in the United States. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 88 , 169–194.

Perry, R.W. (2005). Disasters, definitions and theory construction. In R.W. Perry & E.L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster? New answers to old questions . (pp. 311–324). Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Hewitt, K. (1998). Excluded perspectives in the social construction of disaster. In E.L. Quarantelli (Ed.), What is a disaster? (pp. 75–91). London: Routledge.

Barton, A.H. (1963). Social organization under stress . Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences.

Perry, R.W., & Quarantelli, E.L. (2005). What is a disaster? New answers to old questions . Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Quarantelli, E.L. (1966). Organization under stress. In R. Brictson (Ed.), Symposium on emergency operations (pp. 3–19). Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation.

Alexander, D.A. (1993). Natural disasters . New York: Chapman and Hall.

Buckle, P. (2005). Mandated definitions, local knowledge and complexity. In R.W. Perry & E.L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster: New answers to old questions (pp. 173–200). Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Moore, H.E. (1958). Tornadoes over texas . Austin: University of Texas Press.

Cohen, B.P. (1980). Developing sociological knowledge . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Drabek, T.E. (1989). Taxonomy and disaster: Theoretical and applied issues. In G.A. Kreps (Ed.), Social structure and disaster (pp. 317–345). Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press.

Burton, I., Kates, R., & White, G. (1978). The environment as hazard . New York: Oxford University Press.

Oliver-Smith, A. (1998). Global challenges and the definition of disaster. In E.L. Quarantelli (Ed.), What is a disaster: Perspectives on the question (pp. 177–194). London: Routledge.

Masterman, M. (1970). The nature of a paradigm. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 58–89). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Williams, H.B. (1954). Fewer disasters, better studied. Journal of Social Issues, 10 , 11.

Tierney, K.J., Lindell, M.K., & Perry, R.W. (2001). Facing the unexpected: Disaster preparedness and response in the United States . Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.

Quarantelli, E.L. (2005a). A social science research agenda for the disasters of the 21st century. In R.W. Perry & E.L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster? New answers to old questions (pp. 325–396). Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Kreps, G.A., Ed. (1989c). Social structure and disaster . Newark, London, and Toronto: University of Delaware and Associated University Presses.

Stallings, R.A. (1998). Disaster and the theory of social order. In E.L. Quarantelli (Ed.), What is a disaster: Perspectives on the question (pp. 127–145). New York: Routledge.

Britton, N.R. (2005). What’s a word—opening up the debate. In R.W. Perry & E.L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster: New answers to old questions (pp. 60–78). Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Carr, L.J. (1932). Disaster and the sequence-pattern concept of social change. American Journal of Sociology, 38 , 207–218.

Shaluf, I., Ahmadun, F., & Mustapha, S. (2003). Technological disaster’s criteria and models. Disaster Prevention and Management, 12 , 305–311.

Alexander, D.A. (2005). An interpretation of disaster in terms of changes in culture, society and international relations. In R.W. Perry, & E.L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster: New answers to old questions (pp. 25–38). Philadelphia: Xlibris.

Perry, R.W. (1989). Taxonomy, classification and theories of disaster phenomena. In G.A. Kreps (Ed.), Social structure and disaster (pp. 351–359). Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press.

Kaplan, A. (1964). The conduct of inquiry . San Francisco: Chandler Press.

Sjoberg, G. (1962). Disasters and social change. In G. Baker & D. Chapman (Eds.), Man and society in disaster (pp. 356–384). New York: Basic Books.

Homans, G.C. (1967). The nature of social science . New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.

Stallings, R.A. (1991). Disasters as social problems? A dissenting view. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 9 , 90–95.

Turner, B.A. (1978). Man-made disasters . London: Wykeham.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Arizona State University, School of Public Affairs, Tempe, Arizona, USA

Ronald W. Perry

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Perry, R.W. (2007). What Is a Disaster?. In: Handbook of Disaster Research. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-32353-4_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-32353-4_1

Publisher Name : Springer, New York, NY

Print ISBN : 978-0-387-73952-6

Online ISBN : 978-0-387-32353-4

eBook Packages : Humanities, Social Sciences and Law Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Surviving a PhD disaster

This post is written by Brian Flemming, a mathematician working as a Systems Engineer in Edinburgh. He completed an Engineering Doctorate (EngD) as a mature student at Heriot Watt University in 2014 and is now appreciating the freedom to continue studying and spend time away on the hills, without the associated “PhD-guilt” of neglecting the books. In this post Brian tells us about a situation we all dread: discovering a mistake in his thesis after it had been submitted….

It was a pure Adams-esque moment, of the “… accidently chang[ing] down from fourth to first instead of third thus making your engine leap out of your bonnet in a rather ugly mess …” variety.

I’d been preparing a short presentation of background material for the viva when I decided to check on a mathematical equation in a company report to which my thesis was partly related. I’d chosen not to use this report as a reference to avoid any awkwardness over access to material not in the public domain. The equation concerned was the realisation of a physical definition I’d quoted in my thesis. I checked a few other references for corroboration. The uncomfortable truth was there in stark black and white: I’d misinterpreted the definition.

My initial reaction was of mild panic. Not that those working around me noticed anything different, but inside I was quietly dying . After all that hard work making sure the thesis was as perfect as possible, and now this. It was if a large black hole had opened up in front of me, and there was nothing to stop me being sucked in.

My first thought was to try and recall the thesis. There was still a week to go before the deadline for submission. There was conceivably just enough time to correct the draft and resubmit. On the other hand, I was due to start a long-awaited holiday abroad in the next few days, which would effectively scupper any attempt at resubmission.

Missing the deadline would mean an extra six months delay in completing the degree, which I was unwilling to contemplate. I was already fed up with whole process of writing the thesis and wanted to get it out of the way as soon as possible.

Sheepishly I wrote an email explaining the situation to one of my academic supervisors. His reply was reassuring. “Don’t worry”, he said, “it is only a draft. Any mistakes will be dealt with at the viva, and corrections can be done afterwards .” ( Editor’s note: Australian students note: you probably don’t have this option )The pressure was off temporarily.

Even so, I didn’t fancy the idea of undergoing a viva without having an answer to a thesis I knew was flawed.

I looked at the damage again with a fresh perspective. With great relief, it transpired that I had implicitly been using the correct definition after all, so that my results were still nominally correct. My thesis was concerned with an alternative approach to the standard method. To save time, I’d simply ploughed on ahead with the analysis: the introductory description had been added in later, which is when and where the mistake had occurred. It could just be a simple matter of correcting the error and moving on; on the other hand, this would also be a good opportunity to improve the argument by making a stronger connection between the standard definition and my alternative analysis.

Time was still of the essence though, and it would mean working through the holiday I’d planned with my long-suffering better-half as a celebration for my finishing the thesis. The books would, after all, be following me to France.

We agreed a compromise whence I’d work on our rest days between sightseeing trips. The total sum of the changes were two chapters swapped round, a new introduction drafted, conclusions revised, and follow-on effects traced throughout the remaining text.

The laptop glowed red hot crunching new data. It had been hard work but I’d done it, and the end result was a much stronger and more convincing argument. The question still to be answered though was why the mistake had happened in the first place.

Because my project involved a wide-ranging mixture of techniques spanning physics and statistics, my two academic supervisors were from the separate schools of mathematics and physical sciences respectively. I had spent considerable amounts of time writing up summaries of essential theory to aid inter-disciplinary understanding, in which differences in notation had also to be overcome.

Crucially, neither supervisor was particularly expert in the field in which the mistake had occurred, so that I was effectively policing my own understanding of the subject. I could remember distinctly the occasion when I’d checked the meaning of that particular definition. I trusted I knew what it meant. Unfortunately, I’d assumed the wrong interpretation and pushed on with the mountain of other work still to be done, unaware of the inadvertent discrepancy between the introduction and the rest of the analysis.

The viva took place approximately three months after the original draft had been submitted, during which time I’d continued to refine the replacement sections. It was a full discussion of the thesis, including my proposed changes. Having worked hard to overcome the flawed earlier submission I felt far more confident in discussing the material than I might otherwise have done. I passed: convincingly as it turned out. I’d demonstrated that I knew my stuff, and that is all I needed to do.

The moral of the story is that, no matter what the pressure, it pays to check and check and check yet again. Then check some more. In my case I’d let the pressure of work get to me instead of mentally setting aside the impending submission deadline, a tactic I’d found so effective in the past in maintaining a high standard of work. On the other hand, errors in execution are not necessarily fatal: the important point is your understanding of the subject matter, which includes knowing when you’ve made a mistake and what to do about it.

I should note, Brian had a viva to correct the record, Australian students will not have this opportunity. Have you had a near miss or PhD disaster? What did you do to fix it?

Four things you should know about choosing examiners for your PhD

What to do when your thesis is rejected by the examiners

Whisper to me....

Enter your email address to get posts by email.

Email Address

Sign me up!

On the reg: a podcast with @jasondowns
Thesis Whisperer on Facebook
Thesis Whisperer on Instagram
Thesis Whisperer on Soundcloud
Thesis Whisperer on Youtube
Thesiswhisperer on Mastodon
Thesiswhisperer page on LinkedIn
Thesiswhisperer Podcast
12,076,499 hits

Discover more from The Thesis Whisperer

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

Knowledge Base
Dissertation
What Is a Thesis? | Ultimate Guide & Examples

What Is a Thesis? | Ultimate Guide & Examples

Published on September 14, 2022 by Tegan George . Revised on November 21, 2023.

A thesis is a type of research paper based on your original research. It is usually submitted as the final step of a master’s program or a capstone to a bachelor’s degree.

Writing a thesis can be a daunting experience. Other than a dissertation , it is one of the longest pieces of writing students typically complete. It relies on your ability to conduct research from start to finish: choosing a relevant topic , crafting a proposal , designing your research , collecting data , developing a robust analysis, drawing strong conclusions , and writing concisely .

Thesis template

You can also download our full thesis template in the format of your choice below. Our template includes a ready-made table of contents , as well as guidance for what each chapter should include. It’s easy to make it your own, and can help you get started.

Download Word template Download Google Docs template

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Thesis vs. thesis statement, how to structure a thesis, acknowledgements or preface, list of figures and tables, list of abbreviations, introduction, literature review, methodology, reference list, proofreading and editing, defending your thesis, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about theses.

You may have heard the word thesis as a standalone term or as a component of academic writing called a thesis statement . Keep in mind that these are two very different things.

A thesis statement is a very common component of an essay, particularly in the humanities. It usually comprises 1 or 2 sentences in the introduction of your essay , and should clearly and concisely summarize the central points of your academic essay .
A thesis is a long-form piece of academic writing, often taking more than a full semester to complete. It is generally a degree requirement for Master’s programs, and is also sometimes required to complete a bachelor’s degree in liberal arts colleges.
In the US, a dissertation is generally written as a final step toward obtaining a PhD.
In other countries (particularly the UK), a dissertation is generally written at the bachelor’s or master’s level.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

The final structure of your thesis depends on a variety of components, such as:

Your discipline
Your theoretical approach

Humanities theses are often structured more like a longer-form essay . Just like in an essay, you build an argument to support a central thesis.

In both hard and social sciences, theses typically include an introduction , literature review , methodology section , results section , discussion section , and conclusion section . These are each presented in their own dedicated section or chapter. In some cases, you might want to add an appendix .

Thesis examples

We’ve compiled a short list of thesis examples to help you get started.

Example thesis #1: “Abolition, Africans, and Abstraction: the Influence of the ‘Noble Savage’ on British and French Antislavery Thought, 1787-1807” by Suchait Kahlon.
Example thesis #2: “’A Starving Man Helping Another Starving Man’: UNRRA, India, and the Genesis of Global Relief, 1943-1947″ by Julian Saint Reiman.

The very first page of your thesis contains all necessary identifying information, including:

Your full title
Your full name
Your department
Your institution and degree program
Your submission date.

Sometimes the title page also includes your student ID, the name of your supervisor, or the university’s logo. Check out your university’s guidelines if you’re not sure.

Theoretical framework

Your literature review can often form the basis for your theoretical framework, but these are not the same thing. A theoretical framework defines and analyzes the concepts and theories that your research hinges on.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

George, T. (2023, November 21). What Is a Thesis? | Ultimate Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 15, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/thesis/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, dissertation & thesis outline | example & free templates, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, 10 research question examples to guide your research project, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Research article
Open access
Published: 21 October 2016

Research in disaster settings: a systematic qualitative review of ethical guidelines

Signe Mezinska 1 ,
Péter Kakuk 2 ,
Goran Mijaljica 3 ,
Marcin Waligóra 4 &
Dónal P. O’Mathúna 5

BMC Medical Ethics volume 17 , Article number: 62 ( 2016 ) Cite this article

13k Accesses

37 Citations

33 Altmetric

Metrics details

Conducting research during or in the aftermath of disasters poses many specific practical and ethical challenges. This is particularly the case with research involving human subjects. The extraordinary circumstances of research conducted in disaster settings require appropriate regulations to ensure the protection of human participants. The goal of this study is to systematically and qualitatively review the existing ethical guidelines for disaster research by using the constant comparative method (CCM).

We performed a systematic qualitative review of disaster research ethics guidelines to collect and compare existing regulations. Guidelines were identified by a three-tiered search strategy: 1) searching databases (PubMed and Google Scholar), 2) an Internet search (Google), and 3) a search of the references in the included documents from the first two searches. We used the constant comparative method (CCM) for analysis of included guidelines.

Fourteen full text guidelines were included for analysis. The included guidelines covered the period 2000-2014. Qualitative analysis of the included guidelines revealed two core themes: vulnerability and research ethics committee review. Within each of the two core themes, various categories and subcategories were identified.

Conclusions

Some concepts and terms identified in analyzed guidelines are used in an inconsistent manner and applied in different contexts. Conceptual clarity is needed in this area as well as empirical evidence to support the statements and requirements included in analyzed guidelines.

Peer Review reports

Disasters are defined as phenomena caused by environmental events or armed conflicts that lead to fatalities, injuries, stress, physical damage and economic breakdown of great significance [ 1 , 2 ]. They occur on a scale that overwhelms local resources, usually requiring external assistance. Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of interventions, and the fairness of their distribution, is crucial in the field of disaster response. For that reason, increasing and improving the scientific evidence for disaster relief is essential. Research is also vital to accurately describe phenomena in disasters, also called humanitarian emergencies or crises [ 3 – 5 ]. Conducting research during or in the aftermath of disasters poses many specific practical and ethical challenges. This is particularly the case with research involving human subjects where data collection must be balanced with the appropriate protection of research subjects. Researchers play a central part in this analysis, as does the system of research ethics review. Such a system, involving research ethics committees (RECs) or institutional review boards (IRBs), is crucial to ensure compliance with existing international and national standards and more general principles of research ethics. The extraordinary circumstances of research conducted in disaster settings require appropriate regulations to ensure the protection of human participants. We decided to perform a systematic qualitative review of existing disaster research ethics guidelines to collect and compare existing regulations. The goal of this study is to systematically and qualitatively review the existing ethical guidelines for disaster research using the constant comparative method (CCM).

Search strategy

We identified guidelines for research ethics in disaster situations by a three-tiered search strategy: 1) searching two databases (PubMed and Google Scholar), 2) an Internet search (Google), and 3) a search of the references in the documents included from the first two searches. We used the following search terms: (guidelines AND “research ethics” AND (disaster OR emergency OR crisis)). Assessment of eligibility was limited to the first 200 hits retrieved in Google and to the first 250 hits in Google Scholar ordered by relevance in accordance with the methods used in numerous similar systematic reviews. Limits were not placed on the PubMed search.

The screening process is summarized in Fig. 1 . At the first screening stage, one researcher reviewed the document titles. Only documents written in English or translated into English by the guideline developers were included. Titles clearly not related to the topic, as well as scientific and popular articles, books, presentations, and opinion pieces which were clearly not guidelines were excluded. This gave 110 documents which were further screened. The second eligibility screening was performed independently by two researchers. Each researcher evaluated the documents against the inclusion criteria and screened the document’s reference list for additional disaster research ethics guidelines. Independent results were compared between the two researchers. When discrepancies existed, a third researcher was involved to resolve any eligibility disagreements.

Screening process for identified articles

Inclusion/exclusion criteria

Documents were included if they fulfilled all the following criteria:

satisfied our definition of research ethics guidelines: systematically developed statements to assist with the responsible conduct of researchers and other stakeholders in the process of planning, conducting, and reporting research;

was issued by an international or national organization/institution/meeting or developed by a group of researchers or an individual researcher;

research ethics in disaster settings was addressed in the whole document or at least in its own part or section;

addressed at least one of the following types of research: clinical drug research; biomedical research involving physical interventions; public health research; research on health data or biological material; psychological or social sciences research.

Qualitative analysis

We used the constant comparative method (CCM) for analysis of included guidelines [ 6 , 7 ]. This method of qualitative analysis combines inductive category coding with a simultaneous comparison of all obtained units of meaning. A unit of meaning is defined as a part of the text (e.g., phrase, sentence, several sentences) that “must be understandable without additional information, except for knowledge of the researcher’s focus of inquiry” [ 7 ]. Open coding was applied as a first step in the coding process to identify units of meaning and to allow categories to emerge from the data. According to CCM, each new unit of meaning is “compared to all other units and subsequently grouped (categorized and coded) with similar units of meaning” [ 7 ]. In the process of open coding and comparison, initial categories were changed, merged and omitted when necessary. The second step involved axial coding to explore connections between categories and subcategories. Selective coding as a third step involved selecting the core themes. As a result of selective coding, we identified two core themes emerging from our analysis: research ethics review process and vulnerability.

The research team reached consensus on including 14 full text guidelines for analysis (see Additional file 1 : Table S1 for the complete list). The included guidelines were published during the period 2000-2014, with a peak in the number of documents being issued between 2008 and 2010 (8 out of 14 guidelines were published during this period).

Issuing organizations

The guidelines identified during the search showed a diversity in geography and types of issuing organizations. Seven out of 14 guidelines are applicable internationally, five are national level guidelines (two each from Canada and the US, and one from India), and two apply to a particular organization (Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) or Doctors Without Borders) or institution (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). However, it should be taken into account that only guidelines written in English were included, which is a limitation of this study.

International organizations issuing guidelines included the World Health Organization (WHO) [ 8 ], MSF [ 9 ] and the International NGO Training and Research Centre [ 10 ]. Several national organizations issued guidelines, including the Indian Council of Medical Research [ 11 ] and the Canadian Medical Association [ 12 ]. Three guidelines arose from particular meetings or specific working groups including: a meeting entitled “Ethical Issues Pertaining to Research in the Aftermath of Disaster,” organized by the New York Academy of Medicine and the National Institute of Mental Health [ 13 ]; the Harvard Humanitarian Action Summit [ 14 ]; and the Working Group on Disaster Research and Ethics [ 15 ].

Content of the guidelines

Qualitative analysis of the 14 included guidelines revealed two core themes: vulnerability and REC review process. Much of the material addressed in the guidelines could be grouped under one of these themes. At the same time, the themes overlap and a clear distinction between the two is not possible. Within each of the two core themes, various categories were identified, and within each of these, further subcategories were identified. These are summarized in Additional file 2 : Table S2 and Additional file 3 : Table S3, and described in detail in the sections below.

Vulnerability

We discovered four main categories applying to vulnerability of participants: vulnerability as a concept; risks and burdens; risk management; decisional capacity of research subjects. For each category, we identified a set of subcategories. The full list of categories and subcategories is presented in Additional file 2 : Table S2 and referenced to the specific guidelines.

Vulnerability as a concept

We identified three subcategories within this category: definitions of vulnerability (in four guidelines), reasons for vulnerability (in six guidelines), and gaps in the existing guidelines (in two guidelines).

Four out of 14 guidelines included a definition of vulnerability or analysed the concept of vulnerability. For example, Collogan et al. discussed different approaches to the definition of vulnerability and contrasted vulnerability as “a characteristic of the group” with “certain individual characteristics” [ 13 ]. The authors of this guideline criticized very broad definitions of vulnerability because these can be applied “to cover almost any person, group, or situation” and often serve to stereotype and disempower research participants [ 13 ].

Six guidelines mentioned and analysed the reasons for vulnerability in disaster settings. These arose from specific disaster situations and included, for example, political status and human rights abuses in refugee populations [ 16 ]; young and old age of research subjects, social vulnerability, physical injuries, and experience of violent and traumatic events leading to mental health problems in the aftermath of disaster [ 13 ]; psychological and physical consequences of a disaster, as well as poverty in pre-disaster settings and disempowerment in post-disaster settings [ 17 ], increased public risks and devastation [ 18 ] and substantial psychological stress in humanitarian settings [ 19 ].

Two guidelines issued in the early 2000s pointed to gaps in other general research ethics guidelines (such as the Declaration of Helsinki, Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) guidelines, etc.) and noted that these existing guidelines look at vulnerability very generally and do not address the special circumstances of disaster settings [ 17 ] or do not provide an applicable definition of vulnerability [ 13 , 16 ].

Risks and burdens

This category covered different types of risks and burdens that research subjects might face during disaster research. The category included six subcategories: physical harm (in seven guidelines), re-traumatization (in five guidelines), manipulation (in two guidelines), exploitation (in eight guidelines), unrealistic expectations (in eight guidelines) and stigmatization (in two guidelines).

Various guidelines mentioned different sources of possible direct physical harm to research subjects, depending of the type of research study and the authors’ experience. Goodhand mentioned a possibility that research interventions might “affect the incentives system and structures driving violent conflict or impact upon the coping strategies and safety of communities” [ 10 ]. Leaning referred to situations where “sampling techniques may confer unintended negative attention or focus on particularly vulnerable subpopulations […] and make conditions worse” [ 16 ]. Allden et al. mentioned several examples of physical risks, e.g., the fact that “the presence of western researchers in itself, could present a danger in targeting of local civilians” [ 14 ]. The authors gave an example where “researchers gave great attention to ethics and staff behaviour only to learn subsequently that the research group’s driver, who stayed with the research staff in the village where research was being conducted, engaged in transactional sex with girls <18 years of age” [ 14 ]. Tansey et al. paid attention to physical risks posed by research involving novel interventions and suggested that, “Early detection of toxicities or other harmful effects of a research intervention could help to reduce research-related harms by leading to adjustments in protocol or, if necessary, termination of the intervention” [ 12 ]. Collogan et al. and Curry et al. provided the general term “physical risks” and did not elaborate on particular types of risks or reasons for them [ 13 , 19 ].

Guidelines were more detailed in their analysis of different types of non-physical risks. The most often mentioned risks were exploitation of research subjects and unrealistic expectations, as well as manipulation. While some guidelines just mentioned exploitation in general, others gave more detailed examples, e.g., Schopper et al. mentioned the collection, export, and analysis of tissues as a potential source of “exploitation of communities from which tissues have been taken” [ 20 ]. Allden et al. paid attention to children as a vulnerable group “who could be targeted for recruitment by groups that could exploit them as a result of research and program activities” [ 14 ]. Sumathipala et al. expressed deep concerns regarding possible exploitation and referred specifically to “exploitation through undue inducement and compensation, and through an understandable confusion regarding the researchers’ objectives” [ 15 ]. This type of exploitation leads into the next subcategory: unrealistic expectations. This was analysed broadly, with the general advice that researchers should be “particularly vigilant in ensuring that prospective study participants do not confuse research procedures with clinical care and evaluation and thus fall prey to the so-called therapeutic misconception” [ 13 ] and to “take great care to inform potential research participants […] that some interventions to which they are subjected might be undertaken primarily for the benefit of the research” [ 21 ].

The risk of stigmatization was mentioned less often, being named in two guidelines. Allden et al. emphasized that vulnerable groups might be stigmatized after participation in research, but individual research participants might be stigmatized by researchers who lack cultural competencies and knowledge of specific socio-cultural contexts [ 14 ]. Sumathipala et al. paid attention to researchers’ duty to prevent stigmatization [ 15 ].

Another risk, mentioned in five guidelines, was re-traumatization of research participants. Goodhand explained that by involving subjects in a research study and by asking sensitive questions “researchers may inadvertently re-open wounds by probing into areas respondents may not wish to talk about” [ 10 ]. Therefore, RECs should assess the risk of re-traumatization [ 20 ]. Specific ways of addressing re-traumatisation were mentioned in some guidelines, such as Sumathipala et al. describing the campaign “Prevent Re-traumatisation of the Traumatised” as an example of good practice [ 15 ]. Some guidelines noted the importance of recognising that disaster settings offer “limited opportunities for therapeutic interventions to handle adverse psychological reactions” [ 17 ]. At the same time, some authors argued that “an individual noted to be upset during participation in research might not necessarily regret participation” [ 13 ].

Risk management

Taking into account the vulnerability of research participants leads to a need to manage risks. The risk management category included six subcategories: accountability and monitoring of research (in nine guidelines); avoiding over- or underestimation of risks (in three guidelines); the need for empirical evidence on risk (in three guidelines); providing psychological support to research subjects (in four guidelines); quality of informed consent (in six guidelines); and evaluation of power relationships between researchers and subjects (in two guidelines).

Accountability and monitoring of research was covered by eight guidelines. Authors of these guidelines, especially after 2008, emphasized that risks in disaster research can be diminished by monitoring and control [ 13 ] and mentioned corresponding values, e.g., accountability and transparency [ 8 ]. The most detailed description of monitoring was developed by Curry et al. [ 19 ]. However, most guidelines did not clearly describe what monitoring and control should include and what institutions should oversee the research studies. Direct oversight of the whole process of research implementation was mentioned in some guidelines, but seen as practically impossible [ 20 ]; however, close monitoring of particular parts of the process, e.g., informed consent procedures [ 12 ], was viewed as necessary. Some guidelines mentioned that new information arising during the research should be carefully monitored, e.g., protocol amendments, side effects, adverse effects and early stopping of a study. A different approach was to increase monitoring of specific types of research “where risk is high or uncertain” [ 12 ]. Various monitoring bodies were proposed, with some guidelines suggesting that monitoring could be done “by the central IRB or a separate data and safety monitoring board” [ 17 ].

Some guidelines noted that preliminary risk assessment should avoid both over- and underestimation of risks, e.g., overestimation by labelling all research participants as ‘vulnerable’ [ 21 ] or misusing the concept of ‘re-traumatization’ [ 13 ], and underestimation of risks by denying that research might add additional risks to those posed by the disaster [ 17 ]. The same guidelines dealing with estimation of risks mentioned the need for empirical evidence to evaluate risks posed by research [ 13 , 17 , 21 ].

One possible additional approach to risk management mentioned in four guidelines was ensuring psychological support to research subjects, including training of researchers and development of procedures to provide psychological support [ 21 ], as well as “explicit mechanisms available for timely referral of subjects in need of mental health consultation” [ 13 ]. These support mechanisms should be culturally and politically acceptable [ 14 ]. Other guidelines emphasized the need to identify available local services and to help research participants access these services when needed [ 17 ].

Another subcategory of risk management was the quality of informed consent, evaluated by some authors as one of the major ethical challenges in disaster research [ 20 ]. Examples of shortcomings in informed consent included “incomplete information given to the participants about objectives, risks, adverse effects, and planned house visits; information too detailed and complicated; formulation of the text biased to induce a positive answer; overestimation of the benefit for participants and community; and lack of procedures to ensure that the information provided is understood” [ 20 ]. To ensure higher quality informed consent, the guidelines included criteria usually mentioned by general research ethics guidelines, as well as criteria specific to disaster settings. These specific criteria emphasized the impact of vulnerability on research subjects and the safety of the setting where informed consent procedures take place [ 13 ]. Allden et al. suggested that researchers should “take consent at multiple times during the research process, including at the end of data collection” and “take consent from multiple agencies including community, parents, and partners as appropriate” [ 14 ].

An additional subcategory of risk management was mentioned in two guidelines: the evaluation of power relationships between researchers and subjects [ 10 , 14 ]. Allden et al. stated that in disaster settings researchers hold more power than participants and therefore researchers should “be aware of power differentials between the researcher and respondent that may increase their likelihood of participation” [ 14 ].

Decisional capacity of research subjects

We identified three subcategories for this category: factors diminishing decisional capacity (in four guidelines); underestimation of decisional capacity (in two guidelines); and the need for a specific procedure for informed consent (in five guidelines). Two guidelines mentioned the traumatic experiences of research participants [ 13 , 21 ] and one guideline referred to “inherent tensions and pressures” in situations of public emergencies [ 18 ] as a possible reason for impaired decision-making capacity. To take account of this, a specific procedure for informed consent was proposed that would address diminished decisional capacity of research participants in disaster settings. This specific procedure should involve “a time lag between an initial contact and eventual interview” [ 21 ], “language specific to the unique situation of protection of victims of disasters as well as their communities” [ 17 ], and use of oral instead of written consent in cases when participants decline to sign anything [ 20 ]. At the same time, authors of several guidelines warned about possible underestimation of decisional capacity of participants by stating that it would “be inaccurate and potentially stigmatizing to assume that all persons who have experienced terror or other disasters are decisionally impaired and unable to make choices for themselves” [ 13 ].

Research ethics committee (REC) review process

The second core theme identified by our qualitative analysis was REC review procedures and processes. Research in disaster settings raises specific ethical concerns around review, with frequent calls for a different approach to review than typically conducted with other types of research. During our qualitative analysis we identified five categories within this theme: experience and awareness of researchers; interests and rights of research subjects; social value of research; organization of review; and problems in the review process. For each category we identified a set of subcategories as summarized in Additional file 3 : Table S3 and referenced to the specific guidelines.

Experience and awareness of researchers was mentioned in many research ethics guidelines for disaster settings, and our analysis showed five subcategories for this category: cultural sensitivity of researchers (in five guidelines); awareness of impact of research (in three guidelines); conflicts of interest (in four guidelines); training in research ethics (in four guidelines); and professional competence of researchers (in three guidelines).

Cultural sensitivity of researchers includes the way authors discussed that research agendas and interventions proposed by researchers in disaster settings often are based on a Western perspective which may impact negatively on local populations [ 14 , 15 ]. Additionally, specific methods and instruments may have limited validity when used in oral cultures [ 14 ]. As a result, guidelines pointed out that research protocols should discuss how cultural factors have “informed the research design and its implementation, and how these factors will be evaluated and by whom during the project” [ 19 ]. Researchers also should be aware of implicit messages given as a result of selection of specific research areas [ 10 ]. This issue included statements about the necessity for researchers to be aware of the possible indirect and direct impact of their research [ 10 , 13 ], and the “ability to anticipate adverse reactions and facilitate appropriate interventions” [ 15 ].

Within the ethics review process, evaluation of conflicts of interest was included, but no specific aspects were linked to disaster settings. Training in research ethics was mentioned as an important aspect by many guidelines, including that RECs be required to ensure that researchers complete an ethics module on doing research in disaster situations. Some guidelines also mentioned that research support staff should be provided ethics training [ 14 , 19 ].

Interests and rights of research subjects was one of the central and most frequently addressed aspects of the guidelines included in our review. This category included seven subcategories: balancing the need for scientific evidence with possible harm from the research (in ten guidelines); minimal risk requirement (in four guidelines); justice in selection of participants (in eight guidelines); potential for overburdening research subjects (in six guidelines); provisions for confidentiality and privacy protection (in nine guidelines); regulation of transfer of biological material (in five guidelines); and application of standard of care (in three guidelines).

Almost all guidelines emphasized that research in disaster settings must carefully balance the need for scientific evidence and the need to protect research subjects from possible harm from the research itself. Some guidelines emphasized the strong ethical mandate to do research in disaster settings “to prevent further death and illness in present or future disasters” [ 21 ], with some suggesting it might be unethical not to do such research [ 11 ]. At the same time, guidelines do not provide specific methods for evaluating risks and benefits. One possible approach was applying the minimal risk requirement suggested in three guidelines: for research in refugee populations [ 16 ], with biomedical research [ 11 ], and in clinical research [ 15 ]. One guideline proposed the minimal risk requirement as a precondition for expedited review [ 20 ].

Justice in selection of participants means “making political and ethical choices about which voices are heard and whose knowledge counts” [ 10 ]. The main requirement was that research participants should be chosen based on scientific reasons and not on any other reason, like accessibility, cost, gender or malleability [ 15 ]. Allden et al. mentioned examples where local governments suggest not interviewing marginalized groups or certain religious communities [ 14 ]. Jennings and Arras pointed out two other concerns regarding justice in selection of research subjects: where the participants and their community should benefit from the results of a successfully conducted trial (a negative example would be a trial of an expensive drug conducted in a poor country where the drug would never be affordable) and where the participants are from a vulnerable population that might make them more easily abused or exploited [ 21 ].

Another subcategory within the interests and rights of research subjects was the potential for overburdening research subjects with multiple or repetitive studies or by adding research burdens to their traumatic experiences. As a possible solution for this problem, some guidelines pointed to the importance of dissemination of research results among researchers to share information and avoid duplication of effort [ 14 , 15 ].

As for REC review with other types of research, guidelines emphasized that disaster research protocols should develop and apply explicit provisions for confidentiality and privacy protection. In disaster research, this applies not only at the level of individual participants, but also at the community level. Another specific issue in disaster settings was extensive media attention that can lead to breaches of confidentiality [ 13 , 14 ].

Regulation of transfer of biological material was addressed in five guidelines. The Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) guideline included the most detailed discussion of this topic and stated that it should be based on a commitment “to serve the beneficiaries of a humanitarian medical intervention, not the interests of third parties such as the developers of commercial tests” [ 20 ]. Transfer of biological material should not only follow existing legal requirements, but also apply ethically acceptable consent procedures, clearly explaining the purposes of collecting and storing samples, ownership of data, intellectual property, and other issues [ 15 ].

Another subcategory included in the guidelines was the application of standard of care in disaster settings and the justification of possible alterations [ 8 , 9 , 21 ]. The general standard of care debate in research ethics addresses questions about the kind of medical care researchers owe to research participants for treating their condition or disease under study or other medical needs arising during participation in research. However, the guidelines found in this review mentioned this topic very generally and did not discuss it in ways specific to disaster settings.

Social value of research was another category that frequently arose and contained six subcategories to be addressed in REC review: potential application to future disaster situations (in five guidelines); research that cannot be pursued in a non-disaster context (in six guidelines); direct or indirect benefit to individuals or community (in eleven guidelines); not draining resources for relief (in two guidelines); involvement of local researchers and/or community (in nine guidelines); and post-research obligations (in four guidelines).

The first subcategory was the potential application of the research results to future disaster situations. Guidelines stated that it would be ethically questionable to perform research during disasters that target crisis events of extremely low probability [ 21 ]. To ensure that results will have future application, researchers need “to systematically map existing and relevant evidence pertaining to disasters” [ 15 ].

Six guidelines stated that ethically acceptable research in disaster settings should be research that cannot be pursued in a non-disaster context. Curry et al. mentioned as an example that “the implementation of a clinical drug or vaccine trial in a refugee camp for reasons of convenience – subjects easy to find, no loss-to-follow-up, etc. – is clearly unacceptable because the same research could be done in situations where participants have much greater agency” [ 19 ].

Direct or indirect benefit to individuals and/or communities was another criterion included in evaluating research proposals for disaster settings. Some guidelines referred to “important direct benefit” [ 16 ], while others stated that the benefit might be indirect if an agreement is reached between the community and the researcher [ 11 ]. Likewise, the MSF guidelines stated that sometimes it is acceptable to test “an intervention that is too expensive at the outset of the research to be made immediately available to everyone who needs it […] if there are good reasons to expect a considerable price drop and if MSF initiates advocacy and lobbying efforts at the same time” [ 20 ].

Two guidelines included a provision that RECs should also evaluate whether the proposed research will drain funds, resources or necessary personnel devoted to immediate disaster relief. If research risks draining resources for relief “such research should either not be conducted in the present circumstance or additional funds or personnel should be devoted to the research in a way that would not threaten or undermine the primary goals of crisis response” [ 21 ]. Sumathipala et al. added that the main reason for this problem is that research activities are often “uncoordinated and poorly integrated with humanitarian relief operations” [ 15 ].

According to many guidelines, the involvement of local researchers and/or communities was a very important criterion for ethical disaster research. Representatives of the community (ideally, representatives of research participants) should take part in the planning and implementation of research projects. Some guidelines mentioned particular forms of participation, e.g., community-based participatory research [ 14 , 21 ] or involving representatives of local unaffected communities [ 17 ]. At the same time, other guidelines indicated that involvement of the community “may seem impossible in the chaos and confusion post-disaster” [ 17 ]. Equally important is the involvement of local researchers as equal research partners, as well as involvement of local experts and lay persons as members of RECs and advisory boards.

Post-research obligations included feedback of research results to research participants [ 10 , 13 ] and the general public [ 19 ], as well as “sharing downstream benefits from the research”, e.g., “invention of new medical procedures or intervention strategies” or “intellectual property (IP), to new or improved commercial products or processes” [ 19 ].

Organization of ethics review in disaster settings is challenging and complicated. The included guidelines offered several possible ways to address this problem that have been organized into the following subcategories: centralization of review (in seven guidelines); conditions for full and expedited review (in seven guidelines); alternative review mechanisms (in four guidelines); “just-in-case protocols” (in four guidelines); and proportionality of review (in one guideline).

Centralization of ethics review by establishing a new disaster-focused REC (national, regional, etc.) or by delegating reviews of disaster research to an existing REC was suggested as having certain advantages, e.g., “maximize the knowledge obtained from the research, coordinate the numerous studies, minimize the burden on research subjects, and attend to simultaneous needs for acquiring new knowledge and clinical treatment” [ 13 ]. Another form of centralized review was MSF’s ethics review board set up in 1999 specifically for MSF research [ 9 ]. However, empirical analysis of the effects of centralization of review has not been conducted.

Clear rules for full and expedited review might be helpful for the organization of such reviews. In most guidelines, expedited review was deemed sufficient if the research study carried minimal risks to participants and did not include any worrisome or novel ethical issues. Guidelines also mentioned alternative review mechanisms not limited to traditional standard review procedures, e.g., development of preparedness plans for researchers, institutions and RECs to “proactively address basic operational questions” [ 18 ], “rolling” or contemporaneous review for protocols or parts of protocols [ 8 ], individual review by the chair of the board or the chair’s delegate, and prioritization of protocols by a specific triage committee [ 12 ]. At the same time, guidelines included a warning that “any exemptions to normal practices in research ethics review should be rare and should require a high level of justification” [ 12 ]. Another form of alternative review suggested in guidelines was “just-in-case protocols” which includes planning and reviewing at least a general outline of a research study or a “generic” protocol in advance of a disaster. This proposal also included creating a pre-disaster repository of these protocols or protocol parts. One guideline also mentioned proportionate review, defined as a form of review “intended to reserve the most intense scrutiny, and correspondingly more protection, for the most ethically challenging research” [ 12 ].

Problems in the review process included three subcategories: risk of bureaucracy in the review process (in three guidelines); lack of guidelines for research in disaster settings (in two guidelines); and distinction between research and non-research (in one guideline). Overly burdensome bureaucracy and undue delays in the review process were mentioned in three guidelines and appeared as a problem often faced by researchers. Another problem was a lack of specific guidelines for research in disaster settings in existing general research ethics guidelines like the Helsinki Declaration and CIOMS guidelines. Footnote 1 The third problem raised was the lack of a clear distinction between research and non-research, particularly as it relates to the boundary between public health-oriented research and practice [ 8 ].

To increase the quality of disaster response activities and interventions, additional research in disaster settings is needed. Many research papers and other documents note that such research often raises specific ethical challenges that should be addressed and adequate guidance should be developed. Our paper is a descriptive study that reviews the existing ethical guidelines on the ethics of research in disasters. Our aim was to identify, describe and compare disaster research ethics guidelines. A thorough critical analysis of these guidelines is warranted, but would require its own article. However, a limited critical analysis will be presented here, along with some proposals for the development of further ethical guidance for disaster research. Our systematic search identified 14 guidelines (in English) that met our inclusion criteria and are applicable to diverse research activities in different settings. Disaster research covers a wide variety of research types and has several ethically relevant characteristics in common with research in public health emergencies, research in conflict zones, clinical research in emergency settings, research in low- and middle-income countries, or research conducted in resource poor settings.

The scope of the guidelines we found was rather narrow. Most of the analyzed documents did not attempt to give researchers and other stakeholders a comprehensive overview of how to proceed ethically in all types of research and in all types of disasters, but rather focused on particular research activities in specific settings and with distinct populations, such as conflict zones, refugee populations, and humanitarian settings. A tension exists here because disaster research is unavoidably context and time sensitive, making generalized guidance less applicable. While taking this into account, a need remains to develop a more comprehensive set of guidelines based on the ethical issues identified here as commonly relevant to many forms of disaster research. Other issues may need to be included also.

One of the two core themes that emerged was vulnerability of research subjects. CIOMS guidelines refer to vulnerability as “a substantial incapacity to protect one’s own interests”, and accordingly state that “special provision must be made for the protection of the rights and welfare of vulnerable persons” [ 22 ]. In a paper by O’Mathúna, it is noted that vulnerability in a disaster research setting presents additional duties for researchers [ 5 ]. Chung et al. proposed that “the individuals and communities affected by declarations of a state of emergency or disaster should be considered ‘vulnerable subjects’ for the purposes of human subjects research”, which would enable the use of current research guidelines in disaster settings [ 17 ]. This approach to vulnerability is not based on a lack of decision making capacity, but rather on the effects of the disaster situation on an individual (participant) or a group (of participants).

One of the guidelines included in this review questioned the applicability of the broad approach to vulnerability to disaster settings because it might stereotype and disempower research subjects due to the specificity and complexity of a disaster situation [ 13 ]. Although the concept of vulnerability is raised in research to ensure special protection for vulnerable participants, further clarification of the concept would help to guide RECs and ensure appropriate protections are put in place [ 23 , 24 ]. Empirical assessment is needed to determine if this approach is sufficient to ensure such protection in a disaster setting.

Beyond vulnerability as a core theme in disaster settings, the analyzed guidelines discussed and attempted to raise awareness about specific risks that disaster research might pose for participants. According to the guidelines, issues that require careful consideration in the design of research protocols and during REC review are the higher risk of therapeutic misconception, the potential for exploitation, manipulation, or re-traumatization of research participants, and also the issue of compromising care or relief for research. In some specific disaster situations, for example in armed conflict zones, even the simple presence of foreign researchers could pose an additional risk to the local community. The need to take such risks into account, especially unintended ones, was one of the most frequently raised ethical issues. The actual risks will vary by research study, but further guidance is need on how to identify disaster-specific risks, especially unintended ones. This highlights the importance of involving experienced researchers and local representatives (of participants and their communities, as well as local researchers) in the design, review and implementation of disaster research. Applying specific study designs that ensure community participation in disaster research (e.g., community based participatory research) should be considered, where appropriate, to ensure effective collaboration.

Most guidelines discussed the need for specific procedures for adequate informed consent. Generally, informed consent was seen as a necessary but also challenging requirement in situations where language and cultural barriers could be determining factors, as well as where the decision-making capacities of participants could have been impacted by disasters. A repository of innovative and evidence-based approaches to informed consent would be very valuable.

Nearly all guidelines described the independent and prior assessment of disaster research by an ethics committee as an important ethical requirement. However, we found great heterogeneity in the specific recommendations for organization of the review, for the assessment process, and also for the specificities of the risk/benefit assessments. Some guidelines viewed protocols as ethically acceptable only if they had a direct benefit for participants, and if the research could not be performed in non-disaster settings. In contrast, other guidelines would not prohibit such research if it posed minimal harm and had a considerable benefit to society. Most guidelines considered the usual REC review procedures as unsuitable in disaster settings. Thus, various innovations were suggested regarding the organization of independent ethics review for disaster research. Empirical research is needed to determine the effectiveness of these approaches in improving the ethical dimensions of disaster research so that its ethical review can become more evidence-based. International and national stakeholders responsible for research ethics approval and review should evaluate the appropriateness of their current ethics approval procedures and their suitability for disaster research.

Although mentioned by only one guideline, the proper coordination of research activities with humanitarian relief operations is another important point to consider. In a disaster setting, a proper coordination center might provide a way to involve local researchers and the local community. Such a center could reduce significantly the duplication of research activities, and adequately assess the potential conflict between research and treatment or aid. It could also give proper consideration to ethical perspectives on benefit sharing with the local community and research participants. Many guidelines focus on the ethical issues commonly addressed in research ethics, but the ethical issues distinct to research in resource poor countries or public health practice need to be incorporated more fully.

Some of the guidelines, like those developed by the Working Group on Disaster Research and Ethics, were explicitly based on a retrospective assessment of a concrete disaster research experience [ 15 ], while others remained obscure regarding the evidence base and motivations for their development. This highlights the need for more empirical research and evidence regarding the ethics of research in disaster settings. Such an example is the Post-Research Ethics Analysis [ 25 ] project that attempts to collect and assess concrete, real world research experiences and ethical challenges faced by researchers and other stakeholders that could further support the development and evaluation of such guidance documents.

Our study found 14 guidelines that might be applied in disaster research settings. Most guidelines referred to vulnerability of research subjects as a central issue, but defined the concept in different ways. The role of RECs was widely acknowledged as challenging in such circumstances. It seems especially important for RECs to consider the potential need for non-standard ethics review procedures for disaster research settings. It is also essential to ensure appropriate dissemination of disaster research results among researchers to share information, and avoid duplication of effort and overburdening of research subjects.

We also found some gaps in the studied guidelines, where further work is certainly needed. Emerging guidelines should include practical suggestions regarding how to weigh conflicting principles, or references to such sources, which could support researchers in their work. Given the tension noted above between generalized and specific approaches to guidance, such practical decision-making tools will be essential. The evidence base of the studied guidelines is rather weak and diverse. Most guidelines were based on some personal experiences, unique situations, or NGO practices. Empirical evidence is urgently needed to support the statements and requirements included in research ethics guidelines. These include the prevalence of ethically significant scenarios, and a typology of ethical issues, including, for example, vulnerability, re-traumatization, or lack of local REC approval. Disaster researchers and the RECs who review their protocols should include projects to evaluate how well the ethical issues are addressed in the research and by following REC recommendations. Particular attention should be given to assessing participants’ perceptions of how ethics is addressed in specific projects.

National RECs and international networks of RECs, or their professional associations, should reconsider their standard recommendations and procedures in light of the challenges posed by disaster situations. A comprehensive guideline for disaster research ethics that takes account of the different types of research methods, contexts and populations would be very helpful. Models for proper coordination centres in disaster settings that could be responsive to the identified research ethics challenges could be advantageous. Beyond the clear need for further work on disaster research ethics guidelines, we also see that it is important that specific educational resources for disaster research ethics training be developed and disseminated.

This will be corrected in the forth-coming revision of the CIOMS guidelines where Guideline 20 specifically addresses disaster research ( http://www.cioms.ch/ ).

Abbreviations

Constant comparative method

Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences

Institutional review board

Médecins sans frontières

Research ethics committee

World Health Organization

Cuny FC. Introduction to disaster management lesson 1: the scope of disaster management. Prehospital Disaster Med. 1992;7(4):400–9.

Article Google Scholar

Sundnes KO, Birnbaum ML. Health disaster management: guidelines for evaluation and research in the Utstein style. Prehospital Disaster Med. 2003;17 Suppl 3:1–177.

Google Scholar

Hunt MR, Anderson JA, Boulanger RF. Ethical implications of diversity in disaster research. Am J Disaster Med. 2012;7(3):211–21.

Mfutso-Bengo J, Masiye F, Muula A. Ethical challenges in conducting research in humanitarian crisis situations. Malawi Med J. 2008;20(2):46–9.

O’Mathúna DP. Conducting research in the aftermath of disasters: Ethical considerations. J Evid-Based Med. 2010;3(2):65–75.

Fram SM. The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory. Qual Rep. 2013;18:1–25.

Maykut P, Morehouse RE. Beginning qualitative research: a philosophic and practical guide. Hove: Psychology Press; 1994.

World Health Organization. Research ethics in international epidemic response: WHO technical consultation, Geneva, Switzerland, 10-11 June 2009: meeting report. 2010. http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/70739 . Accessed 20 June 2016.

Médecins Sans Frontières. MSF Ethics Review Board standard operating procedures. 2013. http://fieldresearch.msf.org/msf/handle/10144/294968?mode=full . Accessed 20 June 2016.

Goodhand J. Research in conflict zones: ethics and accountability. Forced Migr Rev. 2000;8:12–5.

Indian Council of Medical Research. ICMR’s ethical guidelines for biomedical research on human participants. 2006. http://icmr.nic.in/ethical_guidelines.pdf . Accessed 20 June 2016.

Tansey CM, Herridge MS, Heslegrave RJ, Lavery JV. A framework for research ethics review during public emergencies. Can Med Assoc J. 2010;182(14):1533–7.

Collogan LK, Tuma F, Dolan-Sewell R, Borja S, Fleischman AR. Ethical issues pertaining to research in the aftermath of disaster. J Trauma Stress. 2004;17(5):363–72.

Allden K, Jones L, Weissbecker I, Wessells M, Bolton P, Betancourt T, Hijazi Z, Galappatti A, Yamout R, Patel P, Sumathipala A. Mental health and psychosocial support in crisis and conflict: report of the Mental Health Working Group. Prehospital Disaster Med. 2009;24 Suppl 2:s217–27.

Sumathipala A, Jafarey A, De Castro L, Ahmad A, Marcer D. Ethical issues in post-disaster clinical interventions and research: a developing world perspective. Key findings from a drafting and consensus generation meeting of the Working Group on Disaster Research and Ethics (WGDRE) 2007. Asian Bioeth Rev. 2010;2:124–42.

Leaning J. Ethics of research in refugee populations. Lancet. 2001;357(9266):1432–3.

Chung B, Jones L, Campbell LX, Glover H, Gelberg L, Chen DT. National recommendations for enhancing the conduct of ethical health research with human participants in post-disaster situations. Ethn Dis. 2008;18(3):378–83.

Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. The Tri-Council policy statement: ethical conduct for research involving humans, 2nd edition. 2014. http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf/eng/tcps2-2014/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf . Accessed 20 June 2016.

Curry DR, Waldman RJ, Caplan AL. An Ethical Framework for the development and review of health research proposals involving humanitarian contexts. Enhancing Learning and Research for Humanitarian Assistance (ELRHA). 2014. http://www.alnap.org/resource/10687 . Accessed 20 June 2016

Schopper D, Upshur R, Matthys F, Singh JA, Bandewar SS, Aasim A, van Dongen E. Research ethics review in humanitarian contexts: the experience of the independent ethics review board of Médecins Sans Frontières. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000115.

Jennings B, Arras J. Ethical guidance for public health emergency preparedness and response: highlighting ethics and values in a vital public health service. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2008. https://www.cdc.gov/od/science/integrity/phethics/docs/white_paper_final_for_website_2012_4_6_12_final_for_web_508_compliant.pdf . Accessed 20 June 2016

Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) with the World Health Organization (WHO). International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Geneva: CIOMS; 2002. http://www.cioms.ch/publications/guidelines/guidelines_nov_2002_blurb.htm . Accessed 20 June 2016.

Hurst SA. Vulnerability in research and health care. Describing the elephant in the room? Bioethics. 2008;22(4):191–202.

Ten Have H. Vulnerability: challenging bioethics. New York: Routledge; 2016.

Global Public Health, Migration & Ethics Research Group. Post-research ethics analysis (PREA). http://globalhme.org/projects/ethics/prea/ . Accessed 20 June 2016.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for feedback on an early version of this paper from participants at the COST Action IS1201 conference at the University of Split, Croatia (27-28 April 2015) and at a workshop on the ethical challenges for research conducted in disaster settings at the Jagiellonian University, Poland (8-9 February 2016). We thank the two reviewers for their insightful and constructive feedback on the manuscript. We also would like to thank Phyllis Zych Budka for linguistic edits.

Funding for meetings at which early drafts of this manuscript were developed (described under Acknowledgements) and for open-access publication was provided by COST Action IS1201: Disaster Bioethics ( http://DisasterBioethics.eu ). Marcin Waligóra was supported by a grant from the National Science Centre, Poland (DEC-2011/03/D/HS1/01695). The funding bodies played no role in the design of the study, the collection, analysis and interpretation of the guidelines reviewed, or the writing of the manuscript.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Authors’ contributions

MW, PK, SM and GM contributed to the study design. MW, PK, SM and GM collected the guidelines. MW, PK and SM performed the coding for analysis. All authors (MW, PK, SM, GM and DO) contributed to the analysis and interpretation of the guidelines. All authors reviewed the manuscript critically and added supplementary text to the manuscript. DO managed the submission process and responded to the peer-reviewers. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Consent for publication

Ethics approval and consent to participate, author information, authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Medicine, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia

Signe Mezinska

Department of Behavioural Sciences, Faculty of Public Health, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

Péter Kakuk

Department of Medical Humanities, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia

Goran Mijaljica

Department of Philosophy and Bioethics, REMEDY, Research Ethics in Medicine Study Group, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland

Marcin Waligóra

School of Nursing and Human Sciences, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

Dónal P. O’Mathúna

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dónal P. O’Mathúna .

Additional files

Additional file 1: table s1..

List of Disaster Research Ethics Guidelines. A list of the 14 research ethics guidelines included in this review providing their year of issue, issuing organization, reference, reach and scope. (DOCX 27 kb)

Additional file 2: Table S2.

The categories and subcategories within the core theme “Vulnerability”. The analysis identified two core themes, one being Vulnerability. This table lists the four categories identified within this theme, and the subcategories within each of these categories. (DOCX 23 kb)

Additional file 3: Table S3.

The categories and subcategories within the core theme “research ethics committee (REC) review process”. The analysis identified two core themes, one being Research Ethics Committee Review. This table lists the five categories identified within this theme, and the subcategories within each of these categories. (DOCX 24 kb)

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Mezinska, S., Kakuk, P., Mijaljica, G. et al. Research in disaster settings: a systematic qualitative review of ethical guidelines. BMC Med Ethics 17 , 62 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0148-7

Download citation

Received : 25 June 2016

Accepted : 14 October 2016

Published : 21 October 2016

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0148-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Disaster research
Ethics guidelines
Research ethics

BMC Medical Ethics

ISSN: 1472-6939

General enquiries: [email protected]

Academic ‘disaster scripts’ in a time of disasters

| April 23, 2020
By Katherine Firth

Inger just wrote a really good post over on the Thesis Whisperer blog, about how, right now, we are in the middle of a disaster. Inger and I had a chat about it, and one of the things that stood out for me was our discussion of ‘disaster scripts’. That is, we have ways we behave in a disaster:

In her amazing book The Unthinkable , Amanda Ripley talks about how humans react to disaster situations. In a series of stories about hurricanes, floods, and tsunamis, Ripley details our physiological reactions to immediate danger and the effects of extreme stress on the body, particularly how we make decisions in a crisis. ( ‘The Valley of Deep (COVID) Shit’, Inger Mewburn, Thesis Whisperer blog )

You might have had a chance to learn a lot of scripts: perhaps the one about crossing the road, or the one about safely exiting an aircraft. Every time we do a fire drill, we are practicing a disaster script. At school we learned disaster scripts about not taking sweets from strangers. My parents and peers taught me scripts about how to travel alone at night. This is how fairy stories and folk tales work, it’s embedded in our rituals and songs.

A disaster script is not a talisman — it doesn’t stop bad things happening to you, and it doesn’t stop the outcome of a disaster being disastrous. It just gives you a practiced way to react in a crisis that maybe gives you a chance to survive.

Disaster scripts are most useful where you have an early warning system, which gives you a chance to act. Because of the sorts of places I’ve lived, my parents and my communities taught me a disaster script for a typhoon, and one for a bush fire. I learned a script for when someone sights a salt water croc, and for when there are landslides cutting off the road. I learned a script for when high winds means the barge can’t make it to the island and there is no fresh food this week. All of these are disasters that I can know about in advance. If I pay attention to the warning levels or the road signs or the weather report… I can be prepared.

I’ve also lived in places with scary health disasters: places where hepatitis, Swine Flu or SARS were common, so when the current epidemic struck, my partner and I realised we swung into the checklist of actions you ‘always take’ in these situations–we had a script. (Yes, staying home when you are sick, washing your hands, coughing into your elbow, reducing shaking hands or sharing food are generally good ideas, regardless of the outbreak!)

Because that was my life growing up, I thought everyone had these super-useful disaster scripts. But as I’ve worked in student advising for over a decade now, I’ve discovered that while many people do, many other people have unhelpful disaster scripts, that put them in more danger and stress.

It’s okay if your scripts aren’t helpful yet, because recognising that you would like to change a script is the most challenging part. Once you have that ‘ahah!’ moment, teaching yourself a new script is pretty easy — it takes a bit of persistence, but it’s not like differential equation s or Linear A or writing sestinas .

I’m going to talk about three kinds of less helpful script; and then I’m going to talk about what you can do if you’d like a new script.

Unhelpful Disaster Script 1: Literally no idea, so… panic? Some people have honestly never thought about how things work, or how things might be different from how they are now. Things that work ‘just work’ and have become invisible. Perhaps you’ve never had to think about toilet paper supply chains , or communicable diseases, or whatever. So when things happen, you have to work out how to react in the moment. And humans are pretty bad at reacting in the moment. ( Inger’s post covered this pretty thoroughly ). The moment of high stress is a moment when we can react swiftly, but our creative and problem-solving skills are at their minimum. So making something up in a crisis moment is likely just to mean that we decided to do something unhelpful, very fast.

Unhelpful Disaster Script 2: The Castastrophising script Some people’s disaster scripts don’t match up with the dangers of real life. They might invent disasters that are never going to happen, like kids who spend months calculating how to deal with a velociraptor attack (normal behaviour for children, not helpful once you are an adult). Or people take things that are likely to happen, and blow them out of proportion. If you have ever decided that a friend leaving your text message unanswered means they now hate you, instead of them just being busy or distracted, then that’s the kind of script I mean. The reason these scripts aren’t helpful is because they lead you to act in ways that don’t promote efficiency or wellbeing. You are more likely to cause damage to healthy relationships and processes by inventing catastrophes. A good disaster script helps you to deal with what happens if you actually do have a problem, a bad script creates a problem.

Unhelpful Disaster Script 3: The Incompatible learned script Some scripts are excellent in their own way, but cause issues when you deploy them for the wrong kind of problem. Knowing the difference between the fire alarm and the shelter-in-place alarm is essential — one script involves calmly leaving the building, and the other script involves calmly staying inside the building. Using an incompatible script can put you in greater danger. Higher Education regularly involves individual and corporate disasters. A couple of failed grant applications and the lab has to close, putting everyone out of work. A restructure of a university, and an institution-full of jobs are on the line. Yet-more government cuts, and we trim a bit more off the budget and put in some more hours to cover the gap. So our usual script is ‘rise to the challenge and over-perform and push through’. This often works, though not always. In a situation where we are seeing the possibility of a whole global economy collapse, and deep danger to the university sector in particular… let alone the fact that many people won’t make it at all … means that ‘rise to the challenge and over-perform and push through’ is not going to help in this disaster.

At this point, you can wonder if it’s worth bothering . I personally think it’s always worth having a go at turning the dial towards the future you want to create , and it’s always worth acting according to your true values. So yes, it is worthwhile to practice or learn some helpful disaster scripts that guide your steps in this time. Even if you don’t achieve your goals, you tried to act in a way that helped rather than harmed.

So: what do you do if you realise you’ve been playing out an unhelpful script?

Well, first of all, well done for noticing! This is the biggest challenge, and you’ve already cleared it.

Secondly, you don’t need to make up a new script from scratch. Following the advice from the WHO and other reliable sources will give you some good tips. If you are already practicing social distancing, then you have already learned a new script that is saving lives every day!

Thirdly, in unprecedented situations we don’t actually know what the best scripts are, so none of our scripts are particularly practiced yet, but good enough scripts are good enough.

Finally, recognise that disaster scripts only work for individual scenes, not whole plays. In a fast-moving situation like this one, you can’t be sure that if we do X then Y will definitely happen. So don’t try to map out an entire campaign. A script is a single tool. So ‘how I keep teaching my classes even though we are now online’, and ‘how I stay safe and connected with the people I care about in isolation’ and ‘what is my exit strategy if my industry collapses’ are all going to be new scripts you’ll need–and probably many more. The bigger the disaster, the more complex it is. You’ll need a tool box. (Remember to share your tools with others!)

Finally, it doesn’t matter how you feel or how polished you are at carrying out a script in an emergency like this. It’s what you do that matters. If you restock the First Aid Kit, it doesn’t matter if you cry or your hands shake. You don’t have to feel calm, but you do have to stop yourself stampeding for the plane exits. You don’t have to be grateful or graceful, but you do have to avoid hurting other people.

I hope this is helpful. It maybe would have been more useful if I’d written it before the emergency… but here is a tool from my tool-box that might help you get through. Thank you to everyone who shares their tools and teaches me.

Out of sight: researchers and eyes

We maximise our powers of sight, by focussing—and focussing means some things are in focus and others are out of focus, out of sight; either blurry or in our peripheral vision or completely invisible.

And this makes me wonder, how can we use our sense of sight to help us by choosing NOT to look at certain things?

Pointless writing for pointless writing machines?: more thoughts on AI and human writing

The capacity of LLMs/AI has grown exponentially since I last wrote something, and is now turning up as an essential part of Google, Microsoft Office and other megalithic software programs. But I’m less interested in the how-to of this stuff, and much more interested in the why-for? And here’s another rambling on the internet (fully human generated) to help me track my thoughts as this new technology unfolds.

Writing as poaching: strange encounters with de Certeau

Many moons ago, I wrote a post about reading like a pirate (that got picked up by Times Higher Education and later became part of a chapter on reading with confidence in Writing Well and Being Well). And since then, people have suggested that I’d enjoy exploring de Certeau’s idea, from The Practice of Every Day Life, that reading is like ‘poaching’.

Get the latest blog posts

Connect with Dr Katherine Firth

Founder of Research Degree Insiders

115 reasons why Man City’s dominance is a disaster for the Premier League

A rsenal lose, Liverpool lose, Manchester City always seem to win . No team in the history of English football have won four straight league titles, although naturally Pep Guardiola has done it twice elsewhere. Win six more games and nobody can stop what tends to feel inevitable when the clocks go forward.

It is now 14 months since the Premier League charged City with 115 alleged financial breaches . They include 54 counts of failing to provide accurate and up-to-date financial information, 14 counts of failing to provide accurate reports of player and manager compensation and seven breaches of Premier League profitability and sustainability regulations.

City’s case is unprecedented in its scope, severity and complication. City deny any wrongdoing , vowing to fight them and reiterating that intent in their latest accounts last month. A week after the initial charges were made, supporters hung a banner in honour of Lord David Pannick QC, appointed as their lead representation: “Pannick on the streets of London”.

As such, we always expected the process to be lengthy (and confidential). If the case is proven, City may face heavy points deductions, suspension or even expulsion. Linking their case with Everton or Nottingham Forest, as too many are prone to do on social media, is like comparing apples with porpoises . Everton’s initial case lasted five days; City’s will take many months. Were you predicting an end date to all this (any appeal from either party notwithstanding), summer 2025 fits about right.

Football can never stop. The principle of innocent until proven guilty must pervade and, if City are cleared of their charges, a provisional suspension in the interim would have cost them hundreds of millions of pounds in revenue – it was never an option. And so we focus on the minutiae, choosing to believe the maxim that gets less relevant every year: the business of football is football .

My verdict on every Premier League team after Gameweek 32

Were this the reality of an Eastern European autocrat’s fiefdom, we would roll our eyes. This is happening on our doorstep; it is affecting every club .

The Premier League campaigns for self-regulation while its repeated champion stands accused by the league itself of breaking its rules in the most egregious manner possible.

Those of a Manchester City persuasion might insist that we live in the moment. These charges are historical, relating to a nine-year period that ended in 2018 .

But how can that work? Seasons, eras, golden dynasties do not start with the first trophy. They are birthed over years of heavy investment.

John Stones and Kevin De Bruyne were signed during those years when the Premier League alleges that City’s accountancy malpractice effectively afforded them extra wiggle room in the transfer market. If this is the house that Pep built, and nobody denies his genius, the foundations were laid long before. Director of football Txiki Begiristain , who provided such an easy welcome for Guardiola, joined in 2012.

There will be those too who say that owners should be entitled to spend what they want to erode the advantages of the previously established elite. But that is a separate issue here; everybody agrees to abide by the rules. Cheating is cheating, and we have a right to know who was and who wasn’t. In the meantime, what else can we do but wait and wonder.

None of this is good for anyone. City, who plead their innocence in the strongest terms , must surely want to decry any notion of unfairness and they must be aware of the ill-feeling amongst other supporters growing (perhaps they simply do not care).

That is exacerbated by the difficulty the Premier League has even had in bringing the case. The league went to court in 2022 and launched arbitration processes to extract the necessary documents.

Torquay United are drifting aimlessly and the fans have had enough

All the while, the noise of outrage and scorn reverberates around our national sport and makes the Premier League’s work to punish other clubs look farcical (this is not their fault, but the outcry of the masses shapes your PR reputation). They must have expected rampant cynicism because time and a lack of new information create a void into which cynicism makes its home.

It is easy to ignore all of this if we choose. Focus on the progress of Phil Foden from wunderkind to world star, of De Bruyne’s transcendental brilliance with a ball and two seconds of time, Erling Haaland changing the game so we view a 30-goal season – and counting – as tepid. See the master craftsman, an obsessive manager who nobody could ever deny dragged the game to meet his own excellence.

But as City edge closer to historic achievement, that loses all credence . A league defined by two things: competition and trust. Competition has been effectively eroded over the last 30 years so that the division remains a spectacular financial success that is compartmentalised into blurred tiers, a league of glass ceilings and trapdoors for those outside of the economic elite.

Even then, on a basic level you can at least watch the results and believe wholeheartedly in sporting integrity. Now, a cloud hangs over the title race and the performance of the club now top of the league, a foggy mess of “What if?” quandaries. And still we wait to hear whether everything we saw and savoured was sullied all along. The Premier League has become the league of unspoken asterisks.

Manchester City are facing 115 charges for financial breaches (Photo: Getty)

Contribute to the Bing forum! Click here to learn more 💡

April 9, 2024

Contribute to the Bing forum!

Click here to learn more 💡

Search the community and support articles
Search Community member

Ask a new question

This new generative erase is a total disaster. It freezes up my computer by using a ridiculous amount of memory. Why on earth did you change it to this? It's totally useless.

This new generative erase in Photo is a total disaster. It freezes up my computer by using a ridiculous amount of memory. Why on earth did you change it to this? It's totally useless.

Subscribe to RSS feed

Report abuse

Microsoft Agent |

Hello RWynne，

Welcome to the Microsoft Community！

The community forum is a technical forum for advice on development issues

I understand that you don't seem to like the new feature called "generative erase". I understand how you feel. If this feature causes your device to freeze, maybe you can try to get the old version of the photo app to avoid this feature for the time being.

Open the Photos app, click the Settings icon at the top, swipe to the bottom of the page in the Settings page, and select Get Photos (Legacy).

Since the community forum mainly helps with technical usage issues, the development team does not follow feedback from this forum in real time. You mentioned that providing users with the option to choose whether to enable this feature is a very constructive idea. I believe they deserve and need to be noticed. We encourage you to submit your ideas to the Microsoft team through the Feedback Hub , and they may take your suggestions into account.

Thank you for sharing this situation and your understanding！

Best Regards ,

Morning | Microsoft Technical Support Community

1 person found this reply helpful

Was this reply helpful? Yes No

Sorry this didn't help.

Great! Thanks for your feedback.

How satisfied are you with this reply?

Thanks for your feedback, it helps us improve the site.

Thanks for your feedback.

Replies (1) 

Question info.

Norsk Bokmål
Ελληνικά
Русский
עברית
العربية
ไทย
한국어
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
日本語

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
v.12(1); 2020

Risk of a disaster: Risk knowledge, interpretation and resilience

Osamuede odiase.

1 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Centre for Disaster Recovery, Resilience, and Reconstruction, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

Suzanne Wilkinson

2 School of Built Environment, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand

Andreas Neef

3 Department of Development Studies, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

Associated Data

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

Knowledge and interpretation of local risks are essential in disaster mitigation. Auckland’s exposure to multiple hazards is a source of national concern. Considering the multiplicity of natural hazards in Auckland, investigations on how communities can enhance their resilience to possible disasters have become imperative. Convincing individuals to embark on activities that would reduce their vulnerability to natural hazards is difficult, especially in communities that have not recently experienced the impact of natural hazards. This research investigated risk knowledge and interpretation in the South African community in Auckland. Data for this study were collected from both primary and secondary sources. A questionnaire was distributed amongst the South African population, and follow-up interviews with participants constituted the primary sources of data collection. Other sources were materials in the public domain. Regarding data analysis, an independent-sample t -test and Spearman’s correlation analysis were used to analyse the quantitative research data. A general inductive approach for qualitative data was used to analyse the research interviews. The research confirmed the subjectivity in risk perception and also revealed a high-risk perception, especially for earthquake, flood and tsunami. Whilst this study agreed that there is a relationship between risk perception and preparedness, such relationship is often contextual. The research concludes that risk perception could contribute to disaster resilience if communities appreciate the impact of a natural hazard irrespective of disaster experience or otherwise.

Introduction

Many type of literature exists on natural hazards in Auckland; the majority of literature is focused on volcanic eruptions. The Auckland volcanic projects (Paton et al. 1999 ) projecting real-time eruption (Lindsay et al. 2009 ) and the consequences of eruptions (Magill & Blong 2006) are cases in point. In spite of potential disaster from volcanic eruptions and dangers from other local hazards, evidence from the existing literature on risk perception in Auckland and New Zealand, in general, shows that no investigation has been conducted on how the African community in Auckland understands and reacts to risks. This investigation becomes necessary because of the hazard landscape of Auckland and the importance of risk perception in designing an effective mitigation strategy and improving resilience.

The overarching objective of this research was to investigate awareness and interpretation of risk amongst South Africans in Auckland. The objective was achieved by answering the following questions:

Which hazards are likely to affect the community?
Which hazards are likely to affect individuals in the community?
How does trust affect risk perception in the community?
How is risk perception in the community personalised?

Subsequent development in this article proceeds with an examination of previous and related works, and this is followed by this study’s data collection and analysis technique, and then this study’s findings and discussion. Lastly, the summary section concludes this study.

Context of the research

‘Disaster risk’ is often defined as the proclivity to be impacted by natural hazards. The possibility of being impacted by a disaster arises from the interaction between existing vulnerability and local hazards (Blaikie et al. 2014 ). Whilst inappropriate social and development policies contribute to vulnerability and risk (Oliver-Smith et al. 2016 ), the exposure and sensitivity of at-risk elements are equally important in disaster causation (Adger 2006 ). Whilst disaster risk reduction (DRR) and resilience could be enhanced through social equity in development planning (Collins 2018 ; United Nations Development Programme, Bureau for Crisis Prevention & Recovery 2004 ), the importance of community risk awareness and acknowledgement of its predisposition to local hazards cannot be underestimated in DRR. The essence of awareness is for a community to have a different orientation towards hazards and it begins to reflect on resilience.

Risk knowledge and community resilience

Risk knowledge refers to community awareness of disaster risk. It encompasses but not limited to the awareness of the magnitude of risks, local hazards, and exposure, susceptibility and the capacity of elements at risk of local hazards (World Meteorological Organisation 2020). Often than not, risk knowledge provides the needed impetus for community resilience and a psychological boost to community participation in DRR and mitigation (Adger 2006 ; Allen 2006 ; McEntire & Myers 2004 ). Essential aspects of risk knowledge and community resilience are hazard analysis and vulnerability assessment (Bogardi & Birkmann 2004 ) because they enable the community to design adaptive response to a potential disaster (Cutter et al. 2008 ). Aside from adaptive capacity, risk knowledge improves adaptive response to local risk through community participation in hazard mapping (Gaillard & Pangilinan 2010 ). The importance of local participation in hazard mapping is that the community acquires the first-hand knowledge of the spatial information on local hazards and their susceptibility to the risks. Local participation in hazard knowledge also provides the opportunity to collaborate local and scientific knowledge to address community vulnerability to local hazards (Mercer et al. 2009 ).

In a disaster-prone community, risk knowledge is better informed by knowledge of the potential consequences of disaster rather than the historical occurrence of a disaster (Tierney et al. 2001 ). Risk knowledge is particularly critical in an urban community where populations migrate from a familiar terrain of known risk to the unfamiliar landscape (Mitchell 1999 ). The extent to which risk knowledge and participation in hazard management influences personal adjustment to local hazards is closely related to how individuals perceive or interpret their vulnerability to local hazards (Oliver-Smith & Hoffman 1999 ; Wachinger et al. 2013 ). Although perception plays a predominant role in personal response to a potential hazard event, it is underpinned by socio-demographic factors.

Risk interpretation

Whilst it is difficult to quantify risk perception, it could be gauged by the actions people embarked upon in anticipation of a potential disaster from local hazards. Cutter ( 1993 ), cited in Murphy et al. ( 2005 :21), explains ‘human perception of risk of a disaster as a process that links individual judgements of the degree of danger (risk) with action (preparedness)’. The assumption that local hazards may impact a community differentiates risk knowledge from risk perception. Underlining the assumption of being affected is the nature and features of local risks, intensity and frequency of individual experience (Kates 1971 ). These variables were further explained by Fischhoff et al. ( 1978 ) and in Slovic and Weber’s ( 2002 ) psychometric paradigm. The paradigm recognises dread and newness of a hazard as significant determinants in understanding risk perception from a non-scientific view. In addition to the psychometric paradigm, cultural theorists explore risk perception from a political economy and emotional perspectives (Douglas & Wildavsky 1983 ). The central theme of their theory is that socio-cultural factors determine how people conceptualise risk. In synergising the above views, Pidgeon et al. ( 1992 :89) posit that risk perception involves personal heuristic on local hazards ‘as well as wider social and cultural values and dispositions that people adopt, towards hazards and their benefits’. Pidgeon and others ( 1992 ) accommodate hazard characteristics and the multi-dimensional concept of risk perception.

Under certain circumstances, trusted sources of information and scientific opinion influence judgement on the riskiness of a probable disaster (Eiser et al. 2012 ; Han, Hörhager & Yan 2017 ; Paton 2008 ). Although decision on the riskiness of a hazard may be underpinned by a trusted source of information and scientific advice on risk, the role of protective measures in risk perception cannot be underestimated (Terpstra 2010 ). People rely on expert knowledge for a rational decision on risk because of the complexity or novelty of particular hazard (Frewer & Salter 2007 ; Paton 2008 ). However, the credibility of information, institutional performance in hazard management, and individual experience and satisfaction with previous information determine the level of trust and reliability of risk information (Paton 2008 ; Paton, Burgelt & Prior 2008a ). Aside from trust in human expertise, trust in hard engineering influences risk decisions (Botzen, Aerts & Van den Bergh 2009 ; Wachinger et al. 2013 ) as people undermine risk and trust-existing infrastructures to mitigate risks. Although disaster experience and trust play a critical role in risk perception, risk decision is being modified continually by the media and through social interactions amongst individuals (Morgan et al. 2001 ). This process amplifies or attenuates the perceived risk during personal decision on the risk.

Risk perception is not homogenous amongst individuals. The type of hazard, socio-economic status and demographic factors influence personal judgement on the riskiness of disaster. From the socio-economic perspective, studies have suggested that people prefer to accept risk for economic benefit, rather than suffering from abject poverty in a safer environment (Blaikie et al. 2014 ; Gaillard, Liamzon & Villanueva 2007 ). Ruin, Gaillard and Lutoff ( 2007 ) argued that the risk of a disaster is often determined not by threats from hazards but by the socio-economic and political constraints that are beyond individual’s control. These limitations are also pivotal in their decisions to personalise the risk, embark on mitigation and preparedness actions or disregard the threat (Wachinger et al. 2013 ).

Individual choice of action towards risk explains the inconsistencies between the risk perception and response at different spatial and temporal scales. The expectation is for people to respond positively to high-risk judgement. However, this is often not the case, as a personal estimation of risk is subjective and socially constructed (Johnson et al. 2013 ) as opposed to objectivity. In a socio-ecological environment, the risk is not confined to a simple mathematical model of risk and probability because it undermines the influence of human input in a social phenomenon (Pidgeon et al. 1992 ). In tandem with this view, Slovic ( 1999 ), cited in Botterill and Mazur ( 2004 ) and Hewitt ( 1997 ), argued that:

[ W ]hat constitutes a risk and the level of perception is socially constructed because risk could not be separated from choices which condition individual beliefs and circumstances; and the complexity of the society. (p. 22)

Whilst some individuals may be willing to respond positively to perceived risk, personal circumstances and feeling towards risk may dictate otherwise. Economic benefit, individual self-delusion about risk and lack of confidence in preparedness measures are some of the factors that undermine risk perception (Eiser et al. 2012 ; Johnson et al. 2013 ; Terpstra 2010 ).

Consequently, predicting disaster preparedness on risk perception poses many challenges, especially in an urban community. The multiple ethnic and cultural constellations and unequal access to social and economic opportunities are some of the challenges to human expectations concerning risk and action. Consequently, the relationship between risk perception and disaster preparedness is not linear (Eiser et al. 2012 ) because of intervening variables. Notwithstanding the probability of a disaster or severity of impact, people may choose not to be prepared for a variety of reasons. Johnson et al. ( 2013 ) and Paton and Johnson ( 2001 ) identify lack of confidence and motivation in personal preparation. In some cases, a false sense of safety prevents people from embarking on preparedness activities (Perry, Lindell & Tierney 2001 ). Thus, understanding urban community’s risk perception and its underpinning factors are crucial for improving risk communications and designing adequate and appropriate response and policies towards risk and hazard management (Grothmann & Reusswig 2006 ; Xu et al. 2014 ).

Study area and methodology

Area of the study.

Auckland in the North Island of New Zealand is located on latitude 36.848461 S and longitude 174.763336 E (Longlat.com 2020 :1). It is the fastest-growing multi-cultural city in the country. More than 90% of Auckland’s population lives in urban areas. Unlike the South Island city of Christchurch and its environs, Auckland is least susceptible to earthquake because of its location on the Australian tectonic plate, 300 km–500 km northwest of the active plate boundary of the Australian and Pacific plates (Auckland Council 2015 :6). However, it is most prone to volcanic eruptions and coastal erosion because of its location on the Auckland Volcanic Field (AVF) covering 100 km 2 of the urban areas and approximately 3000 km length of the coastal shoreline (Auckland Council 2015 :6). Apart from earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, Auckland is also highly vulnerable to a wide range of multiple hazard impacts from severe weather events, floods, tsunamis and landslides.

The community of this study

The office of Statistics New Zealand ( 2015 ) recorded the population of South Africans in Auckland to be 30 612 as of the 2013 census. Whilst the history of South African migration to New Zealand dates to the 19th century, a large-scale emigration wave from South Africa started after the demise of the Apartheid regime in the early 1990s (Walrond 2015 ). By 2013, the South African community grew to be the fifth largest community in Auckland and New Zealand (Statistics New Zealand 2013 ). Although the community is divided ethnically, it identifies itself as African.

Notwithstanding that most of the South African population lives in the North shore of Auckland, this research considers the community as a dispersed community as other members of the community live outside the north of Auckland. The South African community, like other communities in Auckland, faces the risk of multiple disasters. Whilst most of the community members may be highly prone to coastal hazards because of residential location, they are equally prone to volcanic eruptions because of the location of Auckland.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is JAMBA-12-845-g001.jpg

Map of Auckland.

This research constitutes a part of the ‘Resilient Urban Communities Project’ (2015–2019), Resilience to Nature’s Challenges funded by the New Zealand Government through the National Science Challenge. One of the stakeholders in this project is the Auckland City Council. In collaboration with the Auckland Council, a criterion was set out for identifying proxy communities for the African community: firstly, a community with longevity and roots in Auckland, and secondly, a diverse community. Regarding diversity and longevity in Auckland, the South African community fitted into that matrix.

Data method: Collection and analytical process

The primary objective of this study was to investigate how the South African community in Auckland interprets the risk of disasters from natural hazards. In order to achieve this objective, this study used a mixed-method to collect data from members of the community. Questionnaire and interviews were the primary sources of data. These sources were complemented by existing literature as secondary data. The questionnaire protocol consisted of sections relating to the socio-demographic background of participants, risk perceptions, trust and risk and disaster readiness. A sizeable proportion of the 150 questionnaires were distributed to adult South Africans aged 18 years and above between October 2016 and December 2017 in a church in the North Shore neighbourhood of Auckland. One of the church leaders assisted in the distribution and collection of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was also distributed with the help of two research assistants in hospitals, government ministries and other areas with a sizeable population of South Africans in Auckland. Of the 150 questionnaires that were distributed, 88 questionnaires were completed and returned by participants. The returned rate was about 58%, a little more than the minimum requirement of 82 participants for correlation analysis and two-tailed hypotheses (Onwuegbuzie & Collins 2007 ). The returned questionnaire for this study indicated that 48% males and 52% females completed the questionnaire. In all, 89% of this study’s participants were between the working age of 18 and 65 years, whilst only 11% constituted a dependent population. Whereas 62% of the respondents had New Zealand citizenship, only 2% had lived in Auckland for more than 26 years; 96% of the respondents had secondary and higher education.

In addition to the questionnaire, this study conducted five face-to-face and three telephonic interviews with community members that indicated their interest for an interview in the questionnaire. The purpose of the interviews was to have further discussion on the findings of the questionnaire. This study used both independent-sample t -test and Spearman’s correlation coefficient to analyse questionnaires to examine gender difference in risk perception and the relationship between independent and dependent variables used in this research. Thomas’s ( 2006 ) General Inductive Approach to qualitative analysis for qualitative data in conjunction with a three-step coding cycle as explained by Saldaña ( 2013 ) was used to select initial data codes, categories and overarching themes. This study discussed findings in line with the existing theoretical propositions on risk perception.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the University of Auckland Human Participants Ethics Committee (Reference No. 017500).

Findings and discussion

Disaster risk perception and awareness.

The participants were asked whether they knew the hazards landscape of Auckland and hazards that could affect Auckland. The question was asked because knowledge of hazards determines the coping and adaptive capacities to be adopted. Responses from the participants indicated high awareness and the likelihood of disasters from one or more hazards in Auckland. The likelihood of floods, earthquake and tsunami was considered high by the respondents, whilst hazards such as volcanic eruptions, landslide and tornado were deemed least likely to occur ( Table 1 ).

Community risk awareness and perception: Descriptive summary results for hazards likely to affect Auckland.

Regarding the hazards under consideration, the community’s sense of danger was more towards earthquake, flooding and tsunami than other hazards in the community. Disaster from a tornado was considered least likely to happen in the community. Participants’ responses were underpinned by hazard information and location. The high level of risk attached to floods by the community was not related to previous experience but to the geographical location of most of the participants’ residences in the north shore of Auckland. Earlier research conducted by Heitz et al. ( 2009 ) and Kaiser and Witzki ( 2004 ) has supported the association between the location of residence and risk perception. Whilst Auckland may not be susceptible to earthquakes because of its location on the Australia tectonic plate, participants’ perception of the risk of earthquakes in Auckland was likely to be influenced by events in other parts of the country, specifically Christchurch and Wellington and the information available on the hazards. Sixty-seven per cent of the research participants felt that a tsunami would affect Auckland. A similar percentage was also recorded for an earthquake because of its trigger effect on tsunami and associated information that are available to participants from the local emergency management agency and through media amplification of the risk of a tsunami (Kasperson et al. 1988 ). The perception of the risk of volcanic eruptions in Auckland was low in comparison to earthquakes and tsunami, which were perceived by 67% participants. Interviews with research participants revealed that they dread earthquakes and tsunami because these were much talked about in Auckland than volcanic eruptions, and, moreover, because of the less occurrence of a disaster arisen from the hazard and the time lag between one occurrence and another (Kajihara & Kishimoto 2011 ). The level of risk perception for earthquake indicated that little or no social learning has transpired between the migrant community and the local agency. Because only 2% of the community has lived in Auckland for 26 years and more, most members of the community were unaware of the risk and past activities relating to earthquakes. The research results have implications on emergency planning and resilience in Auckland. The community is less likely to be prepared for a possible volcanic eruption in Auckland even though Auckland is more susceptible to volcanic eruptions than other hazards. Similarly, other hazards in Auckland were likely to be undermined in resilience planning by the community.

Individual perception of risk

To further understand risk perception amongst the South African community, participants were asked to respond on a 5-point Likert scale on the likelihood of being impacted by local hazards ( Table 2 ). The essence of the question was to know whether individual risk perception differed in the community. This study’s findings suggest a slight contrast between how the community and individual households perceived risks. Whilst disasters from flood, earthquakes and tsunami were worrisome for the community, the danger of tsunami was not considered by most individuals ( M = 2.42, SD = 1.21) to impact them. Instead, participants considered volcanic eruptions as the second major disaster that could impact individuals after an earthquake. This consideration for volcanic eruptions constituted a major difference between how the community perceived volcanic eruptions and household perception of the hazard. Individual risk perception for volcanic eruptions surprisingly was high ( M = 2.77, SD = 1.36) because 96% of the study population had no previous experience of volcanic eruptions’ hazard. Although 56% of the community believed that volcanic eruptions could happen in Auckland, the health implications of volcanic eruptions and its impact on daily activities were the reasons for high-risk perception amongst individual households.

Mean summary: Perception of risk and the likelihood of individuals being affected by natural hazards.

Likelihood of being impacted by local hazards on 5-point Likert scale: 1 = not likely, 2 = somewhat likely, 3 = moderate likely, 4 = quite likely, 5 = high likely.

The reason for high-risk perception for earthquakes amongst households was the perceived likelihood of occurrence. Individuals in the community were worried because they felt that earthquakes were a national problem that could affect them, irrespective of location. The unpredictability of an earthquake in comparison to other hazards was also a source of concern for the people. However, participants’ apprehension for the earthquake was misplaced because the geographical location of Auckland made it less susceptible to an earthquake. The apparent reason for the apprehension could be related to the occurrence of earthquake events in other areas of the country and the publicity attached to damage caused by earthquakes. The expected risk from flooding was equally high, but to a lesser degree when compared to other geophysical hazards. Although Auckland is prone to weather events and coastal erosion, their less severe impacts and low incidence could explain the low-risk perception as expressed by individuals. Household perception of risk had implications for disaster emergency plan and participation in pre-disaster activities. Households were likely to embark on disaster plan and participate in a drill that could be unrelated to local hazards.

To further understand individual risk perception in the community, an independent-sample t -test and Spearman’s correlation analyses were conducted to examine socio-demographic differences and relationships in risk perception. The mean summary report did not indicate a significant difference between genders. Although a marginal difference existed in their assessment of risks across hazards in Auckland, gender was not influential in risk interpretation in the community. This finding was in line with the previous study by Roder et al. ( 2016 ) regarding perception and awareness of landslide and flood risks in Taiwan. Spearman’s correlation analysis conducted to investigate the relationship and direction between age, income, level of education and income across hazards in Auckland showed that education was significantly related to how individuals perceived the risk of tsunami in Auckland ( r = −0.259 p < 0.005) ( Table 3 ). The negative correlation denotes an inverse relationship between education and the perception of risk of tsunami. This finding suggested that a higher educated population had a lower risk perception. This result was, however, not surprising as more than 96% of the community had secondary education and above. Individuals in the community did not interpret risk differently, in spite of the difference in the number of years they had resided in Auckland. The result confirmed the previous studies by Roder et al. ( 2016 ) regarding natural hazards and risk perception in Taiwan. Besides education, there was no significant relationship between income, age and years of residence and hazards’ risk perception. Although income varies in Auckland, it did not correlate with risk perception. The previous work conducted by Qasim et al. ( 2015 ) has reached a similar conclusion regarding the flood-prone province of Pakistan. In addition to income variable, the research findings supported Qasim and others ( 2015 ) on the absence of a relationship between age and risk perception.

Summary of correlations between social variables and perception of hazard risks.

Not significant, p > 0.05; significant, p < 0.05.

Trust and risk decisions

Regarding factors that could influence personal assessment on the risks of a hazard and subsequent actions, this study asked respondents questions on a 5-point Likert scale regarding trusted information from the local emergency management agency and its influence on individuals’ risk interpretation. The aggregate mean value ( M = 3.13, SD =1.31) indicated that official information on hazards played a pivotal role in the individual interpretation and subsequent action regarding risk in the South African community. Consequently, most people in the community relied on official information in deciding the riskiness of a hazard, as indicated in the high mean value ( M =3.67, SD = 1.21). The high mean value was not surprising as most participants were not sure of what to do during a disaster event. Emergent themes from follow-up interviews tended to support this study’s quantitative data. It emerged that participants’ limited knowledge of risk interpretation was a primary reason that they relied on trusted information. The limitation arose out of lack of disaster experience, as about 96% of the study population did not have any disaster experience. The conclusion mirrored previous literature and findings by Njome et al. ( 2010 ), Visschers and Siegrist ( 2008 ) and Wachinger et al. ( 2013 ), in which they argued that communities without previous disaster experience and complexity of natural hazards had increased trust in official and expert information. The influence of official information on risk perception varied across hazards. The variation was closely aligned with how participants perceived the risks that could likely affect them.

Table 4 suggests that how information on earthquake, flood and tsunami is likely to influence individuals’ risk perception than other hazards in the locale.

Descriptive summary results of the influence of trusted information on hazard risk perception.

Likelihood of being impacted by trusted information on hazard risk perception on 5-point Likert scale: 1 = not likely, 2 = somewhat likely, 3 = moderate likely, 4 = quite likely, 5 = high likely.

Although evidence in Table 4 shows how people’s perception of risk of hazards are likely to be influenced by official information, this study conducted Spearman’s rank-order correlation to determine the direction and relationship between risk information and the perception of risk. The output indicated a positive relationship between risk information and earthquake, flood, tsunami, coastal erosion, volcano and tornado ( Table 5 ). The influence of risk information on hazards was more substantial regarding earthquake, flood and tsunami than other hazards. The results indicated that individual perceptions of risks were positively related to risks that could likely impact them. The levels of correlation further confirmed participants’ fear of hazards and risk information.

Summary of correlations between trusted information and influence risk perception.

The work conducted by Arlikatti, Lindell and Prater ( 2007 ) and Bronfman et al. ( 2015 ) supported the above correlations. Whilst the former found trust in official information to be influential in seismic behavioural and hazard adjustment in the USA, the later found that trusted information from authorities was a strong predictor of how Chileans perceived environmental hazards. However, studies conducted by Dow and Cutter ( 2000 ) regarding Hurricane Floyd in South Florida and Paton et al. ( 2008b ) on the effectiveness of information in volcanic perception and adjustment in New Zealand did not align with this study’s findings. The reason could be contextual as risk perception is influenced by disaster experience, information and the personality of people, which differ across at-risk communities.

Risk perception and personalisation

The degree of danger attached to hazards and the willingness to act on the risk varied from one hazard to another. On a 5-point Likert scale, this study found that disaster preparedness in the community was more motivated by the desire to cope with unexpected challenges ( M = 4.06, SD = 1.24) than the protection of private properties ( M = 3.51, SD = 1.45) ( Table 6 ). In spite of slight variation in participants’ responses, the high mean values recorded from both enquiries denoted a high-risk consideration and perceived preparedness amongst individuals. Although the community’s aggregated mean value ( M ) of risk perception for all hazards was 2.47 ( SD = 1.27), the aggregated mean value of individual readiness for all hazards was 1.65 ( SD = 1.00). The low mean value of preparedness recorded by all hazards reflected a considerable difference between perceived probability, personal consequences and perceived preparedness. It also emerged that hazards with a high-risk perception, that is to say earthquake, also attracted more attention and resources.

Descriptive mean summary of readiness for natural hazards.

Readiness to cope with natural hazards on 5-point Likert scale:1 = very low, 2 = low, 3 = moderate, 4 = high, 5 = very high.

An enquiry into individual readiness revealed that most people in the community confounded preparedness with response actions. During interviews, it emerged that the community understanding of disaster preparedness was the ability to elevate personal properties and moving to higher ground in case of both flooding and tsunami. Although there was a relationship between risk perception and disaster readiness (Khan et al. 2013 ), this view did not apply to all hazards under consideration. Whilst there was a relationship between landslide and disaster planning and tsunami and disaster exercise, such a relationship was not found with other hazards under consideration, and none of the hazards influenced personal emergency storage.

The correlation results shown in Table 7 indicate that risk perception and disaster preparedness were not homogenous across hazards. This result supports the conclusion that risk perception does not necessarily influence disaster preparedness (Lindell, Arlikatti & Prater 2009 ; Paton et al. 2008b ). An independent-sample t -test did not indicate a significant difference between men and women regarding a household disaster plan, 3-day emergency supply and disaster exercises. The gender of participants did not contribute to general preparedness in the community. Similar results also emerged regarding gender and preparedness for specific natural hazards. These findings aligned with prior studies conducted by Burningham, Fielding and Thrush ( 2008 ) regarding awareness and preparedness for a flood in the UK, and by Tekeli-Yesil et al. ( 2010 ) in their study about motivation for earthquake preparedness in Istanbul, Turkey. However, Karanci, Aksit and Dirik ( 2005 ) found a relationship between gender, disaster awareness and preparedness behaviour regarding earthquake, landslide and floods in Cankiri.

Summary of correlation results of readiness activities and natural hazards.

In understanding the strength and direction of risk and preparedness in the community, this study conducted a Spearman’s coefficient correlation analysis between social variables and indicators of overall preparedness on the one hand ( Table 8 ) and social variables and hazard-specific readiness on the other ( Table 9 ).

Summary of the correlation between social variables and pre-disaster preparedness activities.

Summary of correlation between social variables and hazard readiness.

Not significant, p > 0.05;significant, p < 0.05.

A positive relationship existed between the number of years participants had resided in Auckland and the willingness to have a disaster plan for a potential hazard event in Auckland: disaster plan, r = 0.239, p < 0.05 (two-tailed). Similarly, age of individuals in the community was highly significant with having a disaster plan, r = 0.292, p < 0.01 (two-tailed); and making provision for a 3-day emergency storage, r = 0.311, p < 0.01 (two-tailed).

Age was significant in individual readiness for landslide, r = 0.228, p < 0.05 (two-tailed); coastal erosion, r = 0.253, p < 0.05 (two-tailed) and Tornado, r = 0.267, p < 0.05 (two-tailed). The individual level of education was significantly related to individual perceived readiness for coastal erosion and tornado. Previous studies by Finnis et al. ( 2010 ) and Roder et al. ( 2016 ) have also supported the relationship between education and disaster preparedness. Participants’ income was positively related to the earthquake. The result suggested that household investment in seismic mitigation and retrofitting could improve as income increases (income, r = 0.223, p < 0.05 [two-tailed]). This finding was in line with the prior work of Turner et al. ( 2003 ) regarding the risk of an earthquake in California.

This study has analysed risk awareness and interpretation in the South African community in Auckland. The hazards examined were earthquake, flood, tsunami, volcano, landslide, coastal erosion and tornado. Findings from this study indicate a high level of risk awareness in the community. As hazards, risks of earthquake and flooding that are likely to impact the community and households were consistent. Official information on risk was a critical input into the community’s risk decisions. The influence was because of lack of experience and trust in the official source of information. Whereas trust in official information was influential in risk decisions, role of the media and personality factors of the recipients cannot be overlooked. Although a relationship existed between risk knowledge and preparedness, such a relationship was not linear because of intervening variables between risk and decision. The variables accounted for the low level of disaster preparedness in the community.

Wide disparity in perception amongst hazards was indicative of the level of importance and preparedness of participants attached to respective hazards. In a multi-hazard environment such as Auckland, the importance of preparing for an all-hazard disaster couldn’t be overemphasised because climate change and current complexities are associated with hazards. Whilst the community may not have experienced a disaster, a policy that bridges risk and disaster mitigation would enhance resilience of the community to local hazards. Such policy includes but not limited to community participation in risk identification, defining their vulnerability and formulating strategies for resilience, because communities are more likely to implement mitigation strategies when they participate in the process. The researchers recommend further investigation on how to narrow the gap between risk and resilience behaviour amongst the population that has barely experienced a disaster.

Acknowledgements

Competing interests.

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Authors’ contributions

O.O. carried out this research as part of his PhD thesis in civil engineering under the supervision of S.W. and A.N. The entire research was carried out by O.O. The contributions of S.W. and A.N. were supervisory and they read the final manuscript.

Funding information

This work was supported by the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) through the Resilience to Nature’s Challenges National Science Challenge, Urban Resilient Cities Science Programme.

Data availability statement

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the authors.

How to cite this article: Odiase, O., Wilkinson, S. & Neef, A., 2020, ‘Risk of a disaster: Risk knowledge, interpretation and resilience’, Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies 12(1), a845. https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v12i1.845

Adger W.N., 2006, ‘ Vulnerability ’, Global Environmental Change 16 ( 3 ), 268–281. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Allen K.M., 2006, ‘ Community based disaster preparedness and climate adaptation: Local capacity-building in the Philippines ’, Disasters 30 ( 1 ), 81–101. 10.1111/j.1467-9523.2006.00308.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Arlikatti S., Lindell M.K. & Prater C.S., 2007, ‘ Perceived stakeholder role relationships and adoption of seismic hazard adjustments ’, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 25 ( 3 ), 218. [ Google Scholar ]
Auckland Council , 2015, Natural hazards and emergency , viewed 10 February 2020, from http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/ENVIRONMENTWASTE?NATURALHAZARDSEMERGENCIES?HAZARDS/pages/coastalerosionhazards.aspx .
Blaikie P., Cannon T., Davis I. & Wisner B., 2014, At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters , 2nd edn., Routledge, London. [ Google Scholar ]
Bogardi J. & Birkmann J., 2004, ‘Vulnerability assessment: The first step towards sustainable risk reduction’, Disaster and society – From hazard assessment to risk reduction , pp. 75–82, Logos Verlag, Berlin. [ Google Scholar ]
Botterill L. & Mazur N., 2004, Risk and risk perception: A literature review , pp. 1–28, Australian Government Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Kingstrom, ACT. [ Google Scholar ]
Botzen W.J., Aerts J.C. & Van den Bergh J.C.J.M., 2009, ‘ Dependence of flood risk perceptions on socioeconomic and objective risk factors ’, Water Resources Research 45 ( 10 ), 1–15. 10.1029/2009WR007743 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bronfman N.C., Cisternas P.C., López-Vázquez E. & Cifuentes L.A., 2015, ‘ Trust and risk perception of natural hazards: Implications for risk preparedness in Chile ’, Natural Hazards 81 ( 1 ), 307–327. 10.1007/s11069-015-2080-4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Burningham K., Fielding J. & Thrush D., 2008, ‘ “It will never happen to me”: Understanding public awareness of local flood risk ’, Disasters 32 ( 2 ), 216–238. 10.1111/j.1467-7717.2007.01036.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Collins A.E., 2018, ‘ Advancing the disaster and development paradigm ’, International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 9 ( 4 ), 486–495. 10.1007/s13753-018-0206-5 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cutter S.L., Barnes L., Berry M., Burton C., Evans E., Tate E. et al., 2008, ‘ A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters ’, Global Environmental Change 18 ( 4 ), 598–606. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.07.013 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cutter S.L., 1993, Living with risk , Routledge, New York. [ Google Scholar ]
Douglas M. & Wildavsky A., 1983, Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technological and environmental dangers , 1st edn., University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. [ Google Scholar ]
Dow K. & Cutter S.L., 2000, ‘ Public orders and personal opinions: Household strategies for hurricane risk assessment ’, Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards 2 ( 4 ), 143–155. 10.1016/S1464-2867(01)00014-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Eiser J.R., Bostrom A., Burton I., Johnston D.M., McClure J., Paton D. et al., 2012, ‘ Risk interpretation and action: A conceptual framework for responses to natural hazards ’, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 1 , 5–16. 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2012.05.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Finnis K.K., Johnston D.M., Ronan K.R. & White J.D., 2010, ‘ Hazard perceptions and preparedness of Taranaki youth ’, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal 19 ( 2 ), 175–184. 10.1108/09653561011037986 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Fischhoff B., Slovic P., Lichtenstein S., Read S. & Comoobs B., 1978, ‘ How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits ’, Policy Sciences 9 ( 2 ), 127–152. 10.1007/BF00143739 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Frewer L.J. & Salter B., 2007, ‘Societal trust in risk analysis: Implications for the interface of risk assessment and risk management’, in Siegrist M., Earle T.C. & Gutscher H. (eds.), Trust in cooperative risk management: Uncertainty in scepticism in the public mind , pp. 143–158. [ Google Scholar ]
Gaillard J.C., Liamzon C.C. & Villanueva J.D., 2007, ‘ “Natural” disaster? A retrospect into the causes of the late-2004 typhoon disaster in Eastern Luzon, Philippines ’, Environmental Hazards 7 ( 4 ), 257–270. 10.1016/j.envhaz.2006.11.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Gaillard J.C. & Pangilinan M.L.C.J.D., 2010, ‘ Participatory mapping for raising disaster risk awareness among the youth ’, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 18 ( 3 ), 175–179. 10.1111/j.1468-5973.2010.00614.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Grothmann T. & Reusswig F., 2006, ‘ People at risk of flooding: Why some residents take precautionary action while others do not ’, Natural Hazards 38 ( 1 ), 101–120. 10.1007/s11069-005-8604-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Han Z., Lu X., Hörhager E.I. & Yan J., 2017, ‘ The effects of trust in government on earthquake survivors’ risk perception and preparedness in China ’, Natural Hazards 86 ( 1 ), 437–452. 10.1007/s11069-016-2699-9 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Heitz C., Spaeter S., Auzet A. & Glatron S., 2009, ‘ Local stakeholders’ perception of muddy flood risk and implications for management approaches: A case study in Alsace (France) ’, Land Use Policy 26 ( 2 ), 443–451. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.05.008 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hewitt K., 1997, Regions of risk: A geographical introduction to disasters , Routledge, Florence. [ Google Scholar ]
Johnston D., Becker J., McClure J., Paton D., McBride S., Wright K. et al., 2013, ‘Community understanding of, and preparedness for, earthquake and tsunami risk in Wellington, New Zealand’, in Joffe H., Rossetto T. & Adams J. (eds.), Cities at risk , 33rd edn., pp. 131–148, Springer, Dorderecht: 10.1007/978-94-007-6184-1_8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kaiser G. & Witzki D., 2004, ‘ Public perception of coastal flood defence and participation in coastal flood defence planning ’, Final Report of Subproject 3 , 101–108. [ Google Scholar ]
Kajihara H., Kishimoto A., 2011, ‘ Risk tradeoff analysis of sub-stance substitution: Scope, framework and metrics ’, Paper presented at 3rd Integ-Risk Conference on New Technologies and Emerging Risks, June 7–8, 2011, Stuttgart, Germany. [ Google Scholar ]
Karanci A.N., Aksit B. & Dirik G., 2005, ‘ Impact of a community disaster awareness training program in Turkey: Does it influence hazard-related cognitions and preparedness behaviors ’, Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal 33 ( 3 ), 243–258. 10.2224/sbp.2005.33.3.243 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kasperson R.E., Renn O., Slovic P., Brown H.S., Emel J., Goble R. et al., 1988, ‘ The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework ’, Risk Analysis 8 ( 2 ), 177–187. 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kates R.W., 1971, ‘ Natural hazard in human ecological perspective: Hypotheses and models ’, Economic Geography 47 ( 3 ), 438–451. 10.2307/142820 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Khan A.N., Khan B., Qasim S. & Khan S.N., 2013, ‘ Causes, effects and remedies: A case study of rural flooding in District Charsadda, Pakistan ’, Journal of Managerial Sciences 7 ( 1 ), 1–13. [ Google Scholar ]
Lindell M.K., Arlikatti S. & Prater C.S., 2009, ‘ Why people do what they do to protect against earthquake risk: Perceptions of hazard adjustment attributes ’, Risk Analysis 29 ( 8 ), 1072–1088. 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01243.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lindsay J., Marzocchi W., Jolly G., Constantinescu R., Selva J. & Sandri L., 2009, ‘ Towards real-time eruption forecasting in the Auckland Volcanic Field: Application of BET_EF during the New Zealand national disaster exercise “Ruaumoko” ’, Bulletin of Volcanology 72 ( 2 ), 185–204. 10.1007/s00445-009-0311-9 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Longlat.com , 2020, Auckland, the north island, New Zealand geographic information , viewed 25 February 2020, from https://www.latlong.net/place/auckland-the-north-island-new-zealand-4464.html .
Magill C. & Blong R., 2005, ‘ Volcanic risk ranking for Auckland, New Zealand. I: Methodology and hazard investigation ’, Bulletin of Volcanology 67 ( 4 ), 331–339. 10.1007/s00445-004-0374-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
McEntire D.A. & Myers A., 2004, ‘ Preparing communities for disasters: Issues and processes for government readiness ’, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal 13 ( 2 ), 140–152. 10.1108/09653560410534289 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Mercer J., Kelman I., Suchet-Pearson S. & Lloyd K., 2009, ‘ Integrating indigenous and scientific knowledge bases for disaster risk reduction in Papua New Guinea ’, Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 91 ( 2 ), 157–183. 10.1111/j.1468-0467.2009.00312.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Mitchell J.K., 1999, Natural disasters in the context of mega-cities , United Nations University, New York, NY. [ Google Scholar ]
Morgan M.G., Fischhoff B., Bostrom A. & Atman C.J., 2001, Risk communication , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [ Google Scholar ]
Murphy B.L., McBean G., Dolan H., Falkiner L. & Kovacs P., 2005, Enhancing local level emergency management: The influence of disaster experience and the role of households and neighbourhoods , Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction Toronto, Toronto. [ Google Scholar ]
Njome M.S., Suh C.E., Chuyong G. & De Wit M.J., 2010, ‘ Volcanic risk perception in rural communities along the slopes of mount Cameroon, West-Central Africa ’, Journal of African Earth Sciences 58 ( 4 ), 608–622. 10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2010.08.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Oliver-Smith A., Alcántara-Ayala I., Burton I. & Lavell A., 2016, Forensic investigations of disasters: A conceptual framework and guide to research (IRDR FORIN Publication 2) , Integrated Research on Disaster Risk, Beijing. [ Google Scholar ]
Oliver-Smith A. & Hoffman S.M., 1999, The angry earth: Disaster in anthropological perspective , Routledge, London. [ Google Scholar ]
Onwuegbuzie A.J. & Collins K.M.T., 2007, ‘ A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research ’, The Qualitative Report 12 ( 2 ), 281. [ Google Scholar ]
Paton D., 2008, ‘ Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: How trust influences its effectiveness ’, International Journal of Global Environmental Issues 8 ( 1–2 ), 2–16. 10.1504/IJGENVI.2008.017256 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Paton D., Burgelt P. & Prior T.D., 2008a, ‘ Living with bushfire risk: Social and environmental influences on preparedness ’, Australian Journal of Emergency Management 23 ( 3 ), 41–48. [ Google Scholar ]
Paton D. & Johnston D., 2001, ‘ Disasters and communities: Vulnerability, resilience and preparedness ’, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal 10 ( 4 ), 270–277. 10.1108/EUM0000000005930 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Paton D., Johnston D., Gough J., Dowrick D., Manville V., Daly M. et al., 1999, Auckland volcanic risk project: Stage 2 , pp. 1–99, Auckland Regional Council, Auckland. [ Google Scholar ]
Paton D., Smith L., Daly M. & Johnston D., 2008b, ‘ Risk perception and volcanic hazard mitigation: Individual and social perspectives ’, Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 172 ( 3 ), 179–188. 10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.12.026 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Perry R.W., Lindell M.K. & Tierney K.J., 2001, Facing the unexpected: Disaster preparedness and response in the United States , Joseph Henry Press, Washington, DC. [ Google Scholar ]
Pidgeon N., Hood C., Jones D., Turner B. & Gibson R., 1992, ‘Risk Perception’, in Report of a Royal Society Study Group (ed.), Risk: Analysis, Perception and Management , pp. 89–134, The Royal Society, London. [ Google Scholar ]
Qasim S., Khan A.N., Shrestha R.P. & Qasim M., 2015, ‘ Risk perception of the people in the flood prone Khyber Pukhthunkhwa province of Pakistan ’, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 14 ( 4 ), 373–378. 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.09.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Roder G., Ruljigaljig T., Lin C. & Tarolli P., 2016, ‘ Natural hazards knowledge and risk perception of Wujie indigenous community in Taiwan ’, Natural Hazards 81 ( 1 ), 641–662. 10.1007/s11069-015-2100-4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ruin I., Gaillard J. & Lutoff C., 2007, ‘ How to get there? Assessing motorists’ flash flood risk perception on daily itineraries ’, Environmental Hazards 7 ( 3 ), 235–244. 10.1016/j.envhaz.2007.07.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Saldaña , 2013, The coding manual for qualitative researchers , 2nd edn., Sage, London. [ Google Scholar ]
Slovic P., 1999, ‘ Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield ’, Risk Analysis 19 ( 4 ), 689–701. 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1999.tb00439.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Slovic P. & Weber E.U., 2002, ‘ Perception of risk posed by extreme events in risk management strategies in an uncertain world ’, paper presented at the Conference on risk management strategies in an uncertain world, Palisades, NY, 12–13 April 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
Statistics New Zealand , 2013, Census ethnic group profiles: Nigerian , viewed 02 March 2017, from http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/profile-and-summary-reports/ethnic-profiles.aspx?request_value=24787&tabname=Populationandgeography .
Statistics New Zealand , 2015, Census ethnic group profile: South African coloured , viewed 25 August 2018, from http://archive.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/profile-and-summary-reports/ethnic-profiles.aspx?request_value=24797&parent_id=24794&tabname=#24797 .
Tekeli-Yeşil S., Dedeoğlu N., Braun-Fahrlaender C. & Tanner M., 2010, ‘ Factors motivating individuals to take precautionary action for an expected earthquake in Istanbul ’, Risk Analysis 30 ( 8 ), 1181–1195. 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01424.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Terpstra T., 2010, Flood preparedness: Thoughts, feelings and intentions of the Dutch public , University of Twente, Enschede. [ Google Scholar ]
Thomas D.R., 2006, ‘ A general inductive approach for analysing qualitative evaluation data ’, American Journal of Evaluation 27 ( 2 ), 237–246. 10.1177/1098214005283748 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Tierney K.J., Lindell M.K. & Perry R.W., 2001, Facing the unexpected: Disaster preparedness and response in the United States , Joseph Henry Press, Washington, DC. [ Google Scholar ]
Turner B.L., Kasperson R.E., Matson P.A., McCarthy J.J., Corell R.W., Christensen L. et al., 2003, ‘ A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science ’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100 ( 14 ), 8074–8079. 10.1073/pnas.1231335100 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
United Nations Development Programme, Bureau for Crisis Prevention & Recovery , 2004, Reducing disaster risk: A challenge for development – A global report , United Nations, New York, NY. [ Google Scholar ]
Visschers V.H. & Siegrist M., 2008, ‘ Exploring the triangular relationship between trust, affect, and risk perception: A review of the literature ’, Risk Management 10 ( 3 ), 156–167. 10.1057/rm.2008.1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wachinger G., Renn O., Begg C. & Kuhlicke C., 2013, ‘ The risk perception paradox – Implications for governance and communication of natural hazards ’, Risk Analysis 33 ( 6 ), 1049–1065. 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01942.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Walrond C., 2015, ‘South Africans – Settlement’ Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand , viewed 20 October 2017, from https://teara.govt.nz/en/south-africans/page-1 .
Wikipedia , n.d., Auckland , viewed 28 March 2020, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auckland .
Xu J., Zhang Y., Liu B. & Xue L., 2014, ‘ Risk perception in natural disaster management ’, Paper Presented at the Technologies for Development: What is Essential Conference, Lausanne, Switzerland, June 4-6. [ Google Scholar ]

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS

A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. .

The new Individual Assistance updates only apply to disasters declared on or after March 22, 2024. Read about the updates.

Myth vs. Fact Regarding FEMA Disaster Assistance

In the aftermath of a disaster, it’s easy to confuse myth and fact. That’s why it’s important to get your information from a trustworthy source. Here are the corrections to some common myths you may have heard about FEMA disaster assistance.

Myth: I can’t receive assistance if I’ve already cleaned up or repaired damage caused by the disaster.

Fact: You can still apply for FEMA assistance if you’ve started your recovery. Submit photos of the damage and receipts for all repairs with your application.

Myth: I’m a renter. FEMA assistance is only for homeowners.

Fact : FEMA assistance is not just for homeowners. FEMA may provide assistance to help renters who lost personal property or were displaced.

Myth: Accepting FEMA assistance could affect my Social Security benefits, taxes, food stamps or Medicaid.

Fact: FEMA assistance does not affect benefits from other federal programs and is not considered taxable income.

Myth: My income is too high or too low to qualify for FEMA assistance.

Fact: FEMA does not consider your income when evaluating your application for Housing Assistance. However, your household income helps determine eligibility for the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) long-term, low-interest disaster loans.

Myth: If I get disaster assistance from FEMA, I will have to pay it back.

Fact: In most cases, the money FEMA provides to disaster survivors are grants which do not have to be repaid. However, FEMA can’t duplicate benefits. For example, if you receive an insurance settlement for an expense FEMA already paid you for, you need to pay FEMA back.

Myth: It’s too late to apply with FEMA if I’ve already filed a claim with my insurance company, or I have to wait for my insurance claim to process before I apply with FEMA.

Fact: If you have insurance, you can apply before or after you file a claim, as long you apply by April 8, 2024. Make sure to update your FEMA application when you receive a settlement or denial from your insurer, as FEMA needs to know what expenses your insurance will cover before it can process your application.

Myth: I can’t get paid back if I had to pay for a hotel after the disaster.

Fact: FEMA may be able pay you back for out-of-pocket lodging expenses that were not covered by your insurance or another source.

Myth: A FEMA inspector decides how much assistance I receive.

Fact: Inspectors don’t decide whether or how much assistance you will receive. Inspectors only record your disaster-caused damage.

Myth: There’s nothing I can do if FEMA says I’m not eligible for assistance.

Fact: Your FEMA determination letter is not a denial. In many cases, we may only need more information from you. And if you disagree with our decision, you can always appeal.

Myth: If I disagree with a FEMA decision letter, I can only file an appeal once.

Fact: Every time you receive a determination letter from FEMA, you have the right to appeal. With each appeal letter, you must include new documentation to support your claim and submit it within 60 days of the date on FEMA’s letter.

Myth: U.S. Small Business Administration loans are only for businesses.

Fact: The SBA is the largest source of federal disaster recovery funding. SBA offers long-term, low-interest disaster loans to homeowners, renters, private nonprofit organizations and businesses of all sizes. SBA disaster loans have very favorable terms with fixed interest rates and automatic 12-month payment deferment with 0% interest for the first 12 months. For more information, call SBA’s Customer Service Center at (800) 659-2955, visit sba.gov/disaster or email [email protected] for more information.

If you were affected by the Aug. 24-26, 2023 severe storms, tornadoes and flooding, the deadline to apply for FEMA assistance is Wednesday, May 8, 2024. Apply one of four ways:

Call the FEMA helpline at 800-621-3362.

Visit DisasterAssistance.gov .

Use the FEMA mobile app.

Visit a Disaster Recovery Center. Survivors can visit any center for assistance. To find center locations and current hours, visit FEMA.gov/DRC

For more information about the disaster recovery operation in Michigan, visit www.fema.gov/disaster/4757 .

IMAGES

Thesis Concept: Disaster Preparation on Behance
Thesis
Essay on Disaster Management
DISSERTATION DISASTER
Thesis Concept: Disaster Preparation on Behance
Thesis Concept: Disaster Preparation on Behance

VIDEO

The Worst Sea Disasters In History
My Thesis Journey ❤️ #artist #struggle #viral #thesis2k22 #advantagesanddisadvantages #insects
Disaster Management essay in English
3 Awesome Things About Doing a Thesis
Thesis diaries eps. 3
My Thesis Defense

COMMENTS

My thesis is an absolute pile of rubbish. : r/GradSchool
The thesis is just a vessel to learn, develop and improve skills in critical thinking, problem-solving and producing independent research at a high level. Think of it as an apprenticeship in research, of sorts. Like other apprenticeships (say, cooking), you are required to learn skills and theory in the kitchen.
Is there a way to save my career from absolute disaster?
43. I am in my fifth year and I am about to submit my Applied Mechanics PhD thesis in. However, I always felt absolutely incompetent in the field. I tried improving my weak areas by self study, taking up challenging projects, but always ended up with either abandoning the idea or settling with a less rigorous work.
How I Wrote My Masters' Thesis in One Week
Here are two ways that I managed to do it. Write. Even when you have zero motivation. This applies especially to those who are in the situation I was in. Since the aim is to fill your content ...
citations
I'm in a total disaster right now because it feels like I have no chance of being a researcher anymore. Months ago, I submitted my Bachelor's thesis. Days later, I realized that I printed a wrong version of it (the version before the final) so I asked permission from my adviser and the librarian if I can replace the copies because of the mistake.
Disaster Relief Architecture
There is a lot of information now, especially compared to 5 years ago, when I prepared my undergraduate thesis. As mentioned before, disaster relief architecture works in many complex phases - I chose to explore the early stages. I also did not have any other theses to refer to at the time..
All-nighters and self-doubt: learn from our dissertation disasters
The dissertation was "a long, arduous process" for William Lloyd, a recent journalism graduate at Kingston University. "I caught the flu for the second time in my life, a week before it was ...
5 Surefire Ways To Fail Your Academic Thesis
In a nutshell, I was a disaster waiting to happen. Thank God, I managed to hand in a rather decent-looking piece of work by the deadline. Bitten by my painful experience (during my undergraduate thesis-writing), I became twice shy during graduate school and resolved never to repeat the blunders I made while rushing through (i.e. speed-typing my ...
PDF PhD RESEARCH THESIS
PhD RESEARCH THESIS The Awareness and Knowledge of Post-Disaster Emotional Responses in Adult Community Members and Nurses in Yogyakarta, Indonesia Dewi Retno Pamungkas, S. Kep., Ns., MNg This thesis is submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Adelaide Nursing School The University of Adelaide
Defending Your Dissertation: A Guide
The first thing you should know is that your defense has already begun. It started the minute you began working on your dissertation— maybe even in some of the classes you took beforehand that helped you formulate your ideas. This, according to Dr. Celeste Atkins, is why it's so important to identify a good mentor early in graduate school.
What Is a Disaster?
Abstract. Fieldwork is stimulating, challenging, and provides immediate rewards for the researcher. Although contemplating theoretical and paradigmatic issues in one's office may be less exciting by comparison, it is important to deal with such tasks. Devising a definition of disasters or assessing consensus on a definition is not only a part ...
How to Write a Thesis Statement
Step 2: Write your initial answer. After some initial research, you can formulate a tentative answer to this question. At this stage it can be simple, and it should guide the research process and writing process. The internet has had more of a positive than a negative effect on education.
Surviving a PhD disaster
Surviving a PhD disaster. This post is written by Brian Flemming, a mathematician working as a Systems Engineer in Edinburgh. He completed an Engineering Doctorate (EngD) as a mature student at Heriot Watt University in 2014 and is now appreciating the freedom to continue studying and spend time away on the hills, without the associated "PhD ...
What Is a Thesis?
A thesis is a type of research paper based on your original research. It is usually submitted as the final step of a master's program or a capstone to a bachelor's degree. Writing a thesis can be a daunting experience. Other than a dissertation, it is one of the longest pieces of writing students typically complete.
Research in disaster settings: a systematic qualitative review of
Background Conducting research during or in the aftermath of disasters poses many specific practical and ethical challenges. This is particularly the case with research involving human subjects. The extraordinary circumstances of research conducted in disaster settings require appropriate regulations to ensure the protection of human participants. The goal of this study is to systematically ...
Before Disaster Strikes: An Analysis of Emergency Management Planning
The thesis will demonstrate that disaster policy is a complex issue and approaches to disaster response vary. Likewise, government regulations often hinder opportunities ... The intent of my thesis is to provide a thorough analysis of the emergency management planning programs from a sampling of communities in the United States: Baton Rouge,
Academic 'disaster scripts' in a time of disasters
A disaster script is not a talisman — it doesn't stop bad things happening to you, and it doesn't stop the outcome of a disaster being disastrous. It just gives you a practiced way to react in a crisis that maybe gives you a chance to survive. Disaster scripts are most useful where you have an early warning system, which gives you a ...
Modular Units in Post-Disaster Housing Reconstruction
Leigh Dublin for her invaluable help in revising my thesis and keeping me motivated throughout the process, even when I wanted to throw in the towel. ... effort after Hurricane Sandy to further grasp the nature of a modular housing solution in the post-disaster setting. This thesis will utilize semi-structured interviews with professionals at ...
Thesis Generator
Include an opposing viewpoint to your main idea, if applicable. A good thesis statement acknowledges that there is always another side to the argument. So, include an opposing viewpoint (a counterargument) to your opinion. Basically, write down what a person who disagrees with your position might say about your topic.
Full article: Resilience after natural disasters: the process of
ABSTRACT. Background: Disasters negatively impact mental health and well-being.Studying how people adapt and recover after adversity is crucial for disaster preparedness and response. Objective: This study examined how differentially affected communities harness their resources to adapt to the aftermath of a flood.We predicted that stronger individual, interpersonal, and community resources ...
PDF Living with Disaster: Risk, Housing Instability, and Post-Disaster
For my thesis, the term "disaster" represents "social events" that "involve the juxtaposition of physical forces — geological, atmospheric, technological, and other forces — and vulnerable human communities" (Tierney 2019:4). It is also important to acknowledge the difference between a disaster and a hazard. A hazard refers to ...
Vale's Failures Don't Make It Uninvestable
It started with the Mariana dam disaster in 2020, which killed 19 people. ... Thesis Risk. The largest risk to our thesis is iron ore prices. Iron ore is primarily used in infrastructure, and ...
PDF American University of Beirut Disaster Management and Community
copies of my thesis; (b) include such copies in the archives and digital repositories of the University; and (c) make freely available such copies to third parties for research or ... Disaster management experiences differ from one country to the other. The role of the government is mainly in the prevention of disaster. This role is centered on ...
Ethical Decision Making in Disaster and Emergency Management: A
Decision making in disaster and emergency management guides the allocation of resources and subsequent benefits and impacts upon affected communities. ... abstracts, citations, thesis, unverified or unsubstantiated press or news media reports, and articles that are not related to management of disaster and application of ethical practice were ...
Trump mocks judges in legal battles, asks who is the 'worst ...
(The Hill) — Former President Trump mocked judges who have been a part of his various legal battles on Saturday, asking which of them is the worst or the most corrupt. It continues an assault on ...
115 reasons why Man City's dominance is a disaster for the ...
it is affecting every club. . The Premier League campaigns for self-regulation. while its repeated champion stands accused by the league itself of breaking its rules in the most egregious manner ...
This new generative erase is a total disaster. It freezes up my
This new generative erase is a total disaster. It freezes up my - Microsoft Community. Contribute to the Bing forum! This new generative erase is a total disaster. It freezes up my computer by using a ridiculous amount of memory. Why on earth did you change it to this? It's totally useless. This new generative erase in Photo is a total disaster.
Risk of a disaster: Risk knowledge, interpretation and resilience
Context of the research 'Disaster risk' is often defined as the proclivity to be impacted by natural hazards. The possibility of being impacted by a disaster arises from the interaction between existing vulnerability and local hazards (Blaikie et al. 2014).Whilst inappropriate social and development policies contribute to vulnerability and risk (Oliver-Smith et al. 2016), the exposure and ...
Bad news for Biden (and all Americans): Inflation is creeping higher at
There's rarely a good time for prices to rise a lot. Good luck finding someone who will tell you they enjoy it when their hard-earned dollars can't stretch as far.
Myth vs. Fact Regarding FEMA Disaster Assistance
Myth: I can't receive assistance if I've already cleaned up or repaired damage caused by the disaster. Fact: You can still apply for FEMA assistance if you've started your recovery. Submit photos of the damage and receipts for all repairs with your application. Myth: I'm a renter. FEMA assistance is only for homeowners.
How the Columbia disaster changed the future of spaceflight
The four-part documentary concludes at 9 p.m. ET/PT Sunday. CNN —. Perhaps more than any other moment in NASA's history, the Columbia shuttle disaster reshaped the US space agency's approach ...

Disaster Relief Architecture - Thesis

Block this user

Last Commented Threads

Last Created Threads

Discussed News

Discussed Features

All-nighters and self-doubt: learn from our dissertation disasters

I got the flu, and had to pull three all-nighters in a row

My supervisor told me I was ‘not a scholar’

Avoid unnecessary tinkering

I should have looked for more interesting research material

Different tutors wanted different things - and some didn’t care

I found it was easy to get sidetracked

There’s nothing quite so soul-destroying as losing a page reference

Top tip: don’t drink and dissertate

Comments (…)

Defending Your Dissertation: A Guide

What Is a Disaster?

Access this chapter

Author information

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Download citation

Share this chapter

Surviving a PhD disaster

Share this:

Whisper to me....

Discover more from The Thesis Whisperer

Have a language expert improve your writing

What Is a Thesis? | Ultimate Guide & Examples

Thesis template

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Table of contents

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Thesis examples

Theoretical framework

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Research in disaster settings: a systematic qualitative review of ethical guidelines

Conclusions

Search strategy

Inclusion/exclusion criteria

Qualitative analysis

Issuing organizations

Content of the guidelines

Vulnerability as a concept

Risks and burdens

Risk management

Decisional capacity of research subjects

Research ethics committee (REC) review process

Abbreviations

Acknowledgements

Availability of data and materials

Authors’ contributions

Competing interests

Consent for publication

Corresponding author

Additional files

Additional file 2: Table S2.

Additional file 3: Table S3.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

BMC Medical Ethics

Academic ‘disaster scripts’ in a time of disasters

Share this:

Out of sight: researchers and eyes

Pointless writing for pointless writing machines?: more thoughts on AI and human writing

Writing as poaching: strange encounters with de Certeau

Get the latest blog posts

115 reasons why Man City’s dominance is a disaster for the Premier League

My verdict on every Premier League team after Gameweek 32

Torquay United are drifting aimlessly and the fans have had enough

Contribute to the Bing forum!

This new generative erase is a total disaster. It freezes up my computer by using a ridiculous amount of memory. Why on earth did you change it to this? It's totally useless.

Report abuse

Replies (1) 

Risk of a disaster: Risk knowledge, interpretation and resilience