Social media and crowdsourcing in disaster risk management: Trends, gaps, and insights from the current state of research

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy Pub Date : 2024-03-22 DOI:10.1002/rhc3.12297

Anne B. Nielsen, Dario Landwehr, Juliette Nicolaï, Tejal Patil, Emmanuel Raju

{"title":"Social media and crowdsourcing in disaster risk management: Trends, gaps, and insights from the current state of research","authors":"Anne B. Nielsen, Dario Landwehr, Juliette Nicolaï, Tejal Patil, Emmanuel Raju","doi":"10.1002/rhc3.12297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social media and crowdsourcing (SMCS) are increasingly used as tools to govern disasters. Nevertheless, we have a limited understanding of how these technologies support disaster risk management (DRM). Based on a comprehensive literature review of 237 papers, we present a state‐of‐the‐art of the research field linking SMCS with DRM. The paper provides insights into major trends in research published from 2008 to 2023. It maps the use of SMCS across disaster phases, disaster types, research design, and geographies before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Our results show that existing research predominantly focuses on preparedness and response activities. Moreover, research on SMCS tends to favor (single) case studies and secondary data, and despite a minor shift following the COVID‐19 pandemic, research is dominated by North America, South Asia, Australia, and Europe. There is very little research coming from severely disaster‐prone regions in the Global South on SMCS in disasters with a few exceptions. Research should focus on the power shifts that these technologies produce, the contexts in which they are supposed to be applied, and the sociocultural conditions that co‐produce, potentially vulnerable, outcomes of SMCS in disaster risk management.","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12297","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Social media and crowdsourcing (SMCS) are increasingly used as tools to govern disasters. Nevertheless, we have a limited understanding of how these technologies support disaster risk management (DRM). Based on a comprehensive literature review of 237 papers, we present a state‐of‐the‐art of the research field linking SMCS with DRM. The paper provides insights into major trends in research published from 2008 to 2023. It maps the use of SMCS across disaster phases, disaster types, research design, and geographies before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Our results show that existing research predominantly focuses on preparedness and response activities. Moreover, research on SMCS tends to favor (single) case studies and secondary data, and despite a minor shift following the COVID‐19 pandemic, research is dominated by North America, South Asia, Australia, and Europe. There is very little research coming from severely disaster‐prone regions in the Global South on SMCS in disasters with a few exceptions. Research should focus on the power shifts that these technologies produce, the contexts in which they are supposed to be applied, and the sociocultural conditions that co‐produce, potentially vulnerable, outcomes of SMCS in disaster risk management.

查看原文本刊更多论文

灾害风险管理中的社交媒体和众包：研究现状的趋势、差距和启示

社交媒体和众包（SMCS）越来越多地被用作治理灾害的工具。然而，我们对这些技术如何支持灾害风险管理（DRM）的了解还很有限。在对 237 篇论文进行全面文献综述的基础上，我们介绍了将 SMCS 与 DRM 联系起来的研究领域的最新情况。本文深入分析了 2008 年至 2023 年期间发表的主要研究趋势。它描绘了在 2019 年冠状病毒病（COVID-19）大流行前后，SMCS 在不同灾害阶段、灾害类型、研究设计和地域的应用情况。我们的研究结果表明，现有研究主要侧重于备灾和应对活动。此外，关于 SMCS 的研究倾向于（单一）案例研究和二手数据，尽管在 COVID-19 大流行后发生了细微的变化，但研究主要集中在北美、南亚、澳大利亚和欧洲。除少数例外情况外，来自全球南部严重易受灾害地区的关于灾害中的 SMCS 的研究很少。研究重点应放在这些技术所产生的权力转移、这些技术的应用环境，以及在灾害风险管理中共同产生 SMCS 潜在脆弱结果的社会文化条件。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-

CiteScore

7.50

自引率

8.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： Scholarship on risk, hazards, and crises (emergencies, disasters, or public policy/organizational crises) has developed into mature and distinct fields of inquiry. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy (RHCPP) addresses the governance implications of the important questions raised for the respective fields. The relationships between risk, hazards, and crisis raise fundamental questions with broad social science and policy implications. During unstable situations of acute or chronic danger and substantial uncertainty (i.e. a crisis), important and deeply rooted societal institutions, norms, and values come into play. The purpose of RHCPP is to provide a forum for research and commentary that examines societies’ understanding of and measures to address risk,hazards, and crises, how public policies do and should address these concerns, and to what effect. The journal is explicitly designed to encourage a broad range of perspectives by integrating work from a variety of disciplines. The journal will look at social science theory and policy design across the spectrum of risks and crises — including natural and technological hazards, public health crises, terrorism, and societal and environmental disasters. Papers will analyze the ways societies deal with both unpredictable and predictable events as public policy questions, which include topics such as crisis governance, loss and liability, emergency response, agenda setting, and the social and cultural contexts in which hazards, risks and crises are perceived and defined. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy invites dialogue and is open to new approaches. We seek scholarly work that combines academic quality with practical relevance. We especially welcome authors writing on the governance of risk and crises to submit their manuscripts.