Institutional resilience and disaster governance: How countries respond to Black Swan events

IF 2.6 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Brian Woodall , Adjo Amekudzi-Kennedy , Maya Orthous Inchauste , Samyuthka Sundararajan , Adrian Medina , Simrill Smith , Kathryn Popp
{"title":"Institutional resilience and disaster governance: How countries respond to Black Swan events","authors":"Brian Woodall ,&nbsp;Adjo Amekudzi-Kennedy ,&nbsp;Maya Orthous Inchauste ,&nbsp;Samyuthka Sundararajan ,&nbsp;Adrian Medina ,&nbsp;Simrill Smith ,&nbsp;Kathryn Popp","doi":"10.1016/j.pdisas.2024.100329","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In a worldwide hazard environment exacerbated by the effects of climate change and the increasing interconnectedness of built and social systems, disasters are becoming more frequent, more destructive, and locally more variegated. Yet some communities are more disaster resilient than others. What explains this? This study employs institutional resilience as a lens through which to compare the responses to large-scale disasters taken by Australia, Japan, and The Netherlands, three affluent democracies with distinctive institutional arrangements. In so doing, we use the Swan Matrix as a yardstick for gauging the adaptive capacity of different systems of disaster governance. By focusing on human efforts to build resilience, we draw attention to contextual factors, particularly the type of institutional arrangement, which, our observations suggest, shape disaster governance. We conclude with a call for further comparative research into the major disaster governance systems in a hazard environment in which large-scale disasters are becoming commonplace.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":52341,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Disaster Science","volume":"22 ","pages":"Article 100329"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259006172400019X/pdfft?md5=3cd19bcf836f3f9da25fa8b4e558f030&pid=1-s2.0-S259006172400019X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Disaster Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259006172400019X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a worldwide hazard environment exacerbated by the effects of climate change and the increasing interconnectedness of built and social systems, disasters are becoming more frequent, more destructive, and locally more variegated. Yet some communities are more disaster resilient than others. What explains this? This study employs institutional resilience as a lens through which to compare the responses to large-scale disasters taken by Australia, Japan, and The Netherlands, three affluent democracies with distinctive institutional arrangements. In so doing, we use the Swan Matrix as a yardstick for gauging the adaptive capacity of different systems of disaster governance. By focusing on human efforts to build resilience, we draw attention to contextual factors, particularly the type of institutional arrangement, which, our observations suggest, shape disaster governance. We conclude with a call for further comparative research into the major disaster governance systems in a hazard environment in which large-scale disasters are becoming commonplace.

机构复原力和灾害治理:各国如何应对黑天鹅事件
气候变化的影响以及建筑和社会系统之间日益紧密的相互联系加剧了全球范围内的灾害环境,灾害变得更加频繁、更具破坏性,在当地也更加五花八门。然而,有些社区的抗灾能力却比其他社区更强。这是为什么呢?本研究以制度复原力为视角,比较澳大利亚、日本和荷兰这三个拥有独特制度安排的富裕民主国家对大规模灾害所采取的应对措施。在此过程中,我们将天鹅矩阵作为衡量不同灾害治理体系适应能力的标准。通过关注人类在建设抗灾能力方面所做的努力,我们提请人们注意环境因素,尤其是制度安排的类型,我们的观察表明,这些因素决定了灾害治理的方式。最后,我们呼吁在大规模灾害变得司空见惯的灾害环境中,对主要的灾害治理体系开展进一步的比较研究。
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
Progress in Disaster Science
Progress in Disaster Science Social Sciences-Safety Research
CiteScore
14.60
自引率
3.20%
发文量
51
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Progress in Disaster Science is a Gold Open Access journal focusing on integrating research and policy in disaster research, and publishes original research papers and invited viewpoint articles on disaster risk reduction; response; emergency management and recovery. A key part of the Journal's Publication output will see key experts invited to assess and comment on the current trends in disaster research, as well as highlight key papers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信