灾害的法医调查:过去的成就和新的方向

IF 1.3 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Irasema Alcántara-Ayala, Ian Burton, Allan Lavell, Anthony Oliver-Smith, Alonso Brenes, Thea Dickinson
{"title":"灾害的法医调查:过去的成就和新的方向","authors":"Irasema Alcántara-Ayala, Ian Burton, Allan Lavell, Anthony Oliver-Smith, Alonso Brenes, Thea Dickinson","doi":"10.4102/jamba.v15i1.1490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the 2020s, understanding disaster risk requires a strong and clear recognition of values and goals that influence the use of political and economic power and social authority to guide growth and development. This configuration of values, goals, power and authority may also lead to concrete drivers of risk at any one time. Building on previous disaster risk frameworks and experiences from practice, since 2010, the ‘Forensic Investigations of Disasters (FORIN)’ approach has been developed to support transdisciplinary research on the transformational pathways societies may follow to recognise and address root causes and drivers of disaster risk. This article explores and assesses the achievements and failures of the FORIN approach. It also focuses on shedding light upon key requirements for new approaches and understandings of disaster risk research. The new requirements stem not only from the uncompleted ambitions of FORIN and the forensic approach but also from dramatic and ongoing transformational changes characterised by climate change, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the threat of global international confrontation, among other potential crises, both those that can be identified and those not yet identified or unknown. Contribution: Disasters associated with extreme natural events cannot be treated in isolation. A comprehensive “all risks” or “all disasters” approach is essential for a global transformation, which could lead to a better world order. To achieve this, an Intergovernmental Panel for Disaster Risk is suggested to assess risk science periodically and work towards sustainability, human rights, and accountability, within a development and human security frame and on a systemic basis and integrated perspective.","PeriodicalId":51823,"journal":{"name":"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Forensic investigations of disasters: Past achievements and new directions\",\"authors\":\"Irasema Alcántara-Ayala, Ian Burton, Allan Lavell, Anthony Oliver-Smith, Alonso Brenes, Thea Dickinson\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/jamba.v15i1.1490\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the 2020s, understanding disaster risk requires a strong and clear recognition of values and goals that influence the use of political and economic power and social authority to guide growth and development. This configuration of values, goals, power and authority may also lead to concrete drivers of risk at any one time. Building on previous disaster risk frameworks and experiences from practice, since 2010, the ‘Forensic Investigations of Disasters (FORIN)’ approach has been developed to support transdisciplinary research on the transformational pathways societies may follow to recognise and address root causes and drivers of disaster risk. This article explores and assesses the achievements and failures of the FORIN approach. It also focuses on shedding light upon key requirements for new approaches and understandings of disaster risk research. The new requirements stem not only from the uncompleted ambitions of FORIN and the forensic approach but also from dramatic and ongoing transformational changes characterised by climate change, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the threat of global international confrontation, among other potential crises, both those that can be identified and those not yet identified or unknown. Contribution: Disasters associated with extreme natural events cannot be treated in isolation. A comprehensive “all risks” or “all disasters” approach is essential for a global transformation, which could lead to a better world order. To achieve this, an Intergovernmental Panel for Disaster Risk is suggested to assess risk science periodically and work towards sustainability, human rights, and accountability, within a development and human security frame and on a systemic basis and integrated perspective.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v15i1.1490\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v15i1.1490","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在21世纪20年代,理解灾害风险需要强烈而明确地认识到影响政治和经济权力以及社会权威的使用以指导增长和发展的价值观和目标。这种价值观、目标、权力和权威的配置也可能在任何时候导致具体的风险驱动因素。基于以前的灾害风险框架和实践经验,自2010年以来,“灾害法医调查(FORIN)”方法得到了发展,以支持跨学科研究社会可能遵循的转型途径,以认识和解决灾害风险的根本原因和驱动因素。本文探讨和评估了FORIN方法的成就和失败。它还侧重于阐明对灾害风险研究的新方法和理解的关键要求。新的要求不仅源于FORIN和法医方法尚未完成的雄心,还源于以气候变化、2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行和全球国际对抗威胁为特征的巨大和持续的转型变化,以及其他可识别和尚未识别或未知的潜在危机。贡献:不能孤立地对待与极端自然事件有关的灾害。全面的“所有风险”或“所有灾难”方法对于全球转型至关重要,这可能导致更好的世界秩序。为实现这一目标,建议成立一个政府间灾害风险专门委员会,定期评估风险科学,并在发展和人类安全框架内,以系统的基础和综合的角度,努力实现可持续性、人权和问责制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Forensic investigations of disasters: Past achievements and new directions
In the 2020s, understanding disaster risk requires a strong and clear recognition of values and goals that influence the use of political and economic power and social authority to guide growth and development. This configuration of values, goals, power and authority may also lead to concrete drivers of risk at any one time. Building on previous disaster risk frameworks and experiences from practice, since 2010, the ‘Forensic Investigations of Disasters (FORIN)’ approach has been developed to support transdisciplinary research on the transformational pathways societies may follow to recognise and address root causes and drivers of disaster risk. This article explores and assesses the achievements and failures of the FORIN approach. It also focuses on shedding light upon key requirements for new approaches and understandings of disaster risk research. The new requirements stem not only from the uncompleted ambitions of FORIN and the forensic approach but also from dramatic and ongoing transformational changes characterised by climate change, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the threat of global international confrontation, among other potential crises, both those that can be identified and those not yet identified or unknown. Contribution: Disasters associated with extreme natural events cannot be treated in isolation. A comprehensive “all risks” or “all disasters” approach is essential for a global transformation, which could lead to a better world order. To achieve this, an Intergovernmental Panel for Disaster Risk is suggested to assess risk science periodically and work towards sustainability, human rights, and accountability, within a development and human security frame and on a systemic basis and integrated perspective.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies
Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
37 weeks
×
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