突发事件、危机和灾害:拓宽研究议程

IF 2.6 3区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Simon Hollis
{"title":"突发事件、危机和灾害:拓宽研究议程","authors":"Simon Hollis","doi":"10.1111/1468-5973.12538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The idea of contingency emphasizes uncertainty, the consequences of choice as well as our dependence on persons and events outside our control and ability to comprehend. The concept is thus integral to how we define and understand disasters and crises. Yet the way in which contingency informs research agendas is often restricted to a dialectic reaction to uncertainty, the unknown, and the uncontrollable. There is a tendency to explain or prescribe solutions based on an underlying impetus that champions certainty over chaos, knowledge over ignorance, and control over disorder. This type of thinking has been influential in shaping normative and epistemological research trajectories in crises and disaster disciplines, but it has also restricted the contours of what counts as acceptable research on disasters and crises. In this article, I demonstrate how alternative modes of inquiry can transcend this dialectic by producing knowledge in reception to – rather than in contention from—contingency. In an effort to find a middle road between overemphasizing contingency or necessity, critical realism is used to illustrate how uncertainty, the unknown and the uncontrollable can be recast as an accepted part of a stratified reality leading towards alternative ways of knowing and researching disasters and crises.</p>","PeriodicalId":47674,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.12538","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contingency, crises & disasters: Broadening the research agenda\",\"authors\":\"Simon Hollis\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1468-5973.12538\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The idea of contingency emphasizes uncertainty, the consequences of choice as well as our dependence on persons and events outside our control and ability to comprehend. The concept is thus integral to how we define and understand disasters and crises. Yet the way in which contingency informs research agendas is often restricted to a dialectic reaction to uncertainty, the unknown, and the uncontrollable. There is a tendency to explain or prescribe solutions based on an underlying impetus that champions certainty over chaos, knowledge over ignorance, and control over disorder. This type of thinking has been influential in shaping normative and epistemological research trajectories in crises and disaster disciplines, but it has also restricted the contours of what counts as acceptable research on disasters and crises. In this article, I demonstrate how alternative modes of inquiry can transcend this dialectic by producing knowledge in reception to – rather than in contention from—contingency. In an effort to find a middle road between overemphasizing contingency or necessity, critical realism is used to illustrate how uncertainty, the unknown and the uncontrollable can be recast as an accepted part of a stratified reality leading towards alternative ways of knowing and researching disasters and crises.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47674,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.12538\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.12538\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.12538","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

突发事件的概念强调不确定性、选择的后果以及我们对超出我们控制和理解能力的人和事的依赖性。因此,这一概念与我们如何定义和理解灾害和危机密不可分。然而,突发事件影响研究议程的方式往往局限于对不确定性、未知性和不可控性的辩证反应。人们倾向于根据一种潜在的推动力来解释或规定解决方案,这种推动力是:肯定战胜混乱、知识战胜无知、控制战胜无序。这种思维方式对危机和灾难学科的规范和认识论研究轨迹的形成具有影响力,但也限制了可接受的灾难和危机研究的范围。在这篇文章中,我将展示另一种探究模式如何能够超越这种辩证关系,在接受--而不是对抗--突发事件的过程中产生知识。为了在过分强调偶然性或必然性之间找到一条中间道路,批判现实主义被用来说明不确定性、未知性和不可控性如何被重新塑造为分层现实的一个公认部分,从而走向认识和研究灾害与危机的另一种方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Contingency, crises & disasters: Broadening the research agenda

Contingency, crises & disasters: Broadening the research agenda

The idea of contingency emphasizes uncertainty, the consequences of choice as well as our dependence on persons and events outside our control and ability to comprehend. The concept is thus integral to how we define and understand disasters and crises. Yet the way in which contingency informs research agendas is often restricted to a dialectic reaction to uncertainty, the unknown, and the uncontrollable. There is a tendency to explain or prescribe solutions based on an underlying impetus that champions certainty over chaos, knowledge over ignorance, and control over disorder. This type of thinking has been influential in shaping normative and epistemological research trajectories in crises and disaster disciplines, but it has also restricted the contours of what counts as acceptable research on disasters and crises. In this article, I demonstrate how alternative modes of inquiry can transcend this dialectic by producing knowledge in reception to – rather than in contention from—contingency. In an effort to find a middle road between overemphasizing contingency or necessity, critical realism is used to illustrate how uncertainty, the unknown and the uncontrollable can be recast as an accepted part of a stratified reality leading towards alternative ways of knowing and researching disasters and crises.

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
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
12.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management is an invaluable source of information on all aspects of contingency planning, scenario analysis and crisis management in both corporate and public sectors. It focuses on the opportunities and threats facing organizations and presents analysis and case studies of crisis prevention, crisis planning, recovery and turnaround management. With contributions from world-wide sources including corporations, governmental agencies, think tanks and influential academics, this publication provides a vital platform for the exchange of strategic and operational experience, information and knowledge.
×
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