Anne B. Nielsen, Dario Landwehr, Juliette Nicolaï, Tejal Patil, Emmanuel Raju
{"title":"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","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":"181 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":\"181 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"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}","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}
Social media and crowdsourcing in disaster risk management: Trends, gaps, and insights from the current state of research
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.
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.