A Systematic Review of Forensic Approaches to Disasters: Gaps and Challenges

Adriano Mota Ferreira; Victor Marchezini; Tatiana Sussel Gon&#231;alves Mendes; Miguel Angel Trejo-Rangel; Allan Yu Iwama

doi:10.1007/s13753-023-00515-9

Volume 14 Issue 5

Nov. 2023

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > International Journal of Disaster Risk Science > 2023 > 14(5): 722-735

Adriano Mota Ferreira, Victor Marchezini, Tatiana Sussel Gonçalves Mendes, Miguel Angel Trejo-Rangel, Allan Yu Iwama. A Systematic Review of Forensic Approaches to Disasters: Gaps and Challenges[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2023, 14(5): 722-735. doi: 10.1007/s13753-023-00515-9

Citation:

Adriano Mota Ferreira, Victor Marchezini, Tatiana Sussel Gonçalves Mendes, Miguel Angel Trejo-Rangel, Allan Yu Iwama. A Systematic Review of Forensic Approaches to Disasters: Gaps and Challenges[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2023, 14(5): 722-735. doi: 10.1007/s13753-023-00515-9

Citation:

Adriano Mota Ferreira, Victor Marchezini, Tatiana Sussel Gonçalves Mendes, Miguel Angel Trejo-Rangel, Allan Yu Iwama. A Systematic Review of Forensic Approaches to Disasters: Gaps and Challenges[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2023, 14(5): 722-735. doi: 10.1007/s13753-023-00515-9

PDF

A Systematic Review of Forensic Approaches to Disasters: Gaps and Challenges

doi: 10.1007/s13753-023-00515-9

1. Graduate Program in Disasters, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (Unesp), São José dos Campos, SP, 12247-004, Brazil;
2. Cemaden-National Center for Monitoring and Early Warning of Natural Disasters, São José dos Campos, SP, 12247-004, Brazil;
3. Natural Hazards Center, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309, USA;
4. Department of Environmental Engineering, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (Unesp), São José dos Campos, SP, 12247-004, Brazil;
5. Irish Climate Analysis and Research UnitS (ICARUS), Department of Geography, Maynooth University, Maynooth, W23 F2H6, Kildare, Ireland;
6. Graduate Program in Development and Environment, Federal University of Paraíba, João Pessoa, PB, 58051-900, Brazil

Funds:

Adriano Mota Ferreira acknowledges the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel – CAPES (Grant No. 88887.634411/2021–00). Victor Marchezini acknowledges the Sao Paulo Research Foundation – Fapesp (Grant No. 2018/06093-4) for his scholarship to serve as a visiting postdoctoral researcher at the Natural Hazards Center (NHC) at the University of Colorado Boulder, between June 2022 and June 2023.

Accepted Date: 2023-10-05

Available Online: 2023-11-23

Publish Date: 2023-10-30

Abstract

Abstract

Disaster forensic approaches aim to identify the causes of disasters to support disaster risk management. However, few studies have conducted a systematic literature review of scientific articles that labeled themselves as a forensic approach to disasters. This article provides a qualitative analysis of these forensic studies, focusing on five main issues: (1) the methodologies applied; (2) the forensic approaches used in the disaster risk management phases; (3) the hazards addressed; (4) if the methodologies involve social participation, and using what types of participation; and (5) if there are references to urban planning in the scientific studies analyzed. Our results showed a predominance of the Forensic Investigations of Disasters (FORIN) and Post-Event Review Capability (PERC) methodologies used in isolation or combination. There is a need for methodologies that engage people in participatory FORIN, fostering the co-production of knowledge and action research approaches.
- Dynamic pressures,
- Forensic investigation,
- Participatory research,
- Risk drivers,
- Root causes

FullText(HTML)

References(65)

References

[1]	Albagli, S., and A.Y. Iwama. 2022. Citizen science and the right to research: Building local knowledge of climate change impacts. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications 9(1): Article 39.
[2]	Alcántara-Ayala, I., and A. Oliver-Smith. 2014. ICL Latin-American network: On the road to landslide reduction capacity building. Landslides 11(2): 315-318.
[3]	Alcántara-Ayala, I., O. Altan, D.N. Baker, S. Briceño, S.L. Cutter, H. Gupta, A. Holloway, A. Ismail-Zadeh, et al. 2015. Disaster risks research and assessment to promote risk reduction and management. Paris: ICSU-ISSC.
[4]	Alcántara-Ayala, I. 2019. Time in a bottle: Challenges to disaster studies in Latin America and the Caribbean. Disasters 43(S1): S18-S27.
[5]	Alcántara-Ayala, I., and A. Oliver-Smith. 2019. Early warning systems: Lost in translation or late by definition? A FORIN approach. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 10(3): 317-331.
[6]	Amaral, G.C., A.M. Ferreira, D. de Souza Sardinha, P.H.B.J. Menezes, V. Marchezini, and R. de Oliveira Tiezzi. 2023. Official and unofficial data supporting disaster risk management in medium-sized cities. Natural Hazards Research 3(1): 89-96.
[7]	Arnstein, S.R. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35(4): 216-224.
[8]	Atanga, R.A. 2020. The role of local community leaders in flood disaster risk management strategy making in Accra. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 43: Article 101358.
[9]	Blaikie, P., T. Cannon, I. Davis, and B. Wisner. 1994. At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. New York: Routledge.
[10]	Bosher, L., K. Chmutina, and D. van Niekerk. 2021. Stop going around in circles: Towards a reconceptualisation of disaster risk management phases. Disaster Prevention and Management 30(4/5): 525-537.
[11]	Bronstert, A., A. Agarwal, B. Boessenkool, I. Crisologo, M. Fischer, M. Heistermann, L. Köhn-Reich, and J.A. López-Tarazón et al. 2018. Forensic hydro-meteorological analysis of an extreme flash flood: The 2016-05-29 event in Braunsbach, SW Germany. Science of the Total Environment 630: 977-991.
[12]	Bubb, J., and L. Le Dé. 2022. Participation as a requirement: Towards more inclusion or further exclusion? The community disaster and climate change committees in Vanuatu as a case study. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 76: Article 102992.
[13]	Burton, I. 2010. Forensic disaster investigations in depth: A new case study model. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 52(5): 36-41.
[14]	Carvalho, C.M., L. Luiz Giatti, N. Fagerholm, A.M. Bedran-Martins, and M. Kytta. 2021. Participatory Geographic Information Systems (PGIS) to assess water, energy, and food availability in a vulnerable community in Guarulhos (Brazil). International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development 13(3): 516-529.
[15]	Castro-Díaz, R., L.E. Delgado, A. Langle-Flores, M. Perevochtchikova, and V.H. Marín. 2022. A systematic review of social participation in ecosystem services studies in Latin America from a transdisciplinary perspective, 1996-2020. Science of the Total Environment 828: Article 154523.
[16]	CEDIM (Center for Disaster Management and Risk Reduction Technology). 2013. CEDIM Annual research report 2012—Focus on forensic disaster analysis in near real time. Potsdam, Germany: CEDIM.
[17]	CEDIM (Center for Disaster Management and Risk Reduction Technology). 2020. CEDIM Research report 2017-2020. Potsdam, Germany: CEDIM.
[18]	Chadegani, A.A., H. Salehi, M.M. Yunus, H. Farhadi, M. Fooladi, M. Farhadi, and N.A. Ebrahim. 2013. A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of science and Scopus databases. Asian Social Science 9(5). https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18.
[19]	Davis, I. 1978. Shelter after disaster. Oxford: Oxford Polytechnic Press.
[20]	Davis, I. 1987. Safe shelter within unsafe cities: Disaster vulnerability and rapid urbanization. Open House International 12(3): 5-15.
[21]	Davis, I. 2015. The vulnerability challenges. In Disaster risk management in Asia and the Pacific, ed. I. Davis, 65-108. London: Routledge.
[22]	DKKV (German Committee for Disaster Reduction). 2012. Detecting disaster root causes—A framework and an analytic tool for practitioners 2021. DKKV Publication Series 48. Bonn, Germany: DKKV.
[23]	Doggett, A.M. 2005. Root cause analysis: A framework for tool selection. Quality Management Journal 12(4): 34-45.
[24]	Dominguez, L., C. Bonadonna, C. Frischknecht, S. Menoni, and A. Garcia. 2021. Integrative post-event impact assessment framework for volcanic eruptions: A disaster forensic investigation of the 2011-2012 eruption of the Cordón Caulle volcano (Chile). Frontiers in Earth Science 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2021.645945.
[25]	Dyball, R., V.A. Brown, and M. Keen. 2009. Towards sustainability: Five strands of social learning. In Social learning towards a sustainable world: Principles, perspectives, and praxis, ed. A.E.J. Wals, 181-194. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
[26]	Ensor, J.E., S.E. Park, S.J. Attwood, A.M. Kaminski, and J.E. Johnson. 2018. Can community-based adaptation increase resilience?. Climate and Development 10(2): 134-151.
[27]	Fraser, A., S. Paterson, and M. Pelling. 2016. Developing frameworks to understand disaster causation: From forensic disaster investigation to risk root cause analysis. Journal of Extreme Events 3(2): Article 1650008.
[28]	Fraser, A., M. Pelling, A. Scolobig, and S. Mavrogenis. 2020. Relating root causes to local risk conditions: A comparative study of the institutional pathways to small-scale disasters in three urban flood contexts. Global Environmental Change 63: Article 102102.
[29]	French, A., R. Mechler, M. Arestegui, K. MacClune, and A. Cisneros. 2020. Root causes of recurrent catastrophe: The political ecology of El Niño-related disasters in Peru. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 47: Article 101539.
[30]	Frigo, B., P. Bartelt, B. Chiaia, I. Chiambretti, and M. Maggioni. 2021. A reverse dynamical investigation of the catastrophic wood-snow avalanche of 18 January 2017 at Rigopiano, Gran Sasso National Park, Italy. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 12(1): 40-55.
[31]	Geekiyanage, D., T. Fernando, and K. Keraminiyage. 2020. Assessing the state of the art in community engagement for participatory decision-making in disaster risk-sensitive urban development. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 51: Article 101847.
[32]	Girard, T., F. Wenzel, B. Khazai, T. Kunz-Plapp, J.E. Daniell, and S.A. Brink. 2014. Near-real-time analysis of publicly communicated disaster response information. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 5(2): 165-175.
[33]	Huxley, M., and A. Inch. 2020. Urban planning. In International encyclopedia of human geography, ed. R. Kitchin, and N. Thrift, 87-92. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
[34]	IRDR (Integrated Research on Disaster Risk). 2011. Forensic investigations of disasters: The FORIN Project. IRDR - FORIN Publication No. 1. Beijing: IRDR.
[35]	Jiménez, M., and P. Mujica. 2003. Citizen participation and social cohesion (Participación Ciudadana y Cohesión Social). Santiago, Chile: Corporación PARTICIPA. http://www.participa.cl/archivos/participacionycohesion.pdf. Accessed 3 Dec 2021.
[36]	Keating, A., K. Venkateswaran, M. Szoenyi, K. MacClune, and R. Mechler. 2016. From event analysis to global lessons: Disaster forensics for building resilience. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 16(7): 1603-1616.
[37]	Kitchenham, B., and S. Charters. 2007. Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Technical Report EBSE-2007-001. Keele University and Durham University Joint Report.
[38]	Kwazu, G.C., and A. Chang-Richards. 2022. A tool to assess livelihood preparedness for disasters: A study of Kaikōura Earthquake in New Zealand. Natural Hazards 113(1): 745-766.
[39]	Loli, M., S.A. Mitoulis, A. Tsatsis, J. Manousakis, R. Kourkoulis, and D. Zekkos. 2022. Flood characterization based on forensic analysis of bridge collapse using UAV reconnaissance and CFD simulations. Science of the Total Environment 822: Article 153661.
[40]	Marchezini, V., F.E.A. Horita, P.M. Matsuo, R. Trajber, M.A. Trejo-Rangel, and D. Olivato. 2018. A review of studies on participatory early warning systems (P-EWS): Pathways to support citizen science initiatives. Frontiers in Earth Science 6: Article 184.
[41]	McDermott, R., A. Fraser, J. Ensor, and H. Seddighi. 2022. The role of forensic investigation in systemic risk enquiry: Reflections from case studies of disasters in Istanbul, Kathmandu, Nairobi, and Quito. Progress in Disaster Science 16: Article 100262.
[42]	McKinley, J. 2017. The application of Geographic Information System (GIS) in forensics geoscience. Episodes 40(2): 166-171.
[43]	Mendoza, M., and R. Schwarze. 2019. Sequential disaster forensics: A case study on direct and Socio-economic impacts. Sustainability 11(21): Article 5898.
[44]	Mendoza, M.T. 2019. Forensic investigation of post-flood damage data to support spatial planning. https://www.politesi.polimi.it/handle/10589/145774. Accessed 6 Nov 2021.
[45]	Menoni, S., D. Molinari, F. Ballio, G. Minucci, O. Mejri, F. Atun, N. Berni, and C. Pandolfo. 2016. Flood damage: A model for consistent, complete and multipurpose scenarios. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 16(12): 2783-2797.
[46]	Nakasu, T., Y. Ono, and W. Pothisiri. 2017. Forensic investigation of the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami disaster: A case study of Rikuzentakata. Disaster Prevention and Management 26(3): 298-313.
[47]	Nakasu, T., Y. Ono, and W. Pothisiri. 2018. Why did Rikuzentakata have a high death toll in the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami disaster? Finding the devastating disaster’s root causes. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 27: 21-36.
[48]	Nakasu, T., M. Miyamoto, R. Bhula-or, T. Mokkhamakkul, S. Anantsuksomsri, Y. Amornkitvikai, S. Duangkaew, and T. Okazumi. 2020. Finding the devastating economic disaster’s root causes of the 2011 flood in Thailand: Why did supply chains make the disaster worse?. Journal of Disaster Research 15(5): 556-570.
[49]	Newmiller, J., W. Walker, W.E. Fleenor, and N. Pinter. 2020. Case study: Reconstructing the 2015 Dulcepamba River flood disaster. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience 26(4): 393-404.
[50]	Oliver-Smith, A., I. Alcántara-Ayala, I. Burton, and A. Lavell. 2016. Forensic investigation of disasters (FORIN): A conceptual framework and guide to research. IRDR FORIN Publication No. 2. Beijing: Integrated Research on Disaster Risk.
[51]	Oliver-Smith, A., I. Alcántara-Ayala, I. Burton, and A. Lavell. 2017. The social construction of disaster risk: Seeking root causes. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 22: 469-474.
[52]	Payo, A., R. Arnhardt, A.C.R. Galindo, P. Van Dong, M.A.L.G. Guzman, Y.O. Hatta, A. Bevan, and J.C.N. Monje. 2022. Developing an open database to support forensic investigation of disasters in South East Asia: FORINSEA v1.0. Frontiers in Earth Science 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2022.833599.
[53]	Powell, K.R., and S.R. Peterson. 2017. Coverage and quality: A comparison of Web of Science and Scopus databases for reporting faculty nursing publication metrics. Nursing Outlook 65(5): 572-578.
[54]	Prizzia, R. 2016. Climate change and disaster forensics. In Advanced sciences and technologies for security applications, ed. A. Masys, 223-247. Berlin: Springer.
[55]	Rana, I.A., M. Asim, A.B. Aslam, and A. Jamshed. 2021. Disaster management cycle and its application for flood risk reduction in urban areas of Pakistan. Urban Climate 38: Article 100893.
[56]	Sawalha, I.H. 2020. A contemporary perspective on the disaster management cycle. Foresight 22(4): 469-482.
[57]	Stolle, J., T. Takabatake, T. Mikami, T. Shibayama, N. Goseberg, I. Nistor, and E. Petriu. 2017. Experimental investigation of debris-induced loading in tsunami-like flood events. Geosciences 7(3): Article 74.
[58]	Trajber, R., C. Walker, V. Marchezini, P. Kraftl, D. Olivato, S. Hadfield-Hill, C. Zara, and S. Fernandes Monteiro. 2019. Promoting climate change transformation with young people in Brazil: Participatory action research through a looping approach. Action Research 17(1): 87-107.
[59]	UNDRR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction). n.d. Terminology. https://www.undrr.org/terminology. Accessed 10 Feb 2023.
[60]	Venkateswaran, K., K. MacClune, A. Keating, and M. Szönyi. 2015. The PERC manual: Learning from disasters to build resilience: A simple guide to conducting a post event review. Zurich, Switzerland: Zurich Insurance Group.
[61]	Venkateswaran, K., K. MacClune, A. Keating, and M. Szönyi. 2020. The PERC manual: Learning from disasters to build resilience: A guide to conducting a Post-Event Review 2020. https://www.preventionweb.net/publication/perc-manual-learning-disasters-build-resilience-guide-conducting-post-event-review-2020. Accessed 5 Oct 2023.
[62]	Wenzel, D., F. Comes, F. Fortier, J. Geldermann, and T. Müller (eds.). 2013. Near real-time forensic disaster analysis. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, May 2013, Baden-Baden, Germany.
[63]	Wisner, B., P. Blaikie, T. Cannon, and I. Davis. 2004. At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. London: Routledge.
[64]	Wisner, B., J.C. Gaillard, and I. Kelman. 2012. Framing disaster: Theories and stories seeking to understand hazards, vulnerability and risk. In The Routledge handbook of hazards and disaster risk reduction, ed. B. Wisner, J.C. Gaillard, and I. Kelman, 18-34. London: Routledge.
[65]	Yuan, F., and R. Liu. 2018. Crowdsourcing for forensic disaster investigations: Hurricane Harvey case study. Natural Hazards 93(3): 1529-1546.