Blind Spots on Achilles' Heel: The Limitations of Vulnerability and Resilience Mapping in Research

Jessica Heesen; Daniel F. Lorenz; Michael Nagenborg; Bettina Wenzel; Martin Voss

doi:10.1007/s13753-014-0014-5

Article Contents

Article Navigation > International Journal of Disaster Risk Science > 2014 > 5(1): 74-85

Jessica Heesen, Daniel F. Lorenz, Michael Nagenborg, Bettina Wenzel, Martin Voss. Blind Spots on Achilles' Heel: The Limitations of Vulnerability and Resilience Mapping in Research[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2014, 5(1): 74-85. doi: 10.1007/s13753-014-0014-5

Citation:

Jessica Heesen, Daniel F. Lorenz, Michael Nagenborg, Bettina Wenzel, Martin Voss. Blind Spots on Achilles' Heel: The Limitations of Vulnerability and Resilience Mapping in Research[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2014, 5(1): 74-85. doi: 10.1007/s13753-014-0014-5

Citation:

Jessica Heesen, Daniel F. Lorenz, Michael Nagenborg, Bettina Wenzel, Martin Voss. Blind Spots on Achilles' Heel: The Limitations of Vulnerability and Resilience Mapping in Research[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2014, 5(1): 74-85. doi: 10.1007/s13753-014-0014-5

PDF

Blind Spots on Achilles' Heel: The Limitations of Vulnerability and Resilience Mapping in Research

doi: 10.1007/s13753-014-0014-5

1 International Center for Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities(IZEW), University of Tübingen, 72074 Tübingen, Germany;
2 Disaster Research Unit(DRU), Freie Universität Berlin, 12165 Berlin, Germany;
3 Department of Philosophy, University of Twente, 7500 AE Enschede, Netherlands

Available Online: 2021-04-26

Abstract

Abstract

The mapping of vulnerability and resilience has become an important tool for vulnerability and resilience research. By definition, maps are selective representations. However, the predominant methods of mapping also have constraints. When addressing vulnerability and resilience, these limitations, barriers, and blind spots have to be taken into account. Some aspects cannot be easily mapped, such as specific forms of knowledge and interpretation, the processuality of vulnerability and resilience, the dynamics of social processes, the context of origin, the establishment of contingent interpretations, and so on. These limitations are not only theoretically important, but also are practically significant, since maps themselves become dispositifs. They are regarded as representations of reality, shape particular interpretations of vulnerability and resilience, and are used as a basis for decision-making. If the unmapped preconditions of mapping remain unconsidered, this can lead to problematic side effects.
- Cartographic bias,
- Foucault,
- Mapping constraints,
- Vulnerability mapping

FullText(HTML)

References(76)

References

Adger, N. 2006. Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change 16(3):268-281.

Albrechtslund, A., and L.N. Glud. 2010. Empowering residents:A theoretical framework for negotiating surveillance technologies. Surveillance & Society 8(2):235-250.

Alexander, D.E. 2013. Resilience and disaster risk reduction:An etymological journey. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences Discussions 1:1257-1284.

Alliance Development Works. 2013. World Risk Report 2012. http://www.worldriskreport.com/uploads/media/WRR_2012_en. Accessed 20 March 2014.

Antonovsky, A. 1979. Health stress and coping. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Bankoff, G. 2003. Cultures of disaster. Society and natural hazards in the Philippines. London:Routledge.

Berger, P., and T. Luckmann. 1966. The social construction of reality. Garden City:Anchor Books.

Bhabha, H.K. 1994. The location of culture. New York:Routledge.

Black, J. 1997. Maps and politics. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Blaikie, P., T. Cannon, I. Davis, and B. Wisner. 1994. At risk. Natural hazards, people's vulnerability, and disasters. London:Routledge.

BMTPC (Building Materials & Technology Promotion Council, Ministry of Housing & Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government of India). 1999. Vulnerability Atlas of India. http://www.bmtpc.org/DataFiles/CMS/file/map%20of%20india/Vulnerability%20Atlas%20of%20India.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2014.

Bourdieu, P. 2000. Pascalian meditations. Stanford:Stanford University Press.

Brand, F.S., and K. Jax. 2007. Focusing the meaning(s) of resilience:Resilience as a descriptive concept and a boundary object. Ecology and Society 12(1):Article 23.

Carpenter, S., B. Walker, J.M. Anderies, and N. Abel. 2001. From metaphor to measurement:Resilience of what to what? Ecosystems 4(8):765-781.

Chambers, R. 1983. Rural development-Putting the last first. Harlow:Pearson Education Limited.

Chambers, R. 1997. Whose reality counts? Putting the first last. Sterling, VA:Stylus Pub.

Curry, M. 1998. Digital places:Living with geographic information technologies:Geographic systems in context. London:Routledge.

Dauenhauer, B.P. 1980. Silence:The phenomenon and Its ontological significance. Bloomington:Indiana University Press.

Debord, G. 1955. Psychogeographic guide of Paris, ed. the Bauhaus Imaginiste. Fredriksberg:Permild & Rosengreen. http://imaginarymuseum.org/LPG/Mapsitu1.htm. Accessed 20 March 2014.

Dennis, S.F., S. Gaulocher, R.M. Carpiano, and D. Brown. 2009. Participatory photo mapping (PPM):Exploring an integrated method for health and place research with young people. Health & Place 15(2):466-473.

Douglas, M., and A. Wildavsky. 1982. Risk and culture:An essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. Berkeley:University of California Press.

Edwards, J., M. Gustafsson, and B. Näslund-Landenmark. 2007. Handbook for vulnerability mapping:EU Asia Pro Eco Project disaster reduction through awareness, preparedness and prevention mechanisms in coastal settlements in Asia. Swedish Rescue Services Agency. http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/ANNEXES/3.2.4%20Risk%20assessment%20and%20vulnerability%20maps/Handbook%20for%20Vulnerability%20Mapping.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2014.

Fekete, A. 2012. Spatial disaster vulnerability and risk assessments:Challenges in their quality and acceptance. Natural Hazards 61(3):1161-1178.

Foucault, M. 1980. Questions on geography. In Power/knowledge:Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977, trans. C. Gordon, 63-77. New York:Pantheon.

Foucault, M. 2008. A game about psychoanalysis. A conversation with members of the Department of Psychoanalysis at the University of Paris/Vincennes (Ein Spiel um die Psychoanalyse. Gespräch mit Angehörigen des Departement der Psychoanalyse der Universität Paris/Vincennes). In Dispositifs of power:On sexuality, knowledge and truth (Dispositive der Macht. Über Sexualität, Wissen und Wahrheit), ed. M. Foucault, 118-175. Berlin:Merve.

Glasze, G., R. Pütz, and M. Rolfes. 2005. The spatialization of (in-)security:Crime and security politics-challenges to a critical geography of crime (Die Verräumlichung von (Un-)Sicherheit, Kriminalität und Sicherheitspolitiken-Herausforderungen einer Kritischen Kriminalgeographie). In Discourse-city-crime:urban (in-) securities from the perspective of urban studies and critical geography of crime (Diskurs-Stadt-Kriminalität. Städtische (Un-)Sicherheiten aus der Perspektive von Stadtforschung und Kritischer Kriminalgeographie), ed. G. Glasze, R. Pütz, and M. Rolfes, 13-58. Bielefeld:Transcript.

Gotschi, E., R. Delve, and B. Freyer. 2009. Participatory photography as a qualitative approach to obtain insights into farmer groups. Field Methods 21(3):290-308.

Harendt, A., and D. Sprunk. 2011. Narrated space and narrative space:(Cultural) Constructions of space between discourse and performance (Erzählter Raum und Erzählraum:(Kultur) Raumkonstruk-tionen zwischen Diskurs und Performanz). Social Geography 6(1):15-27.

Harley, J.B. 2001a. Deconstructing the map. In The new nature of maps, ed. J. Harley, 150-168. Baltimore:John Hopkins University Press.

Harley, J.B. 2001b. Maps, knowledge and power. In The new nature of maps, ed. J. Harley, 51-81. Baltimore:John Hopkins University Press.

Harley, J.B. 2001c. Silences and secrecy. The hidden agenda of cartography in early modern Europe. In The new nature of maps, ed. J. Harley, 83-107. Baltimore:John Hopkins University Press.

Harley, J.B. 2001d. Text and contexts in the interpretation of early maps. In The new nature of maps, ed. J. Harley, 33-49. Baltimore:John Hopkins University Press.

Harper, D. 2002. Talking about pictures. A case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies 17(1):13-26.

Heesen, J. 2008. Information ethics and the spatial turn (Informationsethik und Spatial Turn). In Proceedings XXI. Deutscher Kongress für Philosophie:Lebenswelt und Wissenschaft. http://www.dgphil2008.de/fileadmin/download/Sektionsbeitraege/07_Heesen.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2014.

Hewitt, K. 1997. Regions of risk. A geographical introduction to disaster. Harlow:Addison Wesley Longman Limited.

Hilhorst, D., and G. Bankoff. 2004. Introduction. Mapping vulnerability. In Mapping vulnerability:Disasters, development, and people, ed. G. Bankoff, G. Frerks, and D. Hilhorst, 1-9. Sterling:Earthscan.

Holling, C.S. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4(1):1-23.

Hufschmidt, G. 2009. The evolution of risk from landslides:Concepts and applications for communities in New Zealand. Ph.D. Thesis. Wellington:Victoria University.

King, D. 2001. Uses and limitations of socioeconomic indicators of community vulnerability to natural hazards:Data and disasters in Northern Australia. Natural Hazards 24(2):147-156.

Klein, R.J.T., R.J. Nicholls, and F. Thomalla. 2003. Resilience to natural hazards:How useful is this concept? Global Environmental Change Part B:Environmental Hazards 5(1):35-45.

Klinenberg, E. 2003. Heat wave:A social autopsy of disaster in Chicago. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Leurs, R. 1996. Current challenges facing participatory rural appraisal. Public Administration and Development 16(1):57-72.

Liebermann, S., and J. Coulson. 2004. Participatory mapping for crime prevention in South Africa-Local solutions to local problems. Environment and Urbanization 16(2):125-134.

Loomba, A., S. Kaul, M. Bunzl, A. Burton, and Jed Esty (eds.). 2005. Postcolonial studies and beyond. Durham:Duke University Press.

Lorenz, D.F., M. Voss, and B. Wenzel. 2014. Risk attribution in space. Final Report (Risikoattribuierung im Raum bei Katastrophen und technischen Großunglücken. Abschlussbericht). Berlin:Katastrophenforschungsstelle.

Luhmann, N. 1990. Societal complexity and public opinion (Gesellschaftliche Komplexität und öffentliche Meinung). In Sociological enlightenment 5:Constructivist perspectives (Soziologische Aufklärung 5. Konstruktivistische Perspektiven), ed. N. Luhmann, 170-183. Opladen:Westdeutscher Verlag.

Lynch, K.A. 1960. The image of the city. Cambridge:MIT Press.

Macamo, E. 2003. After the disaster is the disaster:The flood of 2000 in the village perception in Mozambique (Nach der Katastrophe ist die Katastrophe. Die 2000er Überschwemmung in der dörflichen Wahrnehmung in Mosambik). In Dreadful social processes:Theory and empirical evidence of disaster (Entsetzliche soziale Prozesse. Theorie und Empirie der Katastrophen), ed. L. Clausen, E. M. Geenen, and E. Macamo, 167-184. Münster:LIT.

Madelin, M., C. Grasland, H. Mathian, and L. Sanders. 2009. The "MAUP":Modifiable area unit-Problem or progress? (Das "MAUP":Modifiable Areal Unit-Problem oder Fortschritt?). Informationen zur Raumentwicklung 2010(10/11):645-660.

McEntire, D. 2004. Development, disasters and vulnerability:A discussion of divergent theories and the need for their integration. Disaster Prevention and Management 13(3):193-198.

Meentemeyer, V. 1989. Geographical perspectives of space, time and scale. Landscape Ecology 3(3/4):163-173.

Monmonier, M. 1996. How to lie with maps. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Müller, A., J. Reiter, and U. Weiland. 2011. Assessment of urban vulnerability towards floods using an indicator-based approach-A case study for Santiago de Chile. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 11(8):2107-2123.

Openshaw, S. 1984. The modifiable areal unit problem. Norwich:Geobooks.

Peluso, N. 1995. Whose woods are these? Counter-mapping forest territories in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Antipode 27(4):383-406.

Pickering, A. 2001. Practice and posthumanism:Social theory and a history of agency. In The practice turn in contemporary theory, ed. T. Schatzki, K.K. Cetina, and E. von Savigny, 172-183. London:Routledge.

Pickles, J. 2004. A history of spaces:Cartographic reason, mapping and the geo-coded world. London:Routledge.

Pickles, J. 2008. Foreword. In The natures of maps, ed. D. Wood and J. Fels. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Porter, T. 1995. Trust in numbers:The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton:Princeton University Press.

Raffestin, C. 2003. Statistics, space, power (Statistik, Raum, Macht). In Claude Raffestin:On a geography of territoriality (Claude Raffestin-zu einer Geographie der Territorialität), ed. F. Klauser, 117-123. Stuttgart:Steiner.

Reichel, C., and U.U. Frömming. 2014. Participatory mapping of local disaster risk reduction knowledge:An example from Switzerland. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science. doi: 10.1007/s13753-014-0013-6

Saetnan, A., H. Lomell, and S. Hammer (eds.). 2010. The mutual construction of statistics and society. London:Routledge.

Schlögel, K. 2003. Lesson II:Ground zero. 11 September 2001 (Lehrstück II:Ground Zero. 11. September 2001). In In space we read time. on the history of civilization and geopolitics (Im Raume lesen wir die Zeit. Über Zivilisationsgeschichte und Geopolitik), ed. K. Schlögel, 30-35. Frankfurt am Main:Fischer.

Sinaga, T.P.T., A. Nugroho, Y.-W. Lee, and Y. Suh. 2011. GIS mapping of tsunami vulnerability:Case study of the Jembrana Regency in Bali, Indonesia. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 15(3):537-543.

Smith, K., C.B. Barret, and P.W. Box. 2000. Participatory risk mapping for targeting research and assistance:With an example from East African Pastoralists. World Development 28(11):1945-1959.

Stephen, L. 2004. Vulnerable regions versus vulnerable people:An Ethiopian case study. In Mapping vulnerability:Disasters, development and people, ed. G. Bankoff, G. Frerks, and D. Hilhorst, 99-114. London:Earthscan.

Thomas, W., and D. Thomas. 1928. The child in America:Behavior problems and programs. New York:Knopf.

Tuan, Y. 1979. Space and place:The perspective of experience. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.

Voss, M. 2008. The vulnerable can't speak:An integrative vulnerability approach to disaster and climate change research. Behemoth A Journal on Civilization 1(3):39-71.

Werner, E. 1971. The children of Kauai. A longitudinal study from the prenatal period to age ten. Honolulu:University of Hawaii Press.

Whitehead, A. 1925. An enquiry concerning the principles of natural knowledge, 2nd ed. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Whitehead, A. 1997. Science and the modern world. New York:Free Press.

Wood, D. 1992. The power of maps. New York:Guilford Press.

Wood, D. 2010. Rethinking the power of maps. New York:Guilford Press.

Wood, D., and J. Fels. 2008. The natures of maps. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Yamin, F., A. Rahman, and S. Huq. 2005. Vulnerability, adaptation and climate disasters:A conceptual overview. Climate Change and Disasters Group, Institute of Development Studies (IDS), University of Sussex.

Relative Articles

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Proportional views