The Nature of “Natural Disasters”: Survivors' Explanations of Earthquake Damage

Alessandro Massazza; Chris R. Brewin; Helene Joffe

doi:10.1007/s13753-019-0223-z

Article Contents

Article Navigation > International Journal of Disaster Risk Science > 2019 > 10(3): 293-305

Alessandro Massazza, Chris R. Brewin, Helene Joffe. The Nature of “Natural Disasters”: Survivors' Explanations of Earthquake Damage[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2019, 10(3): 293-305. doi: 10.1007/s13753-019-0223-z

Citation:

Alessandro Massazza, Chris R. Brewin, Helene Joffe. The Nature of “Natural Disasters”: Survivors' Explanations of Earthquake Damage[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2019, 10(3): 293-305. doi: 10.1007/s13753-019-0223-z

Citation:

PDF

The Nature of “Natural Disasters”: Survivors' Explanations of Earthquake Damage

doi: 10.1007/s13753-019-0223-z

Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London WC1H0 AP, UK

Available Online: 2021-04-26

Abstract

Abstract

The distinction between natural and human-made disasters is ingrained in everyday language. Disaster scientists have long been critical of this dichotomy. Nonetheless, virtually no attention has been paid to how disaster survivors conceptualize the causes of the disasters they experience. In this mixed-methods longitudinal study, 112 survivors of the 2016-2017 Central Italy earthquakes completed questionnaires 3 and 16 months following the earthquakes, with the aim of assessing attributions of blame for the earthquake damage. In-depth interviews were also conducted with 52 participants at the 3-month mark to explore representations of causation for the earthquake damage. The distinction between disasters caused by nature and disasters caused by humans was not supported by survivors of the earthquake. In the longitudinal surveys, building firms and the State were assigned as much blame as nature for the earthquake damage, at both 3 months and 16 months after the earthquakes. Corroborating this complexity, in the interviews, the causes of the earthquake damage, rather than being understood as purely natural, were perceived as a complex mosaic composed of political, technological, natural, and moral factors. This empirical work shows that disaster survivors combine both nature-based and human-based explanations of disasters, rather than subscribing to one or the other. These findings have practical implications for disaster risk reduction and response.
- Amatrice,
- Attributions,
- Disaster causes,
- Disaster survivors,
- Human-made

FullText(HTML)

References(44)

References

Alexander, D. 2010. The L'Aquila earthquake of 6 April 2009 and Italian government policy on disaster response. Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research 2(4):325-342.

Arcenaux, K., and R.M. Stein. 2006. Who is held responsible when disaster strikes? The attribution of responsibility for a natural disaster in an urban election. Journal of Urban Affairs 28(1):43-53.

Baum, A., R. Fleming, and J.E. Singer. 1983. Coping with victimization by technological disaster. Journal of Social Issues 39(2):117-138.

Beamish, T.D. 2002. Silent spill:The organization of industrial crisis. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.

Blocker, T.J., and D.E. Sherkat. 1992. In the eyes of the beholder:Technological and naturalistic interpretations of a disaster. Industrial Crisis Quarterly 6(2):153-166.

Carroll, M.S., P.J. Cohn, D.N. Seesholtz, and L.L. Higgins. 2005. Fire as galvanizing and fragmenting influence on communities:The case of the Rodeo-Chediski fire. Society & Natural Resources 18(4):301-320.

Choudhury, Z.A. 2013. Politics of natural disaster:How governments maintain legitimacy in the wake of major disasters, 1990-2010. Doctoral thesis, Department of Political Science, University of Iowa. https://ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5618&context=etd. Accessed 26 March 2019.

Damm, A., K. Eberhard, J. Sendzimir, and A. Patt. 2013. Perception of landslides risk and responsibility:A case study in Eastern Styria, Austria. Natural Hazards 69(1):165-183.

DeMan, A., P. Simpson-Housley, and F. Curtis. 1985. Assignment of responsibility and flood hazard in Catahoula County, Louisiana. Environment and Behavior 17(3):371-386.

Douglas, M. 1992. Risk and blame:Essays in cultural theory. London:Routledge.

Drabeck, T.E., and E.L. Quarantelli. 1967. Scapegoats, villains, and disasters. Trans-action 4(4):12-17.

Goffman, E. 1974. Frame analysis:An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.

Green, R. 2008. Unauthorised development and seismic hazard vulnerability:A study of squatters and engineers in Istanbul, Turkey. Disasters 32(3):358-376.

Hewitt, K. 1997. Regions of risk:A geographical introduction to disasters. Essex, UK:Addison Wesley Longman.

Joffe, H. 2012. Thematic analysis. In Qualitative research methods in mental health and psychotherapy:A guide for students and practitioners, ed. D. Harper, and A. Thompson, 209-224. Oxford:Wiley-Blackwell.

Joffe, H., and J.W.B. Elsey. 2014. Free association in psychology and the Grid Elaboration Method. Review of General Psychology 18(3):173-185.

Joffe, H., G. Perez-Fuentes, H.W.W. Potts, and T. Rossetto. 2016. How to increase earthquake and home fire preparedness:The fix-it intervention. Natural Hazards 84(3):1943-1965.

Joffe, H., H.W.W. Potts, T. Rossetto, C. Dogulu, E. Gul, and G. Perez-Fuentes. 2019. The fix-it face-to-face intervention increases multihazard household preparedness cross-culturally. Nature Human Behaviour 3:453-461.

Joffe, H., P. Washer, and C. Solberg. 2011. Public engagement with emerging infectious disease:The case of MRSA in Britain. Psychology and Health 26(6):667-683.

Kelman, I. 2010. Natural disasters do not exist (natural hazards do not exist either). Version 3, 9 July 2010. http://www.ilankelman.org/NaturalDisasters.doc. Accessed 26 March 2019.

Kroll-Smith, J., J.S. Couch, and S.R. Couch. 1991. What is a disaster:An ecological-symbolic approach to resolving the definitional debate. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 9(3):355-356.

Kumagai, Y., S.E. Daniels, M.S. Carroll, J.C. Bliss, and J.A. Edward. 2004. Causal reasoning process of people affected by wildfire:Implications for agency-community interactions and communication strategies. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 19(3):184.

Lewis, J. 1999. Development in disaster-prone places:Studies of vulnerability. London:Intermediate Technology Publications.

Moseley, E.M. 1999. Convergent catastrophe:Past patterns and future implications of collateral natural disasters in the Andes. In The angry earth:Disaster in anthropological perspective, ed A. Oliver-Smith, and S. Hoffman, 59-73. New York:Routledge.

O'Keefe, P., K. Westgate, and B. Wisner. 1976. Taking the naturalness out of natural disasters. Nature 260(5552):566-567.

Oliver-Smith, A. 1986. The martyred city:Death and rebirth in the Andes. Albuquerque, NM:University of New Mexico Press.

Picou, J.S., B.K. Marshall, and D.A. Gill. 2004. Disaster, litigation, and the corrosive community. Social Forces 82(4):1493-1522.

Pidgeon, N.F., and M. O'Leary. 2000. Man-made disasters:Why technology and organizations (sometimes) fail. Safety Science 34(1-3):15-30.

Quarantelli, E.L. 1992. The case for a generic rather than an agent specific approach to disasters. Disaster Management 4:191-196.

Rousseau, J.J. 1756. "Rousseau to François-Marie Arouet de Voltaire" (Letter 424, 18 August 1756 ("Rousseau à François-Marie Arouet de Voltaire" (Lettre 424, le 18 août 1756)). In Complete correspondence of Jean Jacques Rousseau, Volume IV 1756-1757 (Correspondance complète de Jean Jacques Rousseau, Tome IV 1756-1757), ed. R.A. Leigh, 1967, 37-50. Geneva, Switzerland:Institut et Musée Voltaire, Les Délices.

Sezgin, U., and R.-L. Punamäki. 2012. Earthquake trauma and causal explanation associating with PTSD and other psychiatric disorders among South East Anatolian women. Journal of Affective Disorders 141(2-3):432-440.

Slovic, P. 2000. The perception of risk. New York:Routledge.

Smith, N. 2006. There's no such thing as a natural disaster. At:Social Science Research Council (SSRC) Understanding Katrina:Perspectives from the social sciences. http://understandingkatrina.ssrc.org/Smith. Accessed 26 March 2019.

Stallings, R. 1988. Conflict in natural disasters:A codification of consensus and conflict theories. Social Science Quarterly 69(3):569-586.

Steinberg, T. 2000. Acts of God:The unnatural history of natural disaster in America. New York:Oxford University Press.

Stephens, N.M., S.A. Fryberg, H.R. Markus, and M.Y.G. Hamedani. 2012. Who explains Hurricane Katrina and the Chilean Earthquake as an act of God? The experience of extreme hardship predicts religious meaning-making. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 44(4):606-619.

Tierney, K. 2012. A bridge to somewhere:William Freudenburg, environmental sociology, and disaster research. Journal of Environmental Studies and Science 2(1):58-68.

Tiranti, D. 1977. The un-natural disasters. New Internationalist 53:5-6.

UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction). 2007. Terminology:Basic terms of disaster risk reduction. Geneva, Switzerland:UNISDR.

UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction). 2019. What is disaster risk reduction? https://www.unisdr.org/who-we-are/what-is-drr. Accessed 26 March 2019.

Wells, T. 2017. There is no such thing as a natural disaster anymore:Why wilful ignorance is not innocence. https://www.abc.net.au/religion/there-is-no-such-thing-as-a-natural-disaster-anymore-why-wilful-/1009534. Accessed 26 March 2019.

Wijkman, A., and L. Timberlake. 1984. Natural disasters:Acts of god or acts of man? London:International Institute for Environment and Development.

Wisner, B., P. Blaikie, T. Cannon, and I. Davis. 2004. At risk:Natural hazards, people's vulnerability and disasters, 2nd edn. London:Routledge.

Zaman, M.Q. 1999. Vulnerability, disaster, and survival in Bangladesh:Three case studies. In The angry earth:Disaster in anthropological perspective, ed. A. Oliver-Smith, and S. Hoffman, 192-212. New York:Routledge.

Relative Articles

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Proportional views