Advertisement

Natural Hazards

, Volume 86, Issue 2, pp 969–988 | Cite as

Forging a paradigm shift in disaster science

  • A. T. Ismail-ZadehEmail author
  • S. L. Cutter
  • K. Takeuchi
  • D. Paton
Original Paper

Abstract

Despite major advancements in knowledge on disaster risks and disasters caused by natural hazards, the number and severity of disasters are increasing. Convolving natural, engineering, social and behavioral sciences and practices with policymaking should significantly reduce disaster risks caused by natural hazards. To this end, a fundamental change in scientific approaches to disaster risk reduction is needed by shifting the current emphasis on individual hazard and risk assessment dominant in the geoscientific community to a transdisciplinary system analysis with action-oriented research on disaster risk reduction co-produced with multiple stakeholders, including policymakers. This paradigm shift will allow for acquisition of policy-relevant knowledge and its immediate application to evidence-based policy and decision making for disaster risk reduction. The need for the paradigm shift is more critical now than ever before because of the increasing vulnerability and exposure of society to disaster risk and the need for cross-cutting actions in policy and practice related to climate change and sustainability.

Keywords

Natural hazards Risk assessment Disaster science Transdisciplinary Co-productive research 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was benefited from interactions, discussions and/or collaboration with many scientists, engineers and policymakers on the topics related to disaster science. Particularly, we are grateful to Irasema Alcántara-Ayala, Dan Baker, Tom Beer, Salvano Briceño, Harsh Gupta, Ailsa Holloway, David Johnston, Gordon McBean and Reiner Silbereisen for fruitful discussions on disaster risk research and risk reduction. We are thankful to Marcia McNutt, Vladimir Schenk, Brad Wible and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on the initial manuscript, which helped to revise and significantly improve the paper. AIZ was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG Grant IS-203/4-1) and the Russian Science Foundation (RSF Grant 14-17-00520).

References

  1. Aboelela SW, Larson E, Bakken S, Carrasquillo O, Formicola A, Glied SA, Haas J, Gebbie KM (2007) Defining interdisciplinary research: conclusions from a critical review of the literature. Health Serv Res 42:329–346. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00621.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambraseys N, Bilham R (2011) Corruption kills. Nature 469:153–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Babayev G, Ismail-Zadeh A, Le Mouël J-L (2010) Scenario-based earthquake hazard and risk assessment for Baku (Azerbaijan). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 10:2697–2712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker J (2013) Seismology: quake catcher. Nature 498:290–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baker DN, Jackson JM, Thompson LK (2014) Predicting and mitigating socio-economic impacts of extreme space weather: benefits of improved forecasts. In: Ismail-Zadeh A, Urrutia Fucugauchi J, Kijko A, Takeuchi K, Zaliapin I (eds) Extreme natural hazards, disaster risks and societal implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 113–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baxter PJ, Searl A, Cowie HA, Jarvis D, Horwell CJ (2014) Evaluating the respiratory health risks of volcanic ash at the eruption of the Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat, 1995–2010. In: Wadge G, Robertson R, Voight B (eds) The Eruption of Soufriere Hills Volcano, Montserrat from 2000 to 2010. Memoir of the Geological Society of London, 39(22), pp 407–425Google Scholar
  7. Beer T, Ismail-Zadeh A (eds) (2003) Risk science and sustainability. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernstein JH (2015) Transdisciplinarity: a review of its origins, development, and current issues. J Res Pract 11(1): Article R1. Available at webpage: http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/510/412. Retrieved on 25 Nov 2016
  9. Birkmann J (ed) (2014) Measuring vulnerability to natural hazards: towards disaster resilient societies. United Nations University Press, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  10. Boaz A, Hayden C (2002) Pro-active evaluators: enabling research to be useful, usable and used. Evaluation 8:440–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bobrowsky P (ed) (2013) Encyclopaedia of natural hazards. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  12. Burton I (2010) Forensic disaster investigations in depth: a new case study model. Environ Sci Policy Sustain Dev 52(5):36–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cabinet Office (2015) Disaster Management in Japan. Cabinet Office, Government of Japan, March 2015. http://www.bousai.go.jp/1info/pdf/saigaipamphlet_je.pdf. Accessed 1 May 2016
  14. Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(14):8086–8091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Castree N, Adams WM, Barry J, Brockington D, Buscher B, Corbera E, Demeritt D, Duffy R, Felt U, Neves K, Newell P, Pellizzoni L, Rigby K, Robbins P, Robin L, Rose DB, Ross A, Schlosberg D, Sorlin S, West P, Whitehead M, Wynne B (2014) Changing the intellectual climate. Nat Clim Change 4(9):763–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cohen RS, Schnelle T (eds) (1986) Cognition and fact: materials on Ludwik Fleck. Reidel, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  17. Collins A, Jones S, Manyena B, Jayawickrama J (2015) Natural hazards, risks and disasters in society: a cross disciplinary overview. Elsevier, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Cronin K (2008). Transdiciplinary Research (Tdr) and Sustainability. Ministry of Research, Science and Technology, Weelington, NZ. Available at Retrieved on 29 Nov 2016: http://www.learningforsustainability.net/pubs/Transdisciplinary_Research_and_Sustainability.pdf
  19. Curnin S, Owen C, Paton D, Brooks B (2015a) A theoretical framework for negotiating the path of emergency management multi-agency coordination. Appl Ergon 47:300–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Curnin S, Owen C, Paton D, Trist C, Parsons D (2015b) Role clarity, swift trust and multi-agency coordination. J Conting Crisis Manag 23:29–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cutter SL (2014) Building disaster resilience: steps toward sustainability. Chall Sustain 1:72–79Google Scholar
  22. Cutter SL, Gall M (2015) Sendai targets at risk. Nat Clim Change 5:707–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cutter SL, Boruff BJ, Shirley WL (2003) Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Soc Sci Q 84(1):242–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cutter SL, Barnes L, Berry M, Burton C, Evans E, Tate E, Webb J (2008) A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Glob Environ Change 18(4):598–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cutter SL, Emrich CT, Mitchell JT, Piegorsch WW, Smith MM, Weber L (2014) Hurricane Katrina and the forgotten coast of Mississippi. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Cutter SL, Ismail-Zadeh A, Alcántara-Ayala I, Altan O, Baker DN, Briceño S, Gupta H, Holloway A, Johnston D, McBean GA, Ogawa Y, Paton D, Porio E, Silbereisen RK, Takeuchi K, Valsecchi GB, Vogel C, Wu G (2015) Pool knowledge to stem losses from disasters. Nature 522:277–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dalkey N, Helmer O (1963) An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Manag Sci 9(3):458–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Davis C, Keilis-Borok V, Kossobokov V, Soloviev A (2012) Advance prediction of the March 11, 2011 great east Japan earthquake: a missed opportunity for disaster preparedness. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 1:17–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Eiser JR, Bostrom A, Burton I, Johnston DM, McClure J, Paton D, van der Pligt J, White MP (2012) Risk interpretation and action: a conceptual framework for responses to natural hazards. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 1:5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Emanuel K, Ravela S, Vivant E, Risi C (2006) A statistical deterministic approach to hurricane risk assessment. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 87:299–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. HELP Task Force (2001) The design and implementation strategy of the HELP initiative. IHP-V Technical Documents in Hydrology, No. 44, UNESCO, Paris (Doc. No. H00/1)Google Scholar
  32. Fukutani Y, Anawat S, Imamura F (2016) Uncertainty in tsunami wave heights and arrival times caused by the rupture velocity in the strike direction of large earthquakes. Nat Hazards 80:1749–1782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR (1993) Science for the post-normal age. Futures 25(7):739–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gabrielov A, Keilis-Borok V, Olsen S, Zaliapin I (2014) Predictability of extreme events in a branching diffusion model. In: Ismail-Zadeh A, Urrutia Fucugauchi J, Kijko A, Takeuchi K, Zaliapin I (eds) Extreme natural hazards, disaster risks and societal implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 126–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gall M, Nguyen KH, Cutter SL (2015) Integrated research on disaster risk: is it really integrated? Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 12:255–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ghafory-Ashtiany M (2014) Earthquake risk and risk reduction capacity building in Iran. In: Ismail-Zadeh A, Urrutia Fucugauchi J, Kijko A, Takeuchi K, Zaliapin I (eds) Extreme natural hazards, disaster risks and societal implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 267–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gibbons M (1999) Science’s new social contact with society. Nature 402(6761 Suppl):C81–C84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gopalakrishnan SG, Bacon DP, Ahmad NN, Boybeyi Z, Dunn TJ, Hall MS, Jin Y, Lee PCS, Mays DE, Madala RV, Sarma A, Turner MD, Wait TR (2002) An operational multiscale hurricane forecasting system. Month Weather Rev 130:1830–1847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hirsch Hadorn G, Hoffmann-Riem H, Biber-Klemm S, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Joye D, Pohl C, Wiesmann U, Zemp E (eds) (2008) Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  40. IPCC (2012) Summary for Policymakers. In: Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF, Qin D, Dokken DJ, Ebi KL, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ, Plattner G-K, Allen SK, Tignor M, Midgley PM (eds) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. a special report of working groups i and ii of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–19Google Scholar
  41. Ismail-Zadeh A, Cutter S (eds) (2015) Disaster risks research and assessment to promote risk reduction and management. ICSU-ISSC, Paris. Available at http://www.icsu.org/science-for-policy/disaster-risk/documents/DRRsynthesisPaper_2015.pdf. Accessed 1 May 2016
  42. Ismail-Zadeh A, Takeuchi K (2007) Preventive disaster management of extreme natural events. Nat Hazards 42:459–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ismail-Zadeh A, Sokolov V, Bonier K (2007a) Geodynamics, seismicity and seismic hazard of the south-eastern Carpathians. Nat Hazards 42:493–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ismail-Zadeh A, Le Mouël J-L, Soloviev A, Tapponnier P, Vorovieva I (2007b) Numerical modeling of crustal block-and-fault dynamics, earthquakes and slip rates in the Tibet-Himalayan region. Earth Planet Sci Lett 258:465–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ismail-Zadeh A, Le Mouël J-L, Soloviev A (2012) Modeling of extreme seismic events. In: Sharma SA, Bunde A, Dimri VP, Baker DN (eds) Extreme events and natural hazards: the complexity perspective. Geophysical Monograph 196, American Geophysical Union, Washington, pp 75–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ismail-Zadeh A, Urrutia Fucugauchi J, Kijko A, Takeuchi K, Zaliapin I (eds) (2014) Extreme natural hazards, disaster risks and societal implications. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  47. James H, Paton D (2016) The consequences of disasters: demographic, planning and policy implications. Charles C. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  48. Kitoh A (2014) Global climate model and projected hydro-meteorological extremes in the future. In: Ismail-Zadeh A, Urrutia Fucugauchi J, Kijko A, Takeuchi K, Zaliapin I (eds) Extreme natural hazards, disaster risks and societal implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 77–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Klein JT (2007) Interdisciplinary approaches in social science research. In: Outwaite W, Turner SP (eds) The Sage handbook of social science methodology. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, pp 32–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Koontanakulvong S (2014) The Chao Phraya floods 2011. In: Ismail-Zadeh A, Fucugauchi J, Kijko A, Takeuchi K, Zaliapin I (eds) Extreme natural hazards, disaster risks and societal implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 281–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Korotkii A, Kovtunov D, Ismail-Zadeh A, Tsepelev I, Melnik O (2016) Quantitative reconstruction of thermal and dynamic characteristics of lava from surface thermal measurements. Geophys J Int 205:1767–1779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kundzewicz ZW, Takeuchi K (1999) Flood protection and management: quo vadimus? J Hydrol Sci 44(3):417–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lang DJ, Wiek A, Bergmann M, Stauffacher M, Martens P, Moll P, Swilling M, Thomas CJ (2012) Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustain Sci 7(suppl. 1):25–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lin N, Emanuel K, Vanmarcke E (2014) Physically-based hurricane risk analysis. In: Ismail-Zadeh A, Urrutia Fucugauchi J, Kijko A, Takeuchi K, Zaliapin I (eds) Extreme natural hazards, disaster risks and societal implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 88–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Martin S (2010) Co-production of social research: strategies for engaged scholarship. Public Money Manag 30(4):211–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Masood M, Takeuchi K (2012) Assessment of flood hazard, vulnerability and risk of mid-eastern Dhaka using DEM and 1D hydrodynamic model. Nat Hazards 61(2):757–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Matyas D, Pelling M (2014) Positioning resilience for 2015: the role of resistance, incremental adjustment and transformation in disaster risk management policy. Disasters 39(S1):S1–S18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mazzocchi M, Hansstein F, Ragona M (2010) The 2010 volcanic ash cloud and its financial impact on the European airline industry. CESifo Forum 2:92–100Google Scholar
  59. McFarlane C (2006) Crossing borders: development, learning and the North-South divide. Third World Q 27(8):1413–1437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. McNutt M (2015) A community for disaster science. Science 348:11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Menz B, Thieken AH (2009) Flood risk curves and uncertainty bounds. Nat Hazards 51:437–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nowotny H, Scott P, Gibbons M (2001) Re-thinking science, knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Polity Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  63. Oliver-Smith A, Alcántara-Ayala I, Burton I, Lavell AM (2016) Forensic investigations of disasters (FORIN): a conceptual framework and guide to research (IRDR FORIN Publication No.2). Integrated research on disaster risk, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  64. Paton D (2006) Disaster resilience: integrating individual, community, institutional and environmental perspectives. In: Paton D, Johnston D (eds) Disaster resilience: an integrated approach. Charles C. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  65. Paton D (2013) Disaster resilient communities: developing and testing an all-hazards theory. J Integr Disaster Risk Manag 3:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Paton D (ed) (2014) Wildfire hazards, risks, and disasters. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  67. Paton D, Jang L-J (2016) Earthquake readiness and recovery: an Asia-Pacific perspective. In: D’Amico S (ed) Earthquakes and their impact on societies. Springer, London, pp 647–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Paton D, McClure J (2013) Preparing for Disaster: Building household and community capacity. Charles C. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  69. Paton D, Johnston D, Mamula-Seadon L, Kenney CM (2014) Recovery and development: perspectives from New Zealand and Australia. In: Kapucu N, Liou KT (eds) Disaster & development: examining global issues and cases. Springer, New York, pp 255–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Paton D, Anderson E, Becker J, Peterson J (2015) Developing a comprehensive model of earthquake preparedness: lessons from the christchurch earthquake. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 14:37–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Peduzzi P, Dao H, Herold C, Mouton F (2009) Assessing global exposure and vulnerability to hazards: the disaster risk index. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 9:1149–1159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Pelling M, Basher R, Birkmann J, Cutter S, Desai B, Fakhruddin SHM, Ferrugini F, Mitchell T, Oliver-Smith T, Rees J, Takeuchi K (2014) Disaster risk reduction and sustainable development. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment, vol 1. Springer, Switzerland, pp 211–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pohl C, Rist R, Zimmerman A, Fry P, Gurung GS, Schneider F, Speranza CI, Kiteme B, Boillat S, Serrano E, Hirsch Hadorn G, Weismann U (2010) Researchers’ roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal. Sci Public Policy 37(4):267–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Reconstruction Design Council (2011) Towards reconstruction—hope beyond the disaster. Report to the Prime Minister of Japan, June 2011. Available at http://www.mofa.go.jp/announce/jfpu/2011/7/pdfs/0712.pdf. Accessed 1 May 2016
  75. Satake K (2014) The 2011 Tihiku, Japan, earthquake and tsunami. In: Ismail-Zadeh A, Fucugauchi J, Kijko A, Takeuchi K, Zaliapin I (eds) Extreme natural hazards, disaster risks and societal implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 310–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sokolov V, Ismail-Zadeh A (2015) Seismic hazard from instrumentally recorded, historical and simulated earthquakes: application to the Tibet-Himalayan region. Tectonophysics 657:187–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sokolov V, Ismail-Zadeh A (2016) On the use of multiple-site estimations in probabilistic seismic hazard assessment. Bull Seismol Soc Am 106(5):2233–2243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Stefanescu ER, Bursik M, Patra AK (2012) Effect of digital elevation model on Mohr-Coulomb geophysical flow model output. Nat Hazards 62:635–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Tang L, Titov VV, Moore C, Wei Y (2016) Real-time assessment and modeling of the 16 September 2015 Chile tsunami. Pure appl Geophys 173:369–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Taylor NR, Irish JL, Udoh IE, Bilskie MV, Hagen SC (2015) Development and uncertainty quantification of hurricane surge response functions for hazard assessment in coastal bays. Nat Hazards 77:1103–1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Teramage MT, Onda Y, Patin J, Kato H, Gomi T, Nam S (2014) Vertical distribution of radiocesium in coniferous forest soil after the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident. J Environ Radioact 137:37–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. The National Academies (2012) Disaster resilience: a national imperative. National Academy of Sciences, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  83. Todesco M, Neri A, Ongaro TE, Papale P, Macedonio G, Santacroce R, Longo A (2002) Pyroclastic flow hazard assessment at Vesuvius (Italy) by using numerical modeling. I. Large-scale dynamics. Bull Volcanol 64:155–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. UNISDR (2009) The terminology on disaster risk reduction. United Nations, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  85. UNISDR (2015) Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030. A/CONF.224/CRP.1, United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan, 14 to 18 March 2015. http://www.unisdr.org/we/coordinate/sendai-framework. Accessed 1 May 2016
  86. Van Loon AF, Gleeson T, Clark J, Van Dijk AIJM, Stahl K, Hannaford J, Di Baldassarre G, Teuling AJ, Tallaksen LM, Uijlenhoet R, Hannah DM, Sheffield J, Svoboda M, Verbeiren B, Wagener T, Rangecroft S, Wanders N, Van Lanen HAJ (2016) Drought in the anthropocene. Nat Geosci 9:89–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Wei Y, Newman AV, Gavin GP, Titov VV, Tang L (2014) Tsunami forecast by joint inversion of real-time tsunami waveforms and seismic or GPS data: application to the Tohoku 2011 tsunami. Pure appl Geophys 171:3281–3305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Weinstein P, Horwell CJ, Cook A (2013) Volcanic emissions and health. In: Selinus O (ed) Essentials of medical geology. Springer, Netherlands, pp 217–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Wiggins S, Marfo K, Anchirinah V (2004) Protecting the forest or the people? Environmental policies and livelihoods in the forest margins of Southern Ghana. World Dev 32(11):1939–1955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Wisner B, Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis I (2004) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters, 2nd edn. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  91. Wu W (ed) (2015) Recent advances in modeling landslides and Debris flows. Springer, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. T. Ismail-Zadeh
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • S. L. Cutter
    • 3
  • K. Takeuchi
    • 4
  • D. Paton
    • 5
  1. 1.Institute of Applied GeosciencesKarlsruhe Institute of TechnologyKarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Earthquake Prediction Theory and Mathematical GeophysicsRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia
  3. 3.Department of Geography, Hazards and Vulnerability Research InstituteUniversity of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA
  4. 4.International Centre for Water Hazard and Risk Management Under the Auspices of UNESCO, Public Works Research InstituteTsukubaJapan
  5. 5.School of Psychology and Clinical SciencesCharles Darwin UniversityDarwinAustralia

Personalised recommendations