Advertisement

Pitfall of Disaster Information

From the Perspective of Double-Bind Theory
  • Katsuya YamoriEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Integrated Disaster Risk Management book series (IDRM)

Abstract

Even though disaster information provided on its own completely isolated from all other communication can be logically comprehended, in reality it is meaningless. In other words, all disaster information exists in the form of disaster risk communication, messages from one person to another person. When disaster information is viewed as communication (messages), it faces the numerous major difficulties associated with messages in general. “Double bind” is the name given to one of these difficulties by Gregory Bateson, a cultural anthropologist. A double bind arises in a situation in which the recipient of a message, and also in fact the sender of the message, faces a dilemma due to inconsistencies and conflicts arising between a message and its meta-message. Many of the problems involving disaster information in modern societies are thought to closely resemble the double bind. This chapter proposes that these problems can be conceptualized as three major conditions: double bind that reproduces “waiting for information,” double bind that reproduces dependence on government and experts, and double bind that reproduces an objective and unequivocal view of disaster information. A few innovative challenges to overcome difficulties of double bind, under the central concept of “joining and sharing” information, are introduced.

Keywords

Disaster information Risk communication Double bind Message Meta-message 

References

  1. Bateson G (2000) Steps to an ecology of mind. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck U (1992) Risk society. Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  3. Katada T (2006) Research on the existence of social co-learning based on a disaster survey and the results. 2005 Report on the results of important research topics (Research Grants) of the Research and Studies Committee of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers. http://www.jsce.or.jp/committee/jyuten/files/H17j_04.pdf
  4. Katada T (2012) Disaster prevention where people do not die. ShueishaGoogle Scholar
  5. Katada Laboratory (2003) Report on survey of the evacuation of Kesenuma City residents during the Sanriku earthquake of 26th May 2003 (Rapid Report). http://dsel.ce.gunma-u.ac.jp/modules/newdb1/detail.php?id=8
  6. Katada T, Kodama M, Kuwasawa N, Koshimura S (2005) Issues of residents consciousness and evacuation from the Tsumani—From questionnaire survey in Kesennuma City, Miyagi Pref. after the earthquake of Miyagiken-Oki, 2003, J Jpn Soc Civil Eng 789(II-71):93–104Google Scholar
  7. Kuroda Y (2008) Tsunamis and problems directly facing cities and Towns. Yoshii H, Tanaka J (eds) Introduction to disaster crisis management, Kobundo, pp 50–54Google Scholar
  8. Kawata Y (2006) Surviving giant urban disasters. ShinchoshaGoogle Scholar
  9. Murakami Y (1998) The study of safety, SeidoshaGoogle Scholar
  10. Suchman L (1987) Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  11. Sugiman T, Misumi J (1988) Development of a new evacuation method for emergencies: control of collective behavior by emergent small groups. J Appl Psychol 73:3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ushiyama M, Imamura F (2004) Disaster information and residents at the earthquake in Iwate and Miyagi prefecture on 26 May 2003, Tsunami Engineering Technical Report, No. 21, pp 57–82. http://disaster-i.net/notes/200305e-qr.pdf
  13. Working Group for Investigating Tsunami Evacuation Measures, Committee for Advancing and Investigating Disaster Management Measures, Central Disaster Management Council (2012a) Collected reference material of the working group for investigating tsunami evacuation measures, Central Disaster Management CouncilGoogle Scholar
  14. Working Group for Investigating Tsunami Evacuation Measures, Committee for Advancing and Investigating Disaster Management Measures, Central Disaster Management Council (2012b) Results of a web survey of earthquake and Tsunami evacuation during the great East Japan Earthquake (Rapid Report), Central Disaster Management CouncilGoogle Scholar
  15. Yamori K (2007) Disaster risk sense in Japan and gaming approach to risk communication. Int J Mass Emergencies Disasters 25:101–131Google Scholar
  16. Yamori K (2010) Using games in community disaster prevention exercises. Group Decis Negot.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-011-9227-9Key:citeulike:8711838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Yamori K (2014) Revisiting the concept of Tsunami Tendenko: Tsunami evacuation behavior in the Great East Japan Earthquake. In: Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University (eds.). Natural disaster science and mitigation engineering: DPRI Reports (Vol.1), Studies on the 2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake. Springer Verlag pp 49–63.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54418-0_5Google Scholar
  18. Yoshii H, Tanaka A, Nakamura I, Nakamori H, Mikami S (2004) Evacuation activities at the Tokachi-Oki earthquake, 2004. Report Commissions to Survey Earthquakes, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations