The Big Water of a Small River: Flood Experiences and a Community Agenda for Change

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter draws on observations from anthropological fieldwork in a flood-prone area in northeast Siberia to comment on how rural residents assess and “process” destructive consequences of floods in their interaction with water and multiple water governance scales. The massive Soviet “river-turning” projects figure prominently in the development programmes in the Tatta District, an area that has suffered from drought for several decades. Due to the state programme for transporting water from the Lena River, the largest in northeast Siberia, to Tatta, the small Tatta River became a dense network of water management projects. The research demonstrates that the governmental and local agenda for dealing with increased flooding – the causes of such a departure from the norm, the view of “things to be governed” and “how they should be governed” – may differ considerably. This paper focuses on how rural communities search for a balance in their adaptive practices amid several tensions: conflicting attributions of disaster to dams and irrigation constructions as opposed to natural changes; the threat of increased flooding alongside a practical need for development projects; and the clash between the governmental ‘emergency’ approach and communities’ long-term adaptive practices.

Keywords

Affordances Culturally “affiliated” community Russian North Republic of Sakha Yakutia Tatta River Flood Natural disaster Development projects Human-nature interaction Emergency strategy Perception and action Local adaptation 

References

  1. Adamov, D. (2010). Churapcha rulit! Nemnogo ob alasnom patriotizme (Churapcha governs! A little bit about alaas patriotism). Yakutsk vechernii, December 24.Google Scholar
  2. ADRC (2006). Asian Disaster Reduction Center. Country report. Russia. http://www.adrc.asia/countryreport/RUS/2005/english.pdf. Retrieved 5 Dec 2009.
  3. Alekseev, E. E. (1996). Priznayu vinovnym… Sluzhba bezopasnosti respubliki Sakha (Yakutia) (I declare you guilty of… Security Service of the Republic of Salkha (Yakutia). Moscow: Concern LD.Google Scholar
  4. Alekseev, A. (2007). Nikto ne znaet tochno, v chem. prichina uchastivshikhsya navodnenii v Yakutii (Nobody knows exactly what the reason for increased floods in Yakutia is) Sakha News. http://www.1sn.ru/18234.html. Retrieved 7 Oct 2010.
  5. APN (2005). Asian-Pacific Network for global change research. Institutional capacity in natural disaster risk reduction: A comparative analysis of institutions, national policies, and cooperative responses to flood in Russia. Final report. http://www.apn-gcr.org/newAPN/resources/projectBulletinOutputs/finalProjectReports/2005/APN2005-01-CMY-Nikitina_FinalReport-formatted.pdf. Retrieved 30 Nov 2009.
  6. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society, towards a new modernity. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Beck, U. (1999). World risk society. Malden: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Berger, A. R. (1998). Environmental change, geoindicators, and the autonomy of nature. Geological Society of America today, January, 3–8.Google Scholar
  9. Berger, A. R. (2008). Rapid landscape changes, their causes, and how they affect human history and culture. The Northern Review, 28, 15–26.Google Scholar
  10. Calhoun, C. (2004). A world of emergencies: Fear, intervention, and the limits of cosmopolitan order. The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 41(4), 373–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. EMERCOM (2004). Ministry of Russian Federation for civil defence, emergencies and ­elimination of consequences of natural disasters. Country report. http://www.adrc.asia/countryreport/RUS/RUSeng98/index.html. Retrieved 9 Apr 2010.
  12. Forbes, B.C., & Stammler, F. (2009). Arctic climate change discourse: The contrasting politics of research agendas in the West and Russia. Polar Research, 28, 28–42Google Scholar
  13. Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordance. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67–82). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  14. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  15. Heijmans, A. (2001). ‘Vulnerability’: A matter of perception. Disaster management working paper 4. London: Benfield Greig Hazard Research Centre.Google Scholar
  16. Hettinger, N. (2005). Respecting nature’s autonomy in relationship with humanity. In T. Heyd (Ed.), Recognizing the autonomy of nature: Theory and practice (pp. 86–98). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Heyd, T. (2007). Encountering: Toward an environmental culture. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  18. Hirshleifer, J. (1988). Economic behaviour in adversity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  19. Ingold, T. (1992). Culture and the perception of the environment. In E. Croll & D. Parkin (Eds.), Bush base: Forest farm. Culture, environment and development (pp. 39–56). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jencson, L. (2001). Disastrous rites: Liminality and communitas in a flood crisis. Anthropology and Humanism, 26(1), 46–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leroy, S. (2006). From natural hazard to environmental catastrophe: Past and present. Quaternary International, 158(1), 4–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Levochkin, V. (2008). Sezon vody (Season of water). Rossiiskaya gazeta, March 31.Google Scholar
  24. Lopatin, A. (2010). Kihini erei yöreter (Disaster teaches human beings). Sybehit, 1, 2–3.Google Scholar
  25. Lopatina, L. (2009). Puti sokraszeniia uszerba ot navodnenii na malykh rekakh (na primere reki Tatta). (Ways of mitigating the damage from floods on small rivers: the case of the Tatta River). In Sbornik rabot molodykh issledovateli programmy’Shag v buduszee’ (Edited volume: Papers of young researchers in the programme: ‘Step into the future’, pp. 47–51). Yakutsk: Bargaryy.Google Scholar
  26. Marková, I., & Gillespie, A. (Eds.). (2008). Trust and distrust: Sociocultural perspectives. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. Micklin, P. P. (1987). The status of the Soviet Union’s north–south water transfer projects before their abandonment in 1985–1986. Soviet Geography: Review and Translations, 20, 287–329.Google Scholar
  28. Oliver-Smith, A. (1999). What is a disaster? Anthropological perspectives on a persistent question. In S. Hoffman & A. Oliver-Smith (Eds.), The angry earth: Disaster in anthropological ­perspective (pp. 18–34). New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Oliver-Smith, A. (2002). Theorizing disasters: Nature, power, and culture. In S. Hoffman & A. Oliver-Smith (Eds.), Catastrophe and culture: The anthropology of disaster (pp. 23–47). Oxford: School of American Research Press.Google Scholar
  30. Regnum.ru (2004). Lenskaya voda prishla v Churapchu i Tattu (Yakutia) (Water of the Lena River came to Churapcha and to Tatta (Yakutia)). Regnum. http://www.regnum.ru/news/316970.html. Retrieved 7 Oct 2010.
  31. Revich, B. (Ed.). (2008). Climate change impact on public health in the Russian Arctic. Moscow: United Nations in the Russian Federation.Google Scholar
  32. Rose, N. (1996). The death of the social? Re-figuring the territory of government. Economy and Society, 25(3), 327–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Roshydromet. (2005). Strategic prediction for the period of up to 2010–2015 of climate change expected in Russia and its impact on sectors of the Russian national economy. Moscow: Roshydromet.Google Scholar
  34. Salva, A. M. (1999). Cryogenic processes in engineering-geologic investigations for water-supply objects in transriverine regions of central Yakutia. Hydrotechnical Construction, 33(5), 307–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stammler-Gossmann, A. (2010a). ‘Translating’ vulnerability at the community level: Case study from the Russian north. In G. K. Hovelsrud & B. Smit (Eds.), Community adaptation and vulnerability in Arctic regions (pp. 131–162). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stammler-Gossmann, A. (2010b). ‘Political’ animals of Sakha Yakutia. In F. Stammler & H. Takakura (Eds.), Good to eat, good to live with: Nomads and animals in northern Eurasia and Africa (pp. 153–175). Sendai: Tohoku University.Google Scholar
  37. Stark, D. (2009). The sense of dissonance. Accounts of worth in economic life. Princeton/Woodstock: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Sukhoborov, V. (2006). Problems linked to the prevention of natural disasters in the Sakha Republic (Yakutia). The 3 rd northern forum FWG meeting. http://www.yakutiatoday.com/events/inter_FWG_emercom.shtml. Retrieved 19 Sept 2009.
  39. Vorobyev, D. (2005). Ruling rivers: Discussion on the river diversion project in the Soviet Union. In A. Rosenholm & S. Autio-Sarasmo (Eds.), Understanding Russian nature: Representations, values and concepts (pp. 177–205). Saarijärvi: Gummerus Printing.Google Scholar
  40. WCDR (2005). National report of the Russian Federation at the world conference on disaster reduction. http://www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/preparatory-process/national-reports.htm. Retrieved 7 Dec 2009.
  41. Yanitsky, O. N. (2000). Russian greens in a risk society: A structural analysis. Helsinki: Kikimora Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V.  2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Arctic CentreUniversity of LaplandRovaniemiFinland

Personalised recommendations