environmental disaster.

The assignment is to draw find a connection between the following articles. all five articles have to be included and the questions below are guides to help draw the main point from each article.

“The great earthquakes of Lisbon 1755 and Aceh 2004 shook the world: Seismologists’ societal responsibility” (K. Fuchs)
– Discuss this article, linking it to concepts such as black swan, vulnerability and therapeutic/corrosive communities (Freudenberg reading from September 17).
– To what extent is the world better prepared for catastrophic tsunamis now, compared to the Year 1755? Why?
Discuss this sentence on p. 216: “The New Orleans catastrophe has become a vivid paradigm for the inaction of the powerful in modern times in one of the most developed countries on earth.” Do you agree? Why or why not?

“Contamination, Corrosion and the Social Order: An Overview” (W.R. Freudenberg)
– Freudenberg discusses pitfalls of distinguishing between “technological” and “natural” disasters. To what extent do you think it is meaningful or meaningless to categorize types of disasters? Why?
– Discuss “Are All Disasters Anthropogenic?” (p. 23). To what extent do you think this is true? Why?
– Discuss WF’s framework of 3 stages of a disaster. To what extent is this framework useful? What, if anything, is missing from it?
– To what extent do you think that the concept of “ambiguity of harm” (p. 27) is culturally relative? Why?
– Discuss the “therapeutic” vs. “corrosive” communities effect (p. 29). Provide examples of each.
– Discuss WF’s section on “Sociological Disruption” (p. 31). To what extent does this state of affairs characterize contemporary societies in terms of “polarization”, “loss of beliefs”, “legitimacy of institutions”, “erosion of trust”, etc.? In the wake of disasters over the past few decades, is the process of disruption that is described irreversible? Why or why not?

“A bridge to challenging environmental inequality: Intersectionality, environmental justice, and disaster vulnerability” (S.S. Ryder)
– To what extent, and in what ways does this article “develop a more holistic understanding of environmental harms and disaster vulnerabilities”?
– In what ways does the concept of intersectionality bridge (or potentially bridge) environmental justice and disaster vulnerability?
– On page 6, Ryder discusses “overarching, preexisting social conditions” and “differential disaster impacts”. This article was published well before the Covid-19 Pandemic. In your view, to what extent do Ryder’s arguments apply beyond the disaster cases discussed in this article, to the Covid-19 pandemic?
– On page 7, Ryder makes the point that disaster vulnerability literature has broadened. In your view, what is still missing, and in what ways does the literature need to broaden further?
– On page 11, Ryder discusses the prospect of “Examining the multiplicity of social variables in the context of a particular disaster….”. This implies a broad and inclusive approach to analyzing disasters. In practice, many would agree that disasters are usually NOT analyzed in particularly broad and inclusive ways. Do you agree that the typical scope of disaster analysis is often too narrow? Why or why not?

“An Unsustainable Modernity: democracy, the global climate emergency and environmental ethics”. (B. Smart)
– In this essay the author makes the case that the world is on an unsustainable path and argues that current approaches are ineffective. Smart argues, among other things, that business as usual capitalism, high levels of consumption and lack of long-term vision are making matters worse. He argues that: “The action that needs to be taken is revolutionary in form, in scale and scope….” (p. 35).
– Do you agree with the author’s overall argument and the outlines of his proposed remedy? Why or why not?
– Is “revolutionary change” in the direction of sustainability possible? Why or why not?
– What are some shorter-term actions that might be taken to address “unsustainable modernity” and the range of environmental problems and disasters that the world is confronted with?

“From the Margins to the Mainstream? Disaster Research at the Crossroads” (K. J. Tierney)
– Tierney discusses the evolution of how disasters are perceived and framed. Why is this evolution significant? Do you think this evolution makes it more possible for disasters to be prevented or better managed? Why?
– The author makes the point that there is considerable room for improvement in disaster theory. What do you believe some of the most important needed improvements are?
– Tierney argues that the field of disaster studies and management was not diverse not long ago and is changing slowly. Discuss.
– What are the implications of viewing disasters as “events”?
– What are some limitations of the “natural hazards” perspective?
– In what ways was Hurricane Katrina a “turning point” in disaster research?
– How do environmental disasters result from conventional policies and practices?
– Disaster research was slow to recognize factors such as vulnerability, class, race and gender (see p. 514). Discuss.
– Discuss the point about disasters as “normal” (p. 518)

Last Completed Projects