Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Learning from (small) disasters

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this article, disasters are understood as processes that have different impacts on social routines in terms of scale, scope and duration. The extent of adaptive processes in society can provide the ground for a rough classification of disaster types. Such classification has, on the one hand, practical and analytical advantages. On the other hand, they harbour the danger of overlooking transitions of scale and discourage comprehensive scale-related learning forms. Based on the disaster scale by Fischer (Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 1:91–107, 2003), flash floods in mountain rivers and torrents are described as extreme emergencies or small-town disasters. Three given examples will clearly show that learning rarely takes place within an institutional setting that is subjected to small disasters, because the stakeholder’s focus remains on only one level. Therefore, we propose to implement a system of self-organised and scale-independent learning, so called deutero learning, within the political subsystem. Following a damaging event, participative processes that involve all levels should be initialised. Their task would be to assess the combination of causes and draw conclusions for mitigation measures. An aggregation of these assessments would help the responsible political subsystems to adapt the current natural disasters policy to the changing environmental conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For example, the report for the White House (2006) analyses only the federal response to hurricane Katrina: “While the Report notes that disaster preparedness and response to most incidents remains a State and local responsibility, this review did not include an assessment of State and local responses”. The connection between emergency management and hazard mitigation is not addressed, either.

  2. Discursive approaches on “risk governance” try to overcome these simplifications and its unwanted side-effects, at least the “root-causes” of disasters. The IRGC-Framework (Renn and Walker 2008) for example offers practice orientated guidelines to understand risks in their broader connectedness and contexts. The approach developed in this article can be seen as a supplementation to these approaches by focusing on underlying cognitive, social and material factors and their interconnections and interactions in the context of disasters.

  3. The spatial planning authorities have, for many years, played a minor role in flood management. The basic concept for flood management in Germany was developed by the watershed authorities (LAWA 1995). Additionally, the strictest legal norm—the declaration of flood zones which induces a building ban—is regulated in the German Water Act (Wasserhaushaltsgesetz).

References

  • Adger N (2000) Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Prog in Hum Geogr 3:347–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argyris C, Schön DA (1978) Organizational learning. A theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris C, Schön DA (1996) Organizational learning II. Theory, method, and practice. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson G (1972) Steps to an ecology of mind. Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. Intertext Books, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson G (1983) Ökologie des Geistes. Anthropologische, psychologische, biologische und epistemologische Perspektiven, 6th edn. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F (2007) Understanding uncertainty and reducing vulnerability: lessons from resilience thinking. Nat Hazards 41:283–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkland TA (2006) Lessons of disaster. Policy change after catastrophic events. Georgetown University Press, Washington, D.C.

  • Brown JS, Duguid P (1991) Organizational learning and communities of practice: toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organ Sci 1:40–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dombrowsky WR (1996) Falsche Begriffe, falsches Begreifen, schädliches Zugreifen vor Ort. In: Hanisch R, Moßmann P (eds) Katastrophen und ihre Bewältigung in den Ländern des Südens. Deutsches Übersee-Institut, Hamburg, pp 61–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Dombrowsky WR (2004) Entstehung, Ablauf und Bewältigung von Katastrophen. Anmerkungen zum kollektiven Lernen. In: Pfister C (ed) Katastrophen und ihre Bewältigung. Perspektiven und Positionen. Haupt, Bern, pp 165–183

    Google Scholar 

  • EU (2007) Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks [online] URL: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32007L0060:EN:NOT

  • Fischer HW (2003) The sociology of disaster: definitions, research questions, & measurements. Continuation of the discussion in a post-September 11 environment. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 1:91–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke C (2006) Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analysis. Glob Environ Chang 16:253–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folke C, Colding J, Berkes F (2006) Building resilience and adaptive capacity in social-ecological systems. In: Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems. Building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, pp 352–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedberg B (1981) How organizations learn and unlearn. In: Nystrom PC (ed) Adapting organizations to their environments. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, pp 3–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS, Gunderson LH (2002) Resilience and adaptive cycles. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS (eds) Panarchy. Understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington, pp 25–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Huebl J, Kienholz H, Loipersberger A (Eds.) (2002) DOMODIS: documentation of mountain disasters–state of discussion in the European mountain areas. Klagenfurt

  • Kim DH (1993) The link between individual and organizational learning. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 1:37–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon JW (1984) Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Little, Brown and Co., Boston

  • Kuhn TS (2006) Die Struktur wissenschaftlicher Revolutionen. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour B (2005) Reassembling the social. An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Meister M, Kruse S, Schön S (2005) Mapping divergent knowledge claims in heterogeneous constellations: the case of regional flood protection policy. Paper for SSTNET “Science, Technology and the Public” 7th Conference of the European Sociological association (ESA) “Rethinking Inequalities”, September 9–12, 2005, Torun, Poland

  • Murdock G, Petts J, Horlick-Jones T (2003) After amplification: rethinking the role of the media in risk communication. In: Pidgeon N, Kasperson RE, Slovic P (eds) The social amplification of risk. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, pp 159–174

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson RR, Winter SG (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change, 4th edn. Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Pottier N, Penning-Rowsell E, Tunstall S et al (2005) Land use and flood protection: contrasting approaches and outcomes in France and in England and Wales. Appl Geogr 25:1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proebstle E, Seyberth M, Hach G (1981) Zur Geschichte der Wildbachverbauung in Bayern. In: Bayerisches Landesamt für Wasserwirtschaft, Technische Universität München (ed) Seminar ‘Geschichtliche Entwicklung der Wasserwirtschaft und des Wasserbaus in Bayern’ am 30. April 1981. Teil 2, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Quarantelli EL (ed) (1998) What is a disaster? Perspectives on the question. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Quarantelli EL (2003) Auf Desaster bezogenes Verhalten. Eine Zusammenfassung der Forschungsbefunde von fünfzig Jahren. In: Clausen L, Geenen EM, Macamo E (eds) Entsetzliche soziale Prozesse. Theorie und Empirie der Katastrophen. Lit, Münster, pp 25–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn O, Walker KD (2008) Global risk governance. Concept and practice using the IRGC framework. Springer, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schön S, Kruse S, Meister M et al (2007) Handbuch Konstellationsanalyse. Ein interdisziplinäres Brückenkonzept für die Nachhaltigkeits-, Technik- und Innovationsforschung. oekom, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreyögg G (2002) Organisationaler Wandel und organisationales Lernen. Doppelkurseinheit. Lehrbrief für Kurseinheit “Organisation IV”, FernUniversität in Hagen

  • Senge PM (1996) Die fünfte Disziplin. Kunst und Praxis der lernenden Organisation, 3rd edn. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge PM (2006) The fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization. Rev. edn. Currency Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • The White House (2006) The federal response to hurricane Katrina, lessons learned. Report to President Bush from Frances Fragos Townsend. Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomi L, Zaugg-Stern M (2006) Impact of flood events on the configuration and the role of institutional actors–the floods in Thurgau (1979) and Valais (2000), Switzerland. In: Ammann W, Haig J, Huovinen C, Stocker M (eds) IDRC Davos 2006. vol 3. Proceedings of the International Disaster Reduction Conference in Davos, Switzerland. Davos, pp 591–592

  • Wagner K (2004) Naturgefahrenbewusstsein und–kommunikation am Beispiel von Sturzfluten und Rutschungen in vier Gemeinden des Bayerischen Alpenraums [online] URL: http://tumb1.biblio.tu-muenchen.de/publ/diss/ww/2004/wagner_k.pdf

  • Wagner K (2006) Problems for changing the risk prevention strategy. Persistent attitudes of different stakeholders. In: Ammann W, Haig J, Huovinen C, Stocker M (eds) IDRC Davos 2006, vol 3. Proceedings of the International Disaster Reduction Conference in Davos, Switzerland. Davos, pp 623–625

  • Walker B, Gunderson L, Kinzig A et. al. (2006) A handful of heuristics and some propositions for understanding resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecology and society 11(1):13. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art13/

  • LAWA (Länderarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser) (1995) Guidelines for forward-looking flood protection [online] URL: http://www.lawa.de/pub/kostenlos/hwnw/Leitlinien_2902.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Klaus Wagner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Voss, M., Wagner, K. Learning from (small) disasters. Nat Hazards 55, 657–669 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-010-9498-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-010-9498-5

Keywords

Navigation