skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: “How Do We Actually Do Convergence” for Disaster Resilience? Cases from Australia and the United States
Abstract In recent years there has been an increasing emphasis on achieving convergence in disaster research, policy, and programs to reduce disaster losses and enhance social well-being. However, there remain considerable gaps in understanding “how do we actually do convergence?” In this article, we present three case studies from across geographies—New South Wales in Australia, and North Carolina and Oregon in the United States; and sectors of work—community, environmental, and urban resilience, to critically examine what convergence entails and how it can enable diverse disciplines, people, and institutions to reduce vulnerability to systemic risks in the twenty-first century. We identify key successes, challenges, and barriers to convergence. We build on current discussions around the need for convergence research to be problem-focused and solutions-based, by also considering the need to approach convergence as ethic, method, and outcome. We reflect on how convergence can be approached as an ethic that motivates a higher order alignment on “why” we come together; as a method that foregrounds “how” we come together in inclusive ways; and as an outcome that highlights “what” must be done to successfully translate research findings into the policy and public domains.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1847373
PAR ID:
10314964
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
International Journal of Disaster Risk Science
Volume:
12
Issue:
3
ISSN:
2095-0055
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; (, Cognitive Science)
    Abstract How do people come to opposite causal judgments about societal problems, such as whether a public health policy reduced COVID‐19 cases? The current research tests an understudied cognitive mechanism in which people may agree about whatactuallyhappened (e.g., that a public health policy was implemented and COVID‐19 cases declined), but can be made to disagree about the counterfactual, or whatwould havehappened otherwise (e.g., whether COVID‐19 cases would have declined naturally without intervention) via comparison cases. Across two preregistered studies (totalN= 480), participants reasoned about the implementation of a public policy that was followed by an immediate decline in novel virus cases. Study 1 shows that people's judgments about the causal impact of the policy could be pushed in opposite directions by emphasizing comparison cases that imply different counterfactual outcomes. Study 2 finds that people recognize they can use such information to influence others. Specifically, in service of persuading others to support or reject a public health policy, people systematically showed comparison cases implying the counterfactual outcome that aligned with their position. These findings were robust across samples of U.S. college students and politically and socioeconomically diverse U.S. adults. Together, these studies suggest that implied counterfactuals are a powerful tool that individuals can use to manufacture others’ causal judgments and warrant further investigation as a mechanism contributing to belief polarization. 
    more » « less
  2. ; (, University of Kentucky Libraries)
    In this session, we will start at the beginning and talk about what you need to think about in setting up research analytics capabilities for your organization. There are so many options for tools and other resources to get started, but what if you only have Excel? How do you get reporting off the ground when it hasn’t been done (or done consistently) at your workplace? We’ll talk about ways to get started, including who you need to talk with, what you need to consider, and how to move forward with basic reporting. Presented at the 2024 Research Analytics Summit in Albuquerque NM 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; (, American Behavioral Scientist)
    Methods matter. They influence what we know and who we come to know about in the context of hazards and disasters. Research methods are of profound importance to the scholarly advancement of the field and, accordingly, a growing number of publications focus on research methods and ethical practices associated with the study of extreme events. Still, notable gaps exist. The National Science Foundation-funded Social Science Extreme Events Research (SSEER) network was formed, in part, to respond to the need for more specific information about the status and expertise of the social science hazards and disaster research workforce. Drawing on data from 1,013 SSEER members located across five United Nations (UN) regions, this article reports on the demographic characteristics of SSEER researchers; provides a novel inventory of methods used by social science hazards and disaster researchers; and explores how methodological approaches vary by specific researcher attributes including discipline, professional status, researcher type based on level of involvement in the field, hazard/disaster type studied, and disaster phase studied. The results have implications for training, mentoring, and workforce development initiatives geared toward ensuring that a diverse next generation of social science researchers is prepared to study the root causes and social consequences of disasters. 
    more » « less
  4. (, Risk Analysis)
    Abstract Interdisciplinary research can help address complex issues such as community resilience and climate change. However, transcending disciplinary borders to provide better understandings of these cross‐cutting issues is not an easy task. While there has been a greater focus on improving integration across disciplines, less attention has been paid to the particular challenges in the inclusion and integration of policy praxis into interdisciplinary research. This article argues that to effectively integrate policy‐relevant goals, researchers need to understand the obstacles to transcending disciplinary borders to incorporate the perspectives of policy practitioners. Researchers also need to understand problems in integration when it takes place within research groups or entities comprised of a variety of scholars from diverse disciplines working with a set of practitioners from different agencies or levels of government. Impediments to integration include epistemological, disciplinary, and attitudinal barriers, differences in terminologies and timescales, the role of organizational culture, institutional barriers, data issues, and issues related to risk communication and liability. This article explores these challenges and how they affect the translation of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. It concludes with recommendations to help overcome challenges in synthesizing disaster research and policy practices and to enrich interdisciplinary disaster research approaches and designs. 
    more » « less
  5. ; (, International Journal of Emergency Services)
    Purpose The authors use a co-auto-ethnographic study of Hurricane Harvey where both authors were citizen responders and disaster researchers. In practice, large-scale disaster helps temporarily foster an ideal of community which is then appropriated by emergency management institutions. The advancement of disaster research must look to more radical perspectives on human response in disaster and what this means for the formation of communities and society itself. It is the collective task as those invested in the management of crises defer to the potentials of publics, rather than disdain and appropriate them. The authors present this work in the advancement of more empirically informed mitigation of societal ills that produce major causes of disaster. The authors’ work presents a departure from the more traditional disaster work into a critical and theoretical realm using novel research methods. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach This paper produces a co-auto-ethnographic study of Hurricane Harvey where both authors were citizen responders and disaster researchers. Findings The authors provide a critical, theoretical argument that citizen-based response fosters an ephemeral utopia not usually experienced in everyday life. Disasters present the possibility of an ideal of community. These phenomena, in part, allow us to live our better selves in the case of citizen response and provide a direct contrast to the modern experience. Modernity is a mostly fabricated, if not almost eradicated sense of community. Modern institutions, serve as sources of domination built on the backs of technology, continuity of infrastructures and self-sufficiency when disasters handicap society, unpredictability breaks illusions of modernity. There arises a need to re-engage with those around us in meaningful and exciting ways. Research limitations/implications This work produces theory rather than engage in testing theory. It is subject to all the limitations of interpretive work that focuses on meaning and critique rather than advancing associations or causality. Practical implications The authors suggest large-scale disasters will persist to overwhelm management institutions no matter how much preparedness and planning occurs. The authors also offer an alternative suggestion to the institutional status quo system based on the research; let the citizenry do what they already do, whereas institutions focus more on mitigate of social ills that lead to disaster. This is particularly urgent given increasing risk of events exacerbated by anthropogenic causes. Social implications The advancement of disaster research must look to more radical perspectives on human response in disaster and what this means for the formation of communities and society itself. It is the collective task as those invested in the management of crises to defer to the potentials of publics, rather than disdain and appropriate them. The authors also suggest that meaningful mitigation of social ills that recognize and emphasize difference will be the only way to manage future large-scale events. Originality/value The authors’ work presents a departure from the more practical utility of disaster work into a critical and highly theoretical realm using novel research methods. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email