Disaster research, conflict research, and peace research have rich and deep histories, yet they do not always fully intersect or learn from each other, even when they investigate if and how disasters lead to conflict or peace. Scholarship has tended to focus on investigating causal linkages between disaster (including those associated with climate change) and conflict, and disaster diplomacy emerged as a thread of explanatory research that investigates how and why disaster-related activities do and do not influence peace and conflict. However, definitive conclusions on the disaster-conflict-peace nexus have evaded scientific consensus, in part due to conceptual, methodological, and interpretive differences among studies. This article highlights that this nexus would benefit from a more robust engagement with each field’s foundational research that explores beyond binary and crude distinctions. Examples are concepts of destructive and constructive conflict; direct, structural, and cultural violence, and their relationships to vulnerability; negative and positive peace; and the ideals and realities of peacebuilding and conflict transformation. This article demonstrates how integrated scholarship could open up and advance new lines of questioning, with implications for developing coherent research, policy, and practice. The article concludes by offering recommendations for how to better connect disaster, conflict, and peace research.

No abstract

Disasters, including disaster-related activities, have been shown to precipitate, intensify, and lengthen violent conflicts, yet disasters have also demonstrated the potential to reduce violent conflict, encourage cooperation, and build peace. Disaster-conflict and disaster-peace literature has sought to establish causal and linear relationships, but research has not explored with the same rigour the causal mechanisms linking these phenomena in long-term processes of social-political change and how they are influenced by human actions and inactions. This research fills this gap by drawing on in-depth interviews with disaster risk reduction (DRR) professionals in 25 disaster- and conflict-affected countries in South Asia, the Middle East, and Africa to analyse the pathways leading from disasters and disaster-related activities to violent conflict and peace. The findings highlight how these pathways can be deliberately swayed toward peace potential through DRR.

In 2015, 193 countries declared their commitment to “leave no one behind” in pursuit of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, the world’s refugees have been routinely excluded from national censuses and representative surveys, and, as a result, have broadly been overlooked in SDG evaluations. In this study, we examine the potential of OpenStreetMap (OSM) data for monitoring SDG progress in refugee settlements. We collected all available OSM data in 28 refugee and 26 nearby non-refugee settlements in the major refugee-hosting country of Uganda. We created a novel SDG-OSM data model, measured the spatial and temporal coverages of SDG-relevant OSM data across refugee settlements, and compared these results to non-refugee settlements. We found 11 different SDGs represented across 92% (21,950) of OSM data in refugee settlements, compared to 78% (1919 nodes) in non-refugee settlements. However, most data were created three years after refugee arrival, and 81% of OSM data in refugee settlements were never edited, both of which limit the potential for long-term monitoring of SDG progress. In light of our findings, we offer suggestions for improving OSM-driven SDG monitoring in refugee settlements that have relevance for development and humanitarian practitioners and research communities alike.

Communities are powerful and necessary agents for defining and pursuing their health, but outside organizations often adopt community health promotion approaches that are patronizing and top-down. Conversely, bottom-up approaches that build on and mobilize community health assets are often critiqued for tasking the most vulnerable and marginalized communities to use their own limited resources without real opportunities for change. Taking into consideration these community health promotion shortcomings, this article asks how communities may be most effectively and appropriately supported in pursuing their health. This article reviews how community health is understood, moving from negative to positive conceptualizations; how it is determined, moving from a risk-factor orientation to social determination; and how it is promoted, moving from top-down to bottom-up approaches. Building on these understandings, we offer the concept of ‘resourcefulness’ as an approach to strengthen positive health for communities, and we discuss how it engages with three interrelated tensions in community health promotion: resources and sustainability, interdependence and autonomy, and community diversity and inclusion. We make practical suggestions for outside organizations to apply resourcefulness as a process-based, place-based, and relational approach to community health promotion, arguing that resourcefulness can forge new pathways to sustainable and self-sustaining community positive health.

No abstract

Anticipatory disaster risk reduction (DRR) is an essential human right for the ~1 billion people living in informal settlements who are disproportionately exposed to climate-related hazards due to their high vulnerability. Participatory approaches are recognized as being critical for effective and sustainable disaster prevention, mitigation, and preparation through to response, but research on how to coproduce anticipatory DRR with people living and working in informal settlements is scant. Their exclusion is even more pronounced in challenging contexts, such as those characterized by social-political fragility and violence. As a result, a significant portion of the global population is left behind in best practices tied to global DRR ambitions, with DRR actions working neither with nor for the people most at risk. The signal case of urban informal settlements controlled by territorial gangs in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, illustrates the need for new thinking on how to inclusively mitigate, prepare for, and respond to natural hazard-related disasters. Our research examines the coproduction of early warning systems linked with response capacities for floods and landslides through the case study of the international NGO GOAL's work across the city with a focus on nine urban informal settlements with high levels of territorial gang violence. We explore how GOAL navigated informality and violent conflict to support the early warning and response system as an inclusive social process rather than a technical exercise. We identify four cross-cutting strategies employed by GOAL in support of local vulnerability reduction and capacity building based on a local systems approach. This research breaks new ground in identifying how to bridge the gap between knowledge and action in designing inclusive and sustainable early warning and response systems together with the millions of people around the world affected by the intersection of informality, violence, and disaster risks.

The pursuit of sustainable development in the context of global environmental change requires enhanced capability to deal with changing hazard profiles, across scales and geographies. Humans attempt to manage human and natural systems interactions in ways that minimize disaster risks, and the political expression of this ambition is the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (‘Sendai Framework’). These efforts lay the foundation for sustainable development, as since the onset of the Sendai Framework, the policy objective of disaster risk reduction has been explicitly linked to global progress on the Sustainable Development Goals. Separately, peace is a focal point of SDG 16, and widely regarded as foundational to attainment of all SDGs. Meanwhile in academic and policy arenas throughout the 2000s, evidence attests of the amplifying negative impact of climate-related disaster events on increasing violent conflict. What remains underexplored are questions of whether and how effective management of human and natural systems interaction, through disaster risk reduction, can contribute towards conditions of peace through peacebuilding. This paper explores how delivery of the Sendai Framework is necessary for sustainability, and potentially also for peace. In the context of the sustainability–peace nexus, the contribution of disaster risk reduction is terra incognita. This paper aims to deepen understanding of those under-researched tripartite links.